A systematic review of narrative interventions: Lessons for countering anti-vaccination conspiracy theories and misinformation

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Even if a small portion of the population refuses vaccination due to anti-vaccination conspiracy theories or misinformation, this poses a threat to public health. We argue that addressing conspiracy theories with only corrective information is not enough. Instead, considering that they are complex narratives embedded in personal and cultural worldviews, they should be encountered with counternarratives. To identify existing narrative interventions aimed at countering anti-vaccination conspiracy theories and, more generally, map prerequisites for a narrative intervention to be successful, we present a systematic review of experimental effects of exposure to pro-vaccine narratives on a range of vaccination outcomes, based on 17 studies and 97 comparisons. We did not find any narrative interventions aimed directly at conspiracy theories. However, the review allowed us to make evidence-based recommendations for future research and for public communicators. This might help pro-vaccine communication match anti-vaccine communication in its potential to spread and go viral.

Related collections

Most cited references 86

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

David Moher, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff … (2009)

0 comments Cited 8689 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-related Misinformation on Social Media

Yuxi Wang, Martin Mckee, Aleksandra M. Torbica … (2019)

Contemporary commentators describe the current period as “an era of fake news” in which misinformation, generated intentionally or unintentionally, spreads rapidly. Although affecting all areas of life, it poses particular problems in the health arena, where it can delay or prevent effective care, in some cases threatening the lives of individuals. While examples of the rapid spread of misinformation date back to the earliest days of scientific medicine, the internet, by allowing instantaneous communication and powerful amplification has brought about a quantum change. In democracies where ideas compete in the marketplace for attention, accurate scientific information, which may be difficult to comprehend and even dull, is easily crowded out by sensationalized news. In order to uncover the current evidence and better understand the mechanism of misinformation spread, we report a systematic review of the nature and potential drivers of health-related misinformation. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus and Google databases to identify relevant methodological and empirical articles published between 2012 and 2018. A total of 57 articles were included for full-text analysis. Overall, we observe an increasing trend in published articles on health-related misinformation and the role of social media in its propagation. The most extensively studied topics involving misinformation relate to vaccination, Ebola and Zika Virus, although others, such as nutrition, cancer, fluoridation of water and smoking also featured. Studies adopted theoretical frameworks from psychology and network science, while co-citation analysis revealed potential for greater collaboration across fields. Most studies employed content analysis, social network analysis or experiments, drawing on disparate disciplinary paradigms. Future research should examine susceptibility of different sociodemographic groups to misinformation and understand the role of belief systems on the intention to spread misinformation. Further interdisciplinary research is also warranted to identify effective and tailored interventions to counter the spread of health-related misinformation online.

0 comments Cited 505 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing.

Stephan Lewandowsky, Ullrich K H Ecker, Colleen M Seifert … (2013)

The widespread prevalence and persistence of misinformation in contemporary societies, such as the false belief that there is a link between childhood vaccinations and autism, is a matter of public concern. For example, the myths surrounding vaccinations, which prompted some parents to withhold immunization from their children, have led to a marked increase in vaccine-preventable disease, as well as unnecessary public expenditure on research and public-information campaigns aimed at rectifying the situation. We first examine the mechanisms by which such misinformation is disseminated in society, both inadvertently and purposely. Misinformation can originate from rumors but also from works of fiction, governments and politicians, and vested interests. Moreover, changes in the media landscape, including the arrival of the Internet, have fundamentally influenced the ways in which information is communicated and misinformation is spread. We next move to misinformation at the level of the individual, and review the cognitive factors that often render misinformation resistant to correction. We consider how people assess the truth of statements and what makes people believe certain things but not others. We look at people's memory for misinformation and answer the questions of why retractions of misinformation are so ineffective in memory updating and why efforts to retract misinformation can even backfire and, ironically, increase misbelief. Though ideology and personal worldviews can be major obstacles for debiasing, there nonetheless are a number of effective techniques for reducing the impact of misinformation, and we pay special attention to these factors that aid in debiasing. We conclude by providing specific recommendations for the debunking of misinformation. These recommendations pertain to the ways in which corrections should be designed, structured, and applied in order to maximize their impact. Grounded in cognitive psychological theory, these recommendations may help practitioners-including journalists, health professionals, educators, and science communicators-design effective misinformation retractions, educational tools, and public-information campaigns.