Reducing Health Misinformation in Science: A Call to Arms

Abstract

The public often turns to science for accurate health information, which, in an ideal world, would be error free. However, limitations of scientific institutions and scientific processes can sometimes amplify misinformation and disinformation. The current review examines four mechanisms through which this occurs: (1) predatory journals that accept publications for monetary gain but do not engage in rigorous peer review; (2) pseudoscientists who provide scientific- sounding information but whose advice is inaccurate, unfalsifiable, or inconsistent with the scientific method; (3) occasions when legitimate scientists spread misinformation or disinformation; and (4) miscommunication of science by the media and other communicators. We characterize this article as a “call to arms,” given the urgent need for the scientific information ecosystem to improve. Improvements are necessary to maintain the public’s trust in science, foster robust discourse, and encourage a well-educated citizenry.

Examining the replicability of backfire effects after standalone corrections

“…Misinformation—false or misleading information potentially believed to be true—presents a significant societal challenge (Ecker et al, 2022 ). Misinformation about health (e.g., “doctor dies following COVID vaccination”; Widmer, 2021 ) or politics (e.g., “the 2020 US election was stolen”; Cassidy, 2021 ) can negatively impact both individuals and society (Ha et al, 2021 ; Horne et al, 2015 ; Lewandowsky et al, 2017 ; MacFarlane et al, 2021 ; Swire-Thompson & Lazer, 2022 ; Thorson, 2016 ). It is therefore crucial to develop effective interventions for countering misinformation.…”

We need a gold standard for randomised control trials studying misinformation and vaccine hesitancy on social media

“…Important questions surround the role of experts in promoting vaccine acceptance. Although doctors are typically among the most trusted professionals, during the covid-19 pandemic some medical credentials were used to peddle fake cures and outright misinformation about vaccination 13. Although it is important to interrogate how science is communicated,14 the repeated questioning of science and expertise by postmodern scholars has inadvertently played into the hands of anti-vaccination movements and post-truth politics 15.…”

“…A recent article13 claimed that scientists’ desire to “cure misinformation” has led to “rushed” interventions. I have not observed any evidence for this claim.…”

Misinformation and the sins of memory: False-belief formation and limits on belief revision.

“…Misinformation has the potential to negatively affect both individual decision-making and the common good. For example, belief in misinformation can have a negative impact on public health, environmental behaviors, and democracy (Cook, 2019; Lewandowsky et al, 2017; Loomba et al, 2021; Nisbet et al, 2021; Swire-Thompson & Lazer, 2022). Both in online and offline settings, people’s vulnerability to misinformation arises in part from features of our cognitive system.…”