Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Controls in Experiments01:13

Controls in Experiments

13.3K
When conducting an experiment, it is crucial to have control to reduce bias and accurately measure the dependent variables. It also marks the results more reliable. Controls are elements in an experiment that have the same characteristics as the treatment groups but are not affected by the independent variable. By sorting these data into control and experimental conditions, the relationship between the dependent and independent variables can be drawn. A randomized experiment always includes a...
13.3K
What is an Experiment?01:12

What is an Experiment?

15.7K
An experiment is a planned activity carried out under controlled conditions. The purpose of an experiment is to investigate the relationship between two variables. When one variable causes change in another, we call the first variable the explanatory or independent variable. The affected variable is called the response or dependent variable. In a randomized experiment, the researcher manipulates values of the explanatory variable and measures the resulting changes in the response variable. The...
15.7K
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

765
Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:  
765
Ethics in Research01:56

Ethics in Research

24.7K
Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.
24.7K
The Scientific Method02:40

The Scientific Method

63.4K
Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.
63.4K
The Placebo Effect01:54

The Placebo Effect

6.5K
The placebo effect occurs when people's expectations or beliefs influence or determine their experience in a given situation. In other words, simply expecting something to happen can actually make it happen.
6.5K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A Cerebral Basis for Visual Discomfort and Visual Stress.

Vision (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

Exploring the association between mental imagery, sensory sensitivity, and autistic traits in autistic and non-autistic adults.

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

Sensory sensitivity and visual discomfort are not associated with altered gamma oscillations: A test of the excitation-inhibition hypothesis.

Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)·2026
Same author

Most pragmatic responses to underinformative some-statements are associated with scalar implicatures.

Cognition·2025
Same author

Validating the Client Oriented Scale of Improvement for Dizziness and Imbalance (COSIDI).

International journal of audiology·2025
Same author

Sensory hyperacusis as a predictor of anxiety in adolescence.

Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines·2025
Same journal

The effect of boarding on students' noncognitive skills: evidence from rural education in Northwest China.

BMC public health·2026
Same journal

Examining inclusive research practices to engage communities: a qualitative inquiry.

BMC public health·2026
Same journal

Associations of cumulative exposure and two-time-point clustering of the triglyceride-cholesterol-body weight index with incident cardiovascular disease in middle-aged and older Chinese adults: a nationwide cohort study.

BMC public health·2026
Same journal

Prevalence and trends of gestational diabetes in a large university hospital in Lebanon before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BMC public health·2026
Same journal

Global suicide trends across major religions from 2000 to 2021.

BMC public health·2026
Same journal

Determinants of female genital mutilation among daughters in Ethiopia: a negative binomial regression approach.

BMC public health·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 6, 2025

Author Spotlight: Studying Host-Virus Interactions with Pseudotyped Viruses
05:49

Author Spotlight: Studying Host-Virus Interactions with Pseudotyped Viruses

Published on: November 21, 2023

1.9K

COVID-19 myth-busting: an experimental study.

Aimée Challenger1, Petroc Sumner2, Lewis Bott2

  • 1School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. challengera@cardiff.ac.uk.

BMC Public Health
|January 20, 2022
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

All tested formats effectively reduced COVID-19 misinformation beliefs. The question-answer format proved most effective, especially when initial belief in myths was high, both immediately and after a delay.

Keywords:
COVID-19InfodemicMisinformationMyth bustingMyth correction

More Related Videos

Swabbing the Urban Environment - A Pipeline for Sampling and Detection of SARS-CoV-2 From Environmental Reservoirs
07:13

Swabbing the Urban Environment - A Pipeline for Sampling and Detection of SARS-CoV-2 From Environmental Reservoirs

Published on: April 9, 2021

4.3K
Determining Viral Disinfection Efficacy of Hot Water Laundering
06:57

Determining Viral Disinfection Efficacy of Hot Water Laundering

Published on: June 21, 2022

2.7K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 6, 2025

Author Spotlight: Studying Host-Virus Interactions with Pseudotyped Viruses
05:49

Author Spotlight: Studying Host-Virus Interactions with Pseudotyped Viruses

Published on: November 21, 2023

1.9K
Swabbing the Urban Environment - A Pipeline for Sampling and Detection of SARS-CoV-2 From Environmental Reservoirs
07:13

Swabbing the Urban Environment - A Pipeline for Sampling and Detection of SARS-CoV-2 From Environmental Reservoirs

Published on: April 9, 2021

4.3K
Determining Viral Disinfection Efficacy of Hot Water Laundering
06:57

Determining Viral Disinfection Efficacy of Hot Water Laundering

Published on: June 21, 2022

2.7K

Area of Science:

  • Public Health
  • Health Communication
  • Behavioral Science

Background:

  • COVID-19 misinformation poses a significant threat to public health.
  • Various formats are employed in health campaigns to combat misinformation, but their effectiveness is not well-documented.
  • This study addresses the need for data on the efficacy of different myth-busting strategies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the effectiveness of three common myth-busting formats in correcting COVID-19 misinformation.
  • To determine if these formats are effective immediately after exposure and after a time delay.
  • To identify the most effective format for correcting COVID-19 myths.

Main Methods:

  • A randomized controlled trial involving 2215 UK participants (1291 post-attrition) assigned to question-answer, fact-only, or fact-myth correction formats.
  • Participants rated their belief in 11 piloted COVID-19 myths at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and after a delay of at least 6 days.
  • A partial replication with 2084 participants assessed immediate post-intervention belief ratings only. Mixed models were used for analysis.

Main Results:

  • All tested correction formats significantly reduced belief in COVID-19 myths immediately and after a delay (p < .001).
  • When baseline myth belief was high, question-answer and fact-myth formats were more effective than fact-only immediately post-intervention (p < .022).
  • After a delay, the question-answer format was more effective than the fact-myth format (p = .031).

Conclusions:

  • Health campaign materials and formats can effectively correct COVID-19 misinformation.
  • Campaign designers can leverage these findings to select optimal correction formats.
  • The question-answer format is recommended for its superior effectiveness, particularly when addressing strongly held myths, both short-term and long-term.