Combining refutations and social norms increases belief change

Area of Science:

• Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Communication Studies

Background:

• Misinformed beliefs are resistant to change, with refutations offering only partial effectiveness.
• Traditional debunking methods struggle to fully correct false beliefs, necessitating alternative strategies.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the efficacy of a social norming approach as an alternative or complementary strategy to refutation for reducing false beliefs.
• To determine if communicating peer norms can mitigate the endorsement of worldview-congruent misinformation.

Main Methods:

• Three experiments were conducted to test the impact of social norms (single-point, verbal distribution, graphical distribution) on belief endorsement.
• Interventions included descriptive norms alone, refutations alone, and a combination of both.
• Participants' belief endorsement of specific claims was measured following different intervention conditions.

Main Results:

• A single-point norm estimate had less impact than refutation.
• A verbally presented norm with four values was largely ineffective.
• A graphically presented social norm with 25 values was as effective as refutation, and the combination was most impactful.

Conclusions:

• Normative information, particularly when graphically presented, can be effective in debunking false or equivocal claims.
• Combining social norming with refutation offers a powerful strategy for combating misinformation.
• Theories of misinformation processing should incorporate social factors to fully understand belief change.