Many people believe they can differentiate between actual news and fake news, although a small minority can actually do this. The spread of misinformation (i.e. fake news) has the potential to undermine science and society (e.g. democracy).
The inoculation theory states that by pre-emptively exposing people to a weakened version of an argument and subsequently refuting that argument, attitudinal resistance can be conferred against future persuasion attempts. In the case of fake news, this means that people are exposed to weak fake news which is then refuted in order to make people more ‘immune’ to other forms of fake news. In the theory, threat refers to the recognition that one’s attitude on an issue is vulnerable to attack. Refutational pre-emption refers to providing people with specific arguments to help resist persuasion attempts.
It appears to be effective when people are presented with both the arguments and the refutation. However, it may be more effective to use active refutation because internal counter-arguing is a more involved cognitive process.
The studies that showed the effectiveness of the theory used refutational-same schemes where people are inoculated against specific information to which they will be exposed later on. Refutational-different schemes refers to a format where the message refutes challenges that are not specifically featured in a subsequent attack.
It is possible that active inoculation reduces the perceived reliability and persuasiveness of previously unseen fake news articles.
Active inoculation reduces perceived reliability and persuasiveness of fake news articles. The active generation of counter-arguments elicits greater affect. This indicates higher engagement which is a key component of resistance. Early media education might be a viable method of inoculation to help empower people against the risk of disinformation.
