Active versus passive: evaluating the effectiveness of inoculation techniques in relation to misinformation about climate change

Objective The current study evaluated whether an active inoculation (interactive skill development) or a passive inoculation message (provision of information) were effective tools for conferring resistance to misinformation about climate science in the context of extreme weather events. Method Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions: a control condition (no training); a passive inoculation condition; or an active inoculation condition. Participants completed demographic questions followed by training or no training and then evaluated a misinformation and factual article for reliability and persuasiveness. Results Participants in the active inoculation condition rated the reliability and persuasiveness of the misinformation article and the reliability of the factual article lower than participants in the control condition. Participants in the passive inoculation training did not rate the reliability and persuasiveness of a misinformation and factual article significantly differently to those in the control condition. When factors such as ideological worldview and climate change beliefs were controlled for however, the inoculation interventions had no significant effect on ratings of reliability and persuasiveness for a misinformation or factual article. Conclusion Inoculation seems to be a promising method of preventing the acceptance of misinformation on climate science. However, this analysis highlights that more investigation is required in order to determine the most effective inoculation training design.