Swire-Thompson Briony, DeGutis Joseph, Lazer David
Network Science Institute, Northeastern University, Boston, USA.
Institute of Quantitative Social Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA.
J Appl Res Mem Cogn. 2020 Sep;9(3):286-299. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.06.006. Epub 2020 Sep 2.
One of the most concerning notions for science communicators, fact-checkers, and advocates of truth, is the backfire effect; this is when a correction leads to an individual their belief in the very misconception the correction is aiming to rectify. There is currently a debate in the literature as to whether backfire effects exist at all, as recent studies have failed to find the phenomenon, even under theoretically favorable conditions. In this review, we summarize the current state of the worldview and familiarity backfire effect literatures. We subsequently examine barriers to measuring the backfire phenomenon, discuss approaches to improving measurement and design, and conclude with recommendations for fact-checkers. We suggest that backfire effects are not a robust empirical phenomenon, and more reliable measures, powerful designs, and stronger links between experimental design and theory could greatly help move the field ahead.
对于科学传播者、事实核查者和真理倡导者来说，最令人担忧的概念之一是逆火效应；即当一个纠正反而导致个体更加坚信该纠正旨在纠正的错误观念。目前，文献中存在一场关于逆火效应是否真的存在的辩论，因为最近的研究甚至在理论上有利的条件下也未能发现这一现象。在这篇综述中，我们总结了世界观和熟悉度逆火效应文献的现状。随后，我们研究了测量逆火现象的障碍，讨论了改进测量和设计的方法，并为事实核查者提出了建议。我们认为逆火效应并非一种稳健的实证现象，更可靠的测量方法、强大的设计以及实验设计与理论之间更紧密的联系，将极大地推动该领域向前发展。
