The widespread dissemination of misinformation has become a global concern. A recommended solution is to improve people’s ability to discern true from false information through appropriate media literacy education programs. This meta-analysis quantitatively synthesized the results of 49 experimental studies (N = 81,155) that examined the efficacy of media literacy interventions in mitigating misinformation. This study finds that media literacy interventions generally improve resilience to misinformation (d = 0.60). Specifically, the interventions reduce belief in misinformation (d = 0.27), improve misinformation discernment (d = 0.76), and decrease misinformation sharing (d = 1.04). Moreover, media literacy interventions have stronger effects (1) when multiple sessions rather than a single session are implemented, (2) in high (vs. low) uncertainty avoidance cultures, and (3) among college students than among adults recruited from online crowdsourcing platforms (e.g., Amazon Mechanical Turk). These findings enrich our understanding of inoculation theory and provide valuable guidance for the design of future media literacy intervention programs.
AmazeenM. A. (2021). Resisting covert persuasion in digital news: Comparing inoculation and reactance in the processing of native advertising disclosures and in article engagement intentions. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 98(4), 1129–1156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020952131
2.
AmazeenM. A.KrishnaA.EschmannR. (2022). Cutting the bunk: Comparing the solo and aggregate effects of prebunking and debunking covid-19 vaccine misinformation. Science Communication, 44(4), 387–417. https://doi.org/10.1177/10755470221111558
3.
*ApukeO. D.OmarB.Asude TuncaE. (2023). Literacy concepts as an intervention strategy for improving fake news knowledge, detection skills, and curtailing the tendency to share fake news in Nigeria. Child & Youth Services, 44(1), 88–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/0145935x.2021.2024758
4.
ArreseÁ. (2024). Cultural dimensions of fake news exposure: A cross-national analysis among European Union countries. Mass Communication & Society, 27(5), 827–850. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2022.2123278
5.
*AshleyS.MakslA.CraftS. (2013). Developing a news media literacy scale. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 68(1), 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695812469802
6.
AufderheideP. (2018). Media literacy: From a report of the national leadership conference on media literacy. In KubeyR. (Ed.), Media literacy in the information age (pp. 79–86). Routledge.
7.
BanasJ. A.MillerG. (2013). Inducing resistance to conspiracy theory propaganda: Testing inoculation and Metainoculation Strategies. Human Communication Research, 39(2), 184–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12000
*BasolM.RoozenbeekJ.BerricheM.UenalF.McClanahanW. P.LindenS. V. D. (2021). Towards psychological herd immunity: Cross-cultural evidence for two prebunking interventions against COVID-19 misinformation. Big Data & Society, 8(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211013868
10.
*BasolM.RoozenbeekJ.van der LindenS. (2020). Good news about bad news: Gamified inoculation boosts confidence and cognitive immunity against fake news. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), 2–9. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.91
11.
BertolottiM.CatellaniP. (2023). Counterfactual thinking as a prebunking strategy to contrast misinformation on COVID-19. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 104, 104404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104404
12.
BickhamD. S.SlabyR. G. (2012). Effects of a media literacy program in the US on children’s critical evaluation of unhealthy media messages about violence, smoking, and food. Journal of Children and Media, 6(2), 255–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2012.662031
13.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P. T.RothsteinH. R. (Eds.) (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
14.
CacioppoJ. T.PettyR. E.FeinsteinJ. A.JarvisW. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197–253. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.119.2.197
15.
CameronK. A. (2009). A practitioners’ guide to persuasion: An overview of 15 selected persuasion theories, models and frameworks. Patient Education and Counseling, 74(3), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.12.003
16.
CapewellG.MaertensR.RemshardM.van der LindenS.ComptonJ.LewandowskyS.RoozenbeekJ. (2024). Misinformation interventions decay rapidly without an immediate posttest. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 54(8), 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.13049
17.
CastroF. G.BarreraM.JrHolleran SteikerL. K. (2010). Issues and challenges in the design of culturally adapted evidence-based interventions. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 6, 213–239. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-033109-132032
18.
ChenC. Y.KearneyM.ChangS. L. (2021). Belief in or identification of false news according to the elaboration likelihood model. International Journal of Communication, 15(1), 1263–1285. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/14804
19.
CheungM. W. (2019). A guide to conducting a meta-analysis with non-independent effect sizes. Neuropsychology Review, 29(4), 387–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-019-09415-6
ComptonJ. A.PfauM. (2005). Inoculation theory of resistance to influence at maturity: Recent progress in theory development and application and suggestions for future research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 29(1), 97–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2005.11679045
25.
ComptonJ.van der LindenS.CookJ.BasolM. (2021). Inoculation theory in the post-truth era: Extant findings and new frontiers for contested science, misinformation, and conspiracy theories. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(6), e12602. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12602
26.
CummingG. (2012). Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. Routledge.
27.
*Dame Adjin-TetteyT. (2022). Combating fake news, disinformation, and misinformation: Experimental evidence for media literacy education. Cogent Arts and Humanities, 9(1), 2037229. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2022.2037229
28.
DillinghamL. L.IvanovB. (2017). Inoculation messages as a preemptive financial crisis communication strategy with inexperienced investors. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 45(3), 274–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2017.1320571
29.
*DomgaardS.ParkM. (2021). Combating misinformation: The effects of infographics in verifying false vaccine news. Health Education Journal, 80(8), 974–986. https://doi.org/10.1177/00178969211038750
30.
DuvalS.TweedieR. (2000). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics, 56(2), 455–463. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x
31.
EshetY. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93–106.
*FordT. W.YankoskiM.FaccianiM.WeningerT. (2023). Online media literacy intervention in Indonesia reduces misinformation sharing intention. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 15(2), 99–123. https://doi.org/10.23860/jmle-2023-15-2-8
34.
*GuessA. M.LernerM.LyonsB.MontgomeryJ. M.NyhanB.ReiflerJ.SircarN. (2020). A digital media literacy intervention increases discernment between mainstream and false news in the United States and India. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(27), 15536–15545. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920498117
35.
HobbsR. (2013). The blurring of art, journalism, and advocacy: Confronting 21st century propaganda in a world of online journalism. Journal of Law and Policy, 8(3), 625–637.
36.
HofstedeG. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. McGraw-Hill.
37.
*HwangY.RyuJ. Y.JeongS.-H. (2021). Effects of disinformation using deepfake: The protective effect of media literacy education. Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking, 24(3), 188–193. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.0174
38.
IvanovB.ParkerK. A.DillinghamL. L. (2018). Testing the limits of inoculation-generated resistance. Western Journal of Communication, 82(5), 648–665.
KimH. K.AhnJ.AtkinsonL.KahlorL. A. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 misinformation on information seeking, avoidance, and processing: A multicountry comparative study. Science Communication, 42(5), 586–615. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547020959670
42.
KocM.BarutE. (2016). Development and validation of new media literacy scale (NMLS) for university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 834–843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.035
43.
KreuterM. W.LukwagoS. N.BucholtzR. D.ClarkE. M.Sanders-ThompsonV. (2003). Achieving cultural appropriateness in health promotion programs: Targeted and tailored approaches. Health Education & Behavior, 30(2), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198102251021
44.
LeeJ.KimJ. W.Yun LeeH. (2023). Unlocking conspiracy belief systems: How fact-checking label on Twitter counters conspiratorial MMR vaccine misinformation. Health Communication, 38(9), 1780–1792. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2022.2031452
45.
*LeesJ.BanasJ. A.LinvillD.MeirickP. C.WarrenP. (2023). The spot the troll quiz game increases accuracy in discerning between real and inauthentic social media accounts. PNAS Nexus, 2(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad094
46.
*MaertensR.RoozenbeekJ.BasolM.van der LindenS. (2021). Long-term effectiveness of inoculation against misinformation: Three longitudinal experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied, 27(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000315
47.
MansonS. M. (2020). The role of culture in effective intervention design, implementation, and research: Its universal importance. Prevention Science, 21(Suppl 1), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-019-01065-7
48.
MattG. E.CookT. D. (2019). Threats to the validity of generalized inferences from research syntheses. In ValentineJ. C.HedgesL. V.CooperH. (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (pp. 489–516). Russell Sage Foundation.
49.
McGuireW. J. (1964). Inducing resistance to persuasion: Some contemporary approaches. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 191–229). Academic Press.
50.
*Modirrousta-GalianA.HighamP. A.SeabrookeT. (2023). Effects of inductive learning and gamification on news veracity discernment. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied, 29(3), 599–619. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000458
51.
*MooreR. C.HancockJ. T. (2022). A digital media literacy intervention for older adults improves resilience to fake news. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 6008. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-08437-0
52.
MorrisS. B. (2008). Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106291059
53.
PfauM.BockernS. V.KangJ. G. (1992). Use of inoculation to promote resistance to smoking initiation among adolescents. Communication Monographs, 59(3), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759209376266
54.
PfauM.HolbertR. L.ZubricS. J.PashaN. H.LinW. K. (2000). Role and influence of communication modality in the process of resistance to persuasion. Media Psychology, 2(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532785xmep0201_1
55.
PfauM.IvanovB.HoustonB.HaighM.SimsJ.GilchristE.RussellJ.WigleyS.EcksteinJ.RichertN. (2005). Inoculation and mental processing: The instrumental role of associative networks in the process of resistance to counterattitudinal influence. Communication Monographs, 72(4), 414–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750500322578
56.
PotterW. J. (Ed.). (2022). Media literacy (10th ed.). Sage publications.
57.
*QianS.ShenC.ZhangJ. (2022). Fighting cheapfakes: Using a digital media literacy intervention to motivate reverse search of out-of-context visual misinformation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 28(1), zmac024. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmac024
58.
*RoozenbeekJ.MaertensR.McClanahanW.van der LindenS. (2021). Disentangling item and testing effects in inoculation research on online misinformation: Solomon revisited. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 81(2), 340–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164420940378
59.
*RoozenbeekJ.TrabergC. S.van der LindenS. (2022). Technique-based inoculation against real-world misinformation. Royal Society Open Science, 9(5), 211719. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211719
60.
*RoozenbeekJ.van der LindenS. (2019a). The fake news game: Actively inoculating against the risk of misinformation. Journal of Risk Research, 22(5), 570–580. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2018.1443491
61.
*RoozenbeekJ.van der LindenS. (2019b). Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation. Palgrave Communications, 5(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0279-9
62.
*RoozenbeekJ.van der LindenS.GoldbergB.RathjeS.LewandowskyS. (2022). Psychological inoculation improves resilience against misinformation on social media. Science Advances, 8(34), eabo6254. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abo6254
63.
*RoozenbeekJ.van der LindenS.NygrenT. (2020). Prebunking interventions based on the psychological theory of “inoculation” can reduce susceptibility to misinformation across cultures. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, 1(2), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.37016//mr-2020-008
64.
RosenthalR. (1979). The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 636–641.
65.
*ScheibenzuberC.HoferS.NistorN. (2021). Designing for fake news literacy training: A problem-based undergraduate online-course. Computers in Human Behavior, 121, 106796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106796
66.
SeoH.BlombergM.AltschwagerD.VuH. T. (2021). Vulnerable populations and misinformation: A mixed-methods approach to underserved older adults’ online information assessment. New Media & Society, 23(7), 2012–2033. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820925041
67.
SidaniS. (2017). Health intervention research: Understanding research design and methods. Sage.
68.
SilverblattA.EliceiriE. M.EliceiriE. M. E. (1997). Dictionary of media literacy. Greenwood Publishing Group.
69.
*SuY.LeeD. K. L.XiaoX. (2022). “I enjoy thinking critically, and I’m in control”: Examining the influences of media literacy factors on misperceptions amidst the COVID-19 infodemic. Computers in Human Behavior, 128, 107111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107111
70.
TandocE. C.JrYeeA. Z.OngJ.LeeJ. C.B, XuDHanZMatthewCCHNgJSHYLimCMChengLRJ. (2021). Developing a perceived social media literacy scale: Evidence from Singapore. International Journal of Communication, 15(1), 2484–2505. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/16118
71.
ThomanE. (1999). Skills and strategies for media education. Educational Leadership: Journal of the Department of Supervision and Curriculum Development, N.E.A, 56(2), 50–54.
72.
TrabergC. S.RoozenbeekJ.van der LindenS. (2022). Psychological inoculation against misinformation: Current evidence and future directions. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 700(1), 136–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027162221087936
73.
*TullyM.VragaE. K.BodeL. (2020). Designing and testing news literacy messages for social media. Mass Communication & Society, 23(1), 22–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2019.1604970
74.
VahediZ.SibalisA.SutherlandJ. E. (2018). Are media literacy interventions effective at changing attitudes and intentions towards risky health behaviors in adolescents? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Adolescence, 67, 140–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2018.06.007
75.
Van Den NoortgateW.López-LópezJ. A.Marín-MartínezF.Sánchez-MecaJ. (2015). Meta-analysis of multiple outcomes: A multilevel approach. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1274–1294. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0527-2
76.
van der LindenS.LeiserowitzA.RosenthalS.MaibachE. (2017). Inoculating the public against misinformation about climate change. Global Challenges, 1(2), 1600008. https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.201600008
77.
van der MeerT. G. L. A.HameleersM.OhmeJ. (2023). Can fighting misinformation have a negative spillover effect? How warnings for the threat of misinformation can decrease general news credibility. Journalism Studies, 24(6), 803–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670x.2023.2187652
78.
Van DuynE.CollierJ. (2019). Priming and fake news: The effects of elite discourse on evaluations of news media. Mass Communication & Society, 22(1), 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2018.1511807
79.
VishwanathA. (2003). Comparing online information effects: A cross-cultural comparison of online information and uncertainty avoidance. Communication Research, 30(6), 579–598. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650203257838
80.
*VragaE. K.BodeL.TullyM. (2022a). The effects of a news literacy video and real-time corrections to video misinformation related to sunscreen and skin cancer. Health Communication, 37(13), 1622–1630. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1910165
81.
*VragaE. K.BodeL.TullyM. (2022b). Creating news literacy messages to enhance expert corrections of misinformation on Twitter. Communication Research, 49(2), 245–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219898094
82.
WadeT. D.DavidsonS.O’DeaJ. A. (2003). A preliminary controlled evaluation of a school-based media literacy program and self-esteem program for reducing eating disorder risk factors. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 33(4), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.10136
83.
WalterN.CodyM. J.XuL. Z.MurphyS. T. (2018). A priest, a rabbi, and a minister walk into a bar: A meta-analysis of humor effects on persuasion. Human Communication Research, 44(4), 343–373. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqy005
84.
WoodM. L. M. (2007). Rethinking the inoculation analogy: Effects on subjects with differing preexisting attitudes. Human Communication Research, 33(3), 357–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00303.x
85.
WuyckensG.LandryN.FastrezP. (2022). Untangling media literacy, information literacy, and digital literacy: A systematic meta-review of core concepts in media education. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 14(1), 168–182. https://doi.org/10.23860/jmle-2022-14-1-12
*YangS.LeeJ. W.KimH.-J.KangM.ChongE.KimE.-M. (2021). Can an online educational game contribute to developing information literate citizens?Computers & Education, 161, 104057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104057Article104057
88.
YoungM. F.SlotaS.CutterA. B.JaletteG.MullinG.LaiB.SimeoniZ.TranM.YukhymenkoM. (2012). Our princess is in another castle: A review of trends in serious gaming for education. Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 61–89. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312436980
89.
YuW.PaytonB.SunM.JiaW.HuangG. (2023). Toward an integrated framework for misinformation and correction sharing: A systematic review across domains. New Media & Society, 25(8), 2241–2267. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221116569
90.
*ZhangL.IyendoT. O.ApukeO. D.GeverC. V. (2022). Experimenting the effect of using visual multimedia intervention to inculcate social media literacy skills to tackle fake news. Journal of Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515221131797
91.
*ZhaoH.XuJ.IyendoT. O.ApukeO. D.TuncaE. A.GeverV. C. (2023). The effectiveness of using audio-visual based media intervention for promoting social media literacy skills to curtail fake news on social media: A quasi-experimental investigation. Information Development. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669231217236
92.
*Zou’biR. A. (2021). The impact of media and information literacy on acquiring the critical thinking skill by the educational faculty’s students. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 39, 100782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100782
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
