Misinformation Correction Experiment
A misinformation correction experiment tests whether a factual correction can reduce belief in a political misperception. In Nyhan and Reifler's influential 2010 design, all respondents read a misleading claim and a random subset also read a correction, after which their factual beliefs are measured. Their alarming finding was a backfire effect: for some groups, corrections increased rather than decreased misperceptions among those ideologically threatened by the fact. Later large-scale replications by Wood and Porter found backfire to be rare and corrections generally effective, making this design a case study in how political psychology refines a striking result through replication.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
Sources
- Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303-330. DOI: 10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2 ↗
- Wood, T., & Porter, E. (2019). The Elusive Backfire Effect: Mass Attitudes' Steadfast Factual Adherence. Political Behavior, 41(1), 135-163. DOI: 10.1007/s11109-018-9443-y ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 23). Political Misinformation Correction Experiment (Misperception and Backfire Design). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/political-psychology/misinformation-correction-experiment
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- Elite Cue ExperimentPolitical Psychology↔ compare
- Motivated Reasoning ExperimentPolitical Psychology↔ compare
- Partisan Motivated Reasoning ParadigmPolitical Psychology↔ compare