The standard method for addressing the consequences of misinformation is the provision of a correction in which the misinformation is directly refuted. However, the impact of misinformation may also be successfully addressed by introducing or bolstering alternative beliefs with opposite evaluative implications. Six preregistered experiments clarified important processes influencing the impact of bypassing versus correcting misinformation via negation. First, we find that, following exposure to misinformation, bypassing generally changes people's attitudes and intentions more than correction in the form of a simple negation. Second, this relative advantage is not a function of the depth at which information is processed but rather the degree to which people form attitudes or beliefs when they receive the misinformation. When people form attitudes when they first receive the misinformation, bypassing has no advantage over corrections, likely owing to anchoring. In contrast, when individuals focus on the accuracy of the statements and form beliefs, bypassing is significantly more successful at changing their attitudes because these attitudes are constructed based on expectancy-value principles, while misinformation continues to influence attitudes after correction. Broader implications of this work are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

绕过与纠正错误信息：功效和基本过程。


解决错误信息后果的标准方法是提供更正，直接驳斥错误信息。然而，错误信息的影响也可以通过引入或支持具有相反评价含义的替代信念来成功解决。六个预先注册的实验阐明了影响通过否定绕过与纠正错误信息影响的重要过程。首先，我们发现，在接触错误信息后，绕过通常比以简单否定的形式进行纠正更能改变人们的态度和意图。其次，这种相对优势不是信息处理深度的函数，而是人们在收到错误信息时形成态度或信念的程度。当人们在第一次收到错误信息时形成态度时，绕过与纠正相比没有优势，这可能是由于锚定。相比之下，当个体关注陈述的准确性并形成信念时，绕过在改变他们的态度方面要成功得多，因为这些态度是基于期望值原则构建的，而错误信息在纠正后继续影响态度。讨论了这项工作的更广泛影响。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 （c） 2024 APA，保留所有权利）。