Does content matter? Comparing the Continued Influence Effect for different materials

In today’s world of fake news, it is becoming increasingly difficult to tell what is true and what is not. One concerning phenomenon is that belief in misinformation continues despite correction, known as the continued influence effect (CIE). The CIE is typically investigated by presenting participants with a sequence of short statements about an event containing misinformation. The misinformation is then either retracted or retracted with an alternative explanation about what the correct information is. Currently, the materials used vary in length, content, and target audience (usually English-speaking). As misinformation can range from emotionally charged topics (e.g., political content) to more mundane ones (e.g., gossip about a celebrity), it is important to investigate whether correction of such information is content dependent. In a first step we compared three typically used materials (two studies: N = 118, student sample; N = 386 quota-based sample) to investigate whether there is a difference regarding the CIE. We adapted the materials for a German sample and adjusted the materials such that they are similar in length, position of the misinformation, and questions asked. Results showed that while we replicated the typical CIE pattern with retraction including an alternative explanation being the most effective in reducing the CIE, there were differences regarding the CIE for the control condition (study 1) and for the control and the retraction condition (study 2). Thus, pointing towards a content dependency of the CIE. Future studies should therefore take a possible influence of the materials used into account.