Debriefings in misinformation research should include fact-checks to correct misperceptions and increase perceived learning

Abstract

Debriefings are a cornerstone of ethical research, especially when deception is used. In misinformation experiments, debriefings both disclose the deception and warn participants about misinformation. Unlike other misinformation interventions, they reveal that researchers deliberately introduced the falsehoods, raising concerns about trust and skepticism. In a preregistered U.S. experiment (N = 896), we compare no debriefing, a general debriefing, and a specific debriefing with fact-checks and source links. Only the specific debriefing reduced belief in false claims participants saw, not in novel ones. The general debriefing slightly reduced belief in true news, suggesting warnings may heighten skepticism. Both improved attitudes toward the study and perceived transparency, supporting the use of specific debriefings as an ethical and effective practice in misinformation research.