デバンキングハンドブック(3/6) オーバーキルバックファイアー効果

[Cook, J., Lewandowsky, S. (2011), The Debunking Handbook. St. Lucia, Australia: University of Queensland. November 5. ISBN 978-0-646-56812-6.]

The Overkill Backfire Effect

One principle that science communicators often fail to follow is making their content easy to process. That means easy to read, easy to understand and succinct. Information that is easy to process is more likely to be accepted as true.[7] Merely enhancing the colour contrast of a printed font so it is easier to read, for example, can increase people’s acceptance of the truth of a statement.[9]


Common wisdom is that the more counterarguments you provide, the more successful you’ll be in debunking a myth. It turns out that the opposite can be true. When it comes to refuting misinformation, less can be more. Debunks that offered three arguments, for example, are more successful in reducing the influence of misinformation, compared to debunks that offered twelve arguments which ended up reinforcing the myth.[7]



The Overkill Backfire Effect occurs because processing many arguments takes more effort than just considering a few. A simple myth is more cognitively attractive than an over-complicated correction.


The solution is to keep your content lean, mean and easy to read. Making your content easy to process means using every tool available. Use simple language, short sentences, subheadings and paragraphs. Avoid dramatic language and derogatory comments that alienate people. Stick to the facts.


End on a strong and simple message that people will remember and tweet to their friends, such as “97 out of 100 climate scientists agree that humans are causing global warning”; or “Study shows that MMR vaccines are safe.” Use graphics wherever possible to illustrate your points.


Scientists have long followed the principles of the Information Deficit Model, which suggests that people hold erroneous views because they don’t have all the information. But too much information can backfire. Adhere instead to the KISS principle: Keep It Simple, Stupid!


A simple myth is more cognitively attractive than an overcomplicated correction


単純なレベルで書くと、伝えたい概念の複雑さやニュアンスが失われるおそれがある。Skeptical Scienceでは、複数レベルの反論を書くことで両立させている。初級レベルでは、短い平易な英文を書き、単純な図を使う。より専門的に中級および上級レベルでは、より専門的な言葉や詳細な説明を書く。下のアイコンは、反論の専門レベルを示すために使っている。

[7] Schwarz, N., Sanna, L., Skurnik, I., & Yoon, C. (2007). Metacognitive experiences and the intricacies of setting people straight:Implications for debiasing and public information campaigns. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 127-161.
[8] Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32, 303-330.
[9] Reber, R., Schwarz, N. (1999). Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Judgments of Truth, Consciousness and Cognition, 8, 338-3426.


posted by Kumicit at 2011/12/03 23:08 | Comment(1) | TrackBack(0) | ID: General | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする
Having your cake and eating it tooについて、「無理なことを同時に行う=両立は無理」と解釈出来ないでしょうか?その根拠は以下の通です。
"have your cake and eat it (too)" in British English:
to have or do two good things at the same time that are impossible to have or do at the same time:
You can't have your cake and eat it - if you want more local services, you can't expect to pay less tax.
(Definition of “have your cake and eat it (too)” from the Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary & Thesaurus c Cambridge University Press):
Posted by 名も無き忘却からの帰還者 at 2016/08/23 21:33



コメント: [必須入力]