Relevant Resource To Share For LRNT 523

The resource I’m sharing is the “Counterarguments are critical to debunking misinformation” article (Association for Psychological Science, 2017). Please click here to view this resource.

This article reviews techniques from a 2017 meta-analysis (Chan, Jones & Jamieson, 2017) that summarized findings on debunking and countering misinformation.

As summarized by the resource (Association for Psychological Science, 2017), the recommendations for the ‘debunking message’ are:

  • The ‘right’ detail – Do not go into detail on the arguments that formed the misrepresented information, as this can enforce the misinformation within the audience. Instead, give a high level of detail in the debunking message. It is not effective to be brief and/or simply state that information is wrong, details need to be provided to explain how or why it is.
  • Allow for Audience Participation – Offer ways to engage the audience in counterargument generation. As an example, post corrected information in an open discussion forum, where others can comment on it, ask questions and include their own counter-arguments.
  • Include Proof – Ensure the inclusion of new evidence within the corrected explanation that clearly demonstrates how/why the misinformation is incorrect.

How This Resource Relates to LRNT 523

This resource relates to a topic in this course – how people learn. Specifically, this resource summarizes evidence-based elements to use so that people can ‘un-learn’ incorrect information. The audience participation recommendation relates to constructivism, as it allows learners to “construct their own understandings and then to validate through social negotiation, these new perspectives” (Ertmer & Newby, 2013, p. 57).

How It Connects to The Work We’ve Been Doing in LRNT 523

After discovering that screen time and learning styles could be ‘myths’ in Activity #8, an issue to follow is how to spread this learned message within our networks and communities. For some, it may be important that co-workers and colleagues be made aware of the lack of empirical support for these ideas. This could aid to ensure that future pedagogies and instructional design are not built on these theories and continued to be used in our work.

How It Adds To Our Learning

This resource gives an approach that is backed by evidence (the meta-analysis) so that we can be more confident that we can effectively ‘debunk’ these ideas, including others we may find along the journey of this program.

References

Association for Psychological Science. (2017, September 14). Counterarguments Are Critical to Debunking Misinformation. Retrieved from http://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/counterarguments-are-critical-to-debunking-misinformation.html

Chan, M. S., Jones, C. R., Hall Jamieson, K., & Albarracín, D. (2017). Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation. Psychological Science, 095679761771457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617714579

Ertmer, P., & Newby, T. (2013). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71.