Correcting cognitive biases can produce negative psychological outcomes

the verdict

SUPPORTED

the evidence backs this

Recorded sources

2 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Efforts to correct cognitive biases and irrational beliefs can sometimes produce negative psychological outcomes, such as backfire effects that reinforce the original biases or create new cognitive hazards.

The analysis

The retrieved papers include specific evidence demonstrating that corrective interventions (such as debunking strategies or paternalistic debiasing) can backfire and produce adverse psychological outcomes or reinforced biases.

Evidence for · 2

Misinformation lingers in memory: Failure of three pro-vaccination strategies.

Recorded source metadata

Pluviano S, Watt C, Della Sala S. Misinformation lingers in memory: Failure of three pro-vaccination strategies.. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181640

Paper [0] demonstrates that attempts to correct misinformation or cognitive beliefs can backfire, reinforcing ill-founded beliefs and reducing vaccination intentions.

Source citation format

See more details

More for · 1

Government Regulation of Irrationality: Moral and Cognitive Hazards

Recorded source metadata

Jonathan Klick, G. Mitchell. Government Regulation of Irrationality: Moral and Cognitive Hazards. 2006. https://doi.org/10.24926/265535.939

Paper [1] highlights that paternalistic attempts to correct human irrationality can create 'cognitive hazards,' magnifying existing biases and causing adverse psychological effects.

Source citation format

The paper trail · every fact has a biography

first checked01 Aug 2026

judged → SUPPORTED · 8801 Aug 2026

More receipts

Is it true that Phonological evolution involves regular processes of phoneme elision, vowel nasalization, and tonogenesis?Is it true that Hemangiomas are treatable with medication?Is it true that Research identifies forms of intelligence that diverge from standard IQ measures?

Random receipt →The Trust Wiki →

Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.

Check your own claim

Challenge the receipt

I have a source that contradicts this verdict I have a source that supports it No source: request a receipt review Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt