Fact-checking has become an important feature of the modern media landscape. However, it is unclear what the most effective format of fact-checks is. Some have argued that simple retractions that repeat a false claim and tag it as false may backfire because they boost the claim's familiarity. More detailed refutations may provide a more promising approach, but may not be feasible under the severe space constraints associated with social-media communication. In two experiments, we tested whether (1) simple 'false-tag' retractions can indeed be ineffective or harmful; and (2) short-format (140-character) refutations are more effective than simple retractions. Regarding (1), simple retractions reduced belief in false claims, and we found no evidence for a familiarity-driven backfire effect. Regarding (2), short-format refutations were found to be more effective than simple retractions after a 1-week delay but not a one-day delay. At both delays, however, they were associated with reduced misinformation-congruent reasoning.

中文翻译：

---

短格式引用事实检查的有效性。

事实检查已成为现代媒体格局的重要特征。但是，目前尚不清楚最有效的事实检查格式是什么。一些人认为，简单的撤回重复虚假主张并将其标记为虚假，可能会适得其反，因为它们提高了对主张的熟悉度。更详细的驳斥可能提供一种更有希望的方法，但在与社交媒体传播相关的严峻空间限制下可能不可行。在两个实验中，我们测试了（1）简单的“假标签”撤回是否确实无效或有害；（2）短格式（140个字符）的反驳比简单的撤回更为有效。关于（1），简单的撤回减少了对虚假主张的信任，并且我们没有发现证据表明存在由熟悉程度引起的适得其反的后果。关于（2），发现短格式的驳斥比简单的撤回在延迟1周而不是延迟一天后更有效。但是，在两次延误中，它们都与减少错误信息的一致推理有关。