Health MisinformationNCT07803380
Cognitive and Emotional Inoculation Against Nutrition-Related Misinformation in Young Adults
A study testing Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation., Emotional Game-Based Inoculation. and General Nutrition Health Education. in people with Health Misinformation and Misinformation, run by Beijing Normal University at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
This study aims to examine the effects of cognitive and emotional inoculation interventions on young adults' ability to identify and respond to nutrition-related misinformation on social media. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 30 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Health Misinformation, Misinformation, Digital Health Literacy
- What is being tested?
- Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation., Emotional Game-Based Inoculation. and General Nutrition Health Education.
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 330 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 1 Sep 2026to 30 Jun 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 30 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Aged 18 to 30 years.
- Able to read and understand Chinese.
- Able to access and independently complete the online intervention game and study questionnaires.
- Has access to WeChat for study communication and follow-up reminders.
- Provides electronic informed consent.
Who cannot join
- Younger than 18 years or older than 30 years.
- Unable to read Chinese or independently complete the online study procedures.
- Does not provide electronic informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
Official title: Cognitive and Emotional Inoculation Against Nutrition-Related Misinformation in Young Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial
This study aims to examine the effects of cognitive and emotional inoculation interventions on young adults' ability to identify and respond to nutrition-related misinformation on social media. The study will compare two game-based inoculation approaches-a cognitive inoculation intervention and an emotional inoculation intervention-with a control condition. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and 2 weeks later.
Read the detailed description
Nutrition-related misinformation is increasingly disseminated through social media and may influence how young adults perceive and make decisions about food, diet, and health. Such misinformation may rely not only on inaccurate or unsupported claims but also on persuasive communication techniques, including appeals to authority, unrealistic promises, fear appeals, conspiracy narratives, and absolute or dichotomous framing. These techniques may influence judgments by eliciting trust, desire, anxiety, anger, or decision-related pressure.
This three-arm randomized controlled trial will compare two game-based inoculation interventions-a cognitive inoculation intervention and an emotional inoculation intervention-with a control condition. Participants will encounter common persuasive techniques used in nutrition-related misinformation and receive condition-specific feedback. The cognitive intervention is designed to promote recognition of misleading techniques and verification of supporting evidence. The emotional intervention is designed to promote recognition of emotional cues associated with manipulative messages and reflection on how such cues may influence judgment. The study will assess participants' responses to nutrition-related social media posts at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and 2 weeks later to examine both immediate and sustained effects.
- Being tested
- Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation., Emotional Game-Based Inoculation., General Nutrition Health Education.
- Keywords
- Inoculation theory, Cognitive inoculation, Emotional inoculation, Nutrition misinformation, Misinformation, Young adults, Social media, Health literacy
- Medical subject headings
- Communication
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation.Behavioural
Participants will complete a five-level interactive game designed to build resistance to nutrition-related misinformation on social media. In each level, participants act as a health-content creator and choose between an original social media post and alternative titles that may use misleading persuasive techniques. The game addresses five techniques: fake authority, impossible expectations, fear appeals, conspiracy framing, and false dichotomies. After each decision, participants receive cognitive feedback explaining how the misleading technique operates, the linguistic cues that may indicate its use, and how to evaluate whether the claim is supported by verifiable evidence.
Emotional Game-Based Inoculation.Behavioural
Participants will complete a five-level interactive game designed to build resistance to nutrition-related misinformation on social media. The game uses the same scenarios and addresses the same five misleading techniques as the cognitive inoculation intervention: fake authority, impossible expectations, fear appeals, conspiracy framing, and false dichotomies. After each decision, participants receive emotional feedback designed to help them recognize and reflect on the emotional cues triggered by manipulative messages, including unwarranted reassurance, desire, anxiety, anger, and pressure to make extreme choices. The feedback explains how these emotional responses may influence judgment of nutrition-related information.
General Nutrition Health Education.Behavioural
Participants will read eight brief sections of general nutrition health education adapted from the Chinese Dietary Guidelines (2022). This condition provides credible healthy-diet information without instruction about nutrition-related misinformation, persuasive techniques, evidence verification, fact-checking, or emotional manipulation cues. The sections cover dietary variety; energy balance and physical activity; fruit and vegetable intake; animal-source foods; limiting salt, oil, sugar, and alcohol; regular meals and adequate hydration; food selection, label reading, and food hygiene; and sustainable dietary practices.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive Inoculation | Experimental | Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation Receives: Behavioral: Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation. |
| Affective Inoculation | Experimental | Emotional Game-Based Inoculation Receives: Behavioral: Emotional Game-Based Inoculation. |
| General Nutrition Education | Active comparator | General Nutrition Health Education Receives: Behavioral: General Nutrition Health Education. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Perceived Credibility of Nutrition-Related Misinformation
Change from baseline in perceived credibility of nutrition-related misinformation will be assessed using simulated social-media posts about diet and health. Participants will rate the perceived credibility of each post using a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all credible) to 7 (extremely credible). Higher scores indicate greater perceived credibility of nutrition-related misinformation, representing a worse outcome. Lower scores indicate lower perceived credibility of nutrition-related misinformation.
Measured: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Manipulation-Technique Recognition Accuracy
Change from baseline in the accuracy of recognizing manipulation techniques in nutrition-related social-media information will be assessed using simulated posts containing both misleading and accurate content. Participants will identify the persuasion or manipulation technique used in each post, or indicate that no misleading technique is present. Higher scores indicate better recognition accuracy.
Measured: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Secondary outcomes (7)
Intention to Share Nutrition-Related Misinformation
Change from baseline in willingness to share nutrition-related misinformation will be assessed using simulated social-media posts about diet and health. Participants will rate their willingness to share the information with others on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (very unlikely) to 7 (very likely). Higher scores indicate greater intention to share nutrition-related misinformation and represent a worse outcome.
Measured: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Intention to Fact-Check Nutrition-Related Information
Change from baseline in intention to verify nutrition-related information will be assessed using simulated social-media posts about diet and health. Participants will rate the extent to which they would check whether the information is accurate or supported by reliable evidence on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (very unlikely) to 7 (very likely). Higher scores indicate greater intention to fact-check nutrition-related information and represent a better outcome.
Measured: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Perceived Manipulativeness
Change from baseline in perceived manipulativeness will be assessed by participants' ratings of the extent to which nutrition-related social-media posts are perceived as deliberately attempting to influence or guide their judgment. Ratings will be made on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all manipulative) to 7 (extremely manipulative). Higher scores indicate greater perceived manipulativeness.
Measured: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Perceived Emotional Manipulation
Change from baseline in perceived emotional manipulation will be assessed in response to nutrition-related social-media posts. Participants will rate the extent to which the posts rely on emotional appeals rather than factual information.Ratings will be made on 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely). Higher scores indicate greater perceived emotional manipulation.
Measured: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Perceived Threat
Change from baseline in perceived threat will be assessed in response to nutrition-related social-media posts. Participants will rate the extent to which the posts evoke concerns about personal health.Ratings will be made on 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (extremely).Higher scores indicate greater perceived threat.
Measured: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Counterarguing in Response to Nutrition-Related Misinformation
Change from baseline in counterarguing will be assessed by participants' self-reported tendency to generate thoughts that question, challenge, or critically evaluate the claims made in nutrition-related social-media posts. Responses will be rated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate greater counterarguing and represent a better outcome.
Measured: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Misinformation-Detection Self-Efficacy
Change from baseline in confidence in detecting false, exaggerated, or insufficiently supported nutrition-related information and in verifying its source will be assessed using self-report items rated on 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all confident) to 7 (extremely confident). Higher scores indicate greater misinformation-detection self-efficacy.
Measured: Baseline (T0) and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Sep 2026
- Study start1 Sep 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion30 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Jun 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Health MisinformationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 330 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Beijing Normal University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Xue Weng, Principal investigator, Beijing Normal University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07803380
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Nutrition Misinformation Trial
- Status last verified
- Sep 2026
- First submitted
- 31 Aug 2026
- Last updated
- 9 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Cognitive and Emotional Inoculation Against Nutrition-Related Misinformation in Young Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07803380
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Nutrition Misinformation Trial
- Keywords
- Inoculation theory, Cognitive inoculation, Emotional inoculation, Nutrition misinformation, Misinformation, Young adults, Social media, Health literacy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 330 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Beijing Normal UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Sep 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 30 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Jun 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 3 Sep 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study aims to examine the effects of cognitive and emotional inoculation interventions on young adults' ability to identify and respond to nutrition-related misinformation on social media. The study will compare two game-based inoculation approaches-a cognitive inoculation intervention and an emotional inoculation intervention-with a control condition. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and 2 weeks later.
Detailed description
Nutrition-related misinformation is increasingly disseminated through social media and may influence how young adults perceive and make decisions about food, diet, and health. Such misinformation may rely not only on inaccurate or unsupported claims but also on persuasive communication techniques, including appeals to authority, unrealistic promises, fear appeals, conspiracy narratives, and absolute or dichotomous framing. These techniques may influence judgments by eliciting trust, desire, anxiety, anger, or decision-related pressure.
This three-arm randomized controlled trial will compare two game-based inoculation interventions-a cognitive inoculation intervention and an emotional inoculation intervention-with a control condition. Participants will encounter common persuasive techniques used in nutrition-related misinformation and receive condition-specific feedback. The cognitive intervention is designed to promote recognition of misleading techniques and verification of supporting evidence. The emotional intervention is designed to promote recognition of emotional cues associated with manipulative messages and reflection on how such cues may influence judgment. The study will assess participants' responses to nutrition-related social media posts at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and 2 weeks later to examine both immediate and sustained effects.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive Inoculation | Experimental | Behavioral: Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation.Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation |
| Affective Inoculation | Experimental | Behavioral: Emotional Game-Based Inoculation.Emotional Game-Based Inoculation |
| General Nutrition Education | Active comparator | Behavioral: General Nutrition Health Education.General Nutrition Health Education |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 30 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Aged 18 to 30 years.
- Able to read and understand Chinese.
- Able to access and independently complete the online intervention game and study questionnaires.
- Has access to WeChat for study communication and follow-up reminders.
- Provides electronic informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Younger than 18 years or older than 30 years.
- Unable to read Chinese or independently complete the online study procedures.
- Does not provide electronic informed consent.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation.Participants will complete a five-level interactive game designed to build resistance to nutrition-related misinformation on social media. In each level, participants act as a health-content creator and choose between an original social media post and alternative titles that may use misleading persuasive techniques. The game addresses five techniques: fake authority, impossible expectations, fear appeals, conspiracy framing, and false dichotomies. After each decision, participants receive cognitive feedback explaining how the misleading technique operates, the linguistic cues that may indicate its use, and how to evaluate whether the claim is supported by verifiable evidence. | Behavioural | Cognitive Inoculation |
| Emotional Game-Based Inoculation.Participants will complete a five-level interactive game designed to build resistance to nutrition-related misinformation on social media. The game uses the same scenarios and addresses the same five misleading techniques as the cognitive inoculation intervention: fake authority, impossible expectations, fear appeals, conspiracy framing, and false dichotomies. After each decision, participants receive emotional feedback designed to help them recognize and reflect on the emotional cues triggered by manipulative messages, including unwarranted reassurance, desire, anxiety, anger, and pressure to make extreme choices. The feedback explains how these emotional responses may influence judgment of nutrition-related information. | Behavioural | Affective Inoculation |
| General Nutrition Health Education.Participants will read eight brief sections of general nutrition health education adapted from the Chinese Dietary Guidelines (2022). This condition provides credible healthy-diet information without instruction about nutrition-related misinformation, persuasive techniques, evidence verification, fact-checking, or emotional manipulation cues. The sections cover dietary variety; energy balance and physical activity; fruit and vegetable intake; animal-source foods; limiting salt, oil, sugar, and alcohol; regular meals and adequate hydration; food selection, label reading, and food hygiene; and sustainable dietary practices. | Behavioural | General Nutrition Education |
Primary outcome
Perceived Credibility of Nutrition-Related Misinformation
Time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Change from baseline in perceived credibility of nutrition-related misinformation will be assessed using simulated social-media posts about diet and health. Participants will rate the perceived credibility of each post using a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all credible) to 7 (extremely credible). Higher scores indicate greater perceived credibility of nutrition-related misinformation, representing a worse outcome. Lower scores indicate lower perceived credibility of nutrition-related misinformation.
Manipulation-Technique Recognition Accuracy
Time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Change from baseline in the accuracy of recognizing manipulation techniques in nutrition-related social-media information will be assessed using simulated posts containing both misleading and accurate content. Participants will identify the persuasion or manipulation technique used in each post, or indicate that no misleading technique is present. Higher scores indicate better recognition accuracy.
7 secondary outcomes
Intention to Share Nutrition-Related Misinformation
Time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Intention to Fact-Check Nutrition-Related Information
Time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Perceived Manipulativeness
Time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Perceived Emotional Manipulation
Time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Perceived Threat
Time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Counterarguing in Response to Nutrition-Related Misinformation
Time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Misinformation-Detection Self-Efficacy
Time frame: Baseline (T0) and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Sep 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Health Misinformation
Not yet recruiting
Development and Evaluation of a Digital Educational Intervention to Improve Vaccine Confidence and Communication Among Registered Nurses: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial (VaxNurse-RCT).
Vaccine Hesitancy, Vaccine Acceptance
Not yet recruiting
Social Media Withdrawal in Pregnancy: Effects on Maternal Mental Health and Misinformation
Pregnancy
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Xue Weng principal investigator
Beijing Normal University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation., Emotional Game-Based Inoculation. and General Nutrition Health Education. in people with Health Misinformation and Misinformation, run by Beijing Normal University at 1 site in China.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in China. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Xue Weng (3621259, xueweng@bnu.edu.cn), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Perceived Credibility of Nutrition-Related Misinformation (time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Sep 2026.