A cluster-randomized trial with nearly 9,000 high school students from 399 different schools in France found that providing general vaccination knowledge, either through pedagogical activities or chatbot engagement, significantly improved vaccination attitudes. This finding suggest, contrary to other evidence, that addressing the knowledge deficit can positively influence personal perspectives.
An experiment with nearly 1,000 participants finds that conversations with artificial intelligence large language models (LLMs) can reduce participants’ confidence in conspiracies and other inaccurate beliefs. Because the finding holds whether the participant knows the message is being by delivered by a human or an LLM, this indicates that what is most important in persuasive discourse is compelling messages.
Survey research on American public finds that over half of American adults, including higher numbers of young adults, and Black and Hispanic adults report occasionally using social media for health information and advice. Health information – notably on the topics of weight loss, nutrition, and diet – also reaches audiences who report never using social media for health information. Approximately 15% (or 1 in 6) report social media influencers are a regular source for health information and advice. People who reported regularly using social media for health information and advice, approximately one third rely on the health content from a particular influencer.
Cancer research is global, complex, and driven by people who dedicate their lives to helping patients.
Share our original Bluesky Post!
There’s no secret cancer cure being hidden by “Big Pharma.” Cancer research is global, complex, and driven by people who dedicate their lives to helping patients. Learn why this myth doesn’t hold up here 👉 scienceupfirst.com/misinformati… #ScienceUpFirst
— ScienceUpFirst (@scienceupfirst.bsky.social) January 15, 2026 at 12:20 PM
[image or embed]
View our original Instagram Post!
People who perceive themselves to be victims of unfair treatment are linked with greater beliefs in conspiratorial thinking. This international research covering a large number of respondents from 15 different countries found that higher markers of victim justice sensitivity (VJS) demonstrates an increased relationship to belief in conspiracy theories, notably vaccine-related conspiracies.
Keep reading for things to look out for and what you should do to make sure the information is accurate. 🔍
Do you have other tips for verifying AI-generated information? Let us know!
View our original Instagram Post!
Share our original Bluesky Post!
In 2026 it’s cool to care. Myth busting and critical thinking are the in thing. But relying on AI answers, charming personalities and other less than accurate sources are all out baby! Check out our site for more “in” tips on spotting misinformation. www.ScienceUpFirst.com #ScienceUpFirst
— ScienceUpFirst (@scienceupfirst.bsky.social) January 7, 2026 at 12:24 PM
[image or embed]
View our original Instagram Post!
Here are a few tips to help you get through these difficult discussions.
What about you? What are some approaches or strategies you have found helpful when discussing controversial topics? Let us know.
There are also resources available across the country to tackle radicalization in friends and family members. Check out our references (38).
Initiatives and programs to prevent and intervene with individuals and groups at-risk of radicalization to violence: Prevention and Intervention Programs
Share our original Bluesky Post!
Talking about polarizing topics can be difficult. Regardless of who the conversation is with it’s better for everyone if it goes positively. Here are a few tips to help you get through these difficult discussions.😵💫 www.scienceupfirst.com/project/our-… #ScienceUpFirst
— ScienceUpFirst (@scienceupfirst.bsky.social) December 18, 2025 at 12:48 PM
[image or embed]
View our original Instagram Post!
When something feels off, checking other reputable sources and seeing what experts in the field agree on can help you understand what the evidence actually supports.
Evidence is still your best guide. Science is built on many voices, not one institution. And a single surprising statement, even from a familiar or historically trusted source, doesn’t replace the wider consensus.
How is a scientific consensus reached? | ScienceUpFirst | November 2023
Misinformer Tactic: Cherry Picking | ScienceUpFirst | May 2024
Moving the Goalposts | Logically Fallacious
The Fallacy of ‘Moving the Goalposts’, Explained | Snopes | February 2023
Proving Non-Existence | Logically Fallacious
Share our original Bluesky Post!
Science is built on many voices, not one institution. A single surprising statement, even from a familiar or historically trusted source, doesn’t replace the wider consensus. But how to gauge reliability?👇 scienceupfirst.com/misinformati… #ScienceUpFirst
— ScienceUpFirst (@scienceupfirst.bsky.social) December 10, 2025 at 1:14 PM
[image or embed]
View our original Instagram Post!
We hope you enjoy our re-imagining of some of our most common misinformer tactics as fashion icons.
If you need a quick refresher:
Share our original Bluesky Post!
What if different misinformation tactics came with different moods and styles? What would cherry picking look like? What about an appeal to nature? Check out this post to see them all! 👉 scienceupfirst.com/misinformati… #ScienceUpFirst
— ScienceUpFirst (@scienceupfirst.bsky.social) December 8, 2025 at 11:07 AM
[image or embed]
View our original Instagram Post!
It’s no wonder that anger is frequently used to make misinformation go viral (1-3) 😡.
Research shows that:
Strong negative emotions tend to make us more sensitive to information that confirms our views. This creates an echo chamber (in other words, seeing and believing only what aligns with our perspectives) (6). In fact, emotions such as anger, sadness or frustration scramble the message and diminish our ability to analyze scientific information. Our brains tend to simplify problems and solutions when we’re upset (7). Being aware of this misinformation tactic will help you avoid being fooled (8).
Remember to take your time before sharing any information. Those who read information carefully have better judgment when faced with false information (9,10).
Share our original Bluesky Post!
Did you know that misinformation on the internet and social media often plays on your emotions to go viral? Rage bait can hinder our critical thinking. Read more on that and how to protect yourself here 👇 www.scienceupfirst.com/project/misi… #ScienceUpFirst
— ScienceUpFirst (@scienceupfirst.bsky.social) December 4, 2025 at 12:55 PM
[image or embed]
View our original Instagram Post!
The more the study is influenced by the expert, the higher the risk of bias.
Check out this post for an explanation of the hierarchy of evidence 🔺
Share this post with a friend to help them recognize strong evidence!
Share our original Bluesky Post!
Did you know that not all scientific evidence has the same weight? The more the study relies on an expert's opinion, rather than many data points and peer-review, the higher the risk of bias. 🔺https://www.scienceupfirst.com/project/hierarchy-of-evidence/ #ScienceUpFirst
— ScienceUpFirst (@scienceupfirst.bsky.social) November 26, 2025 at 12:41 PM
[image or embed]
View our original Instagram Post!
That’s not curiosity. That’s a tactic called sealioning. It’s when someone jumps into a conversation and fires off endless questions to drain your time and patience, without having any real intention to learn. They keep asking what seems like “polite” follow-ups, but they ignore what’s already been explained. At first glance, it sounds like a civil attempt at conversation, but it’s actually a subtle form of trolling that aims to exhaust you by shifting the burden onto you to teach them again and again (1-4).
The problem with sealioning is that there’s no winning response (1-3,5,6). 👇
If you see the tactic for what it is and choose not to answer, they’ll say you’re avoiding the question because you have no argument, which “proves” they’re right.
If you take the bait and keep answering, you’ll probably end up tired and frustrated. At some point, you might snap, and that’s exactly what they want. They’ll stay calm and polite, pretending to be the “reasonable one,” while you look like the one overreacting and attacking them.
Or, after enough endless questioning, you might slip up, say something slightly off, or contradict yourself. Then they’ll jump on it and claim they’ve proven you wrong.
That’s what makes this tactic so manipulative. No matter what you do, they twist it to make you look unreasonable. It’s not a real debate. It’s harassment dressed up as a polite conversation (2,3,5,6).
So what can you do when someone tries this?
Call it out. You can say, “This looks like sealioning. You keep repeating bad-faith questions that have already been answered.” This works both for the person being targeted and for those watching. Sealioning relies on an audience. By naming it, it loses power (3).
Sometimes, the best way to stop a bad-faith “debate” is to call it what it is.
Share our original Bluesky Post!
They say they’re “just asking questions.” You answer. They ask again, ignoring your answer. And again. And again. That’s not curiosity, that’s sealioning. A polite-looking way to troll and waste your time. Don’t take the bait. Call it out. 🦭 👉 scienceupfirst.com/misinformati… #ScienceUpFirst
— ScienceUpFirst (@scienceupfirst.bsky.social) November 20, 2025 at 1:18 PM
[image or embed]
View our original Instagram Post!