An interventional study of Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation. and Emotional Game-Based Inoculation. in Health Misinformation, Misinformation and Digital Health Literacy, sponsored by Beijing Normal University. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in China. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 30 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-09-09.
Sponsored by Beijing Normal University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention
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.
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.
719 studies on the registry are indexed under Communication; 159 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 330 is above the median of 144 across 571 interventional studies indexed under Communication.
Browse Communication studies →Beijing Normal University is the lead sponsor of 31 studies on the registry; 4 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation
Behavioral: Cognitive Game-Based Inoculation.
Emotional Game-Based Inoculation
Behavioral: Emotional Game-Based Inoculation.
General Nutrition Health Education
Behavioral: General Nutrition Health Education.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Time frame: 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.
Time frame: Baseline (T0), immediate post-intervention (T1), and 2-week follow-up (T2).
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.
Time frame: 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.
Time frame: 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.
Time frame: 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.
Time frame: 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.
Time frame: 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.
Time frame: 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.
Time frame: Baseline (T0) and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Critical and Electronic Health Literacy
Change from baseline in critical and electronic health literacy will be assessed using self-report items addressing participants' ability to find, evaluate, and apply online diet- and health-related information, including the ability to identify omissions, exaggeration, or weak evidence. Responses will be rated on 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate higher critical and electronic health literacy.
Time frame: Baseline (T0) and 2-week follow-up (T2).
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Sep 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Beijing Normal University