提油救火？探討同性婚姻假新聞的逆火效應與更正效果

Putting Out Fire with Gasoline? The Backfire and Correction Effects of Fake News on Same-Sex Marriage in Taiwan

本文為首篇以臺灣同婚案例進行逆火效應的實證研究，將逆火效應擴展到高度爭議性社會議題，納入新聞素養效能、同婚熟悉程度丶議題涉入程度檢視更正訊息效果與逆火效應的程度。本研究操弄個人立場與假新聞立場的一致性，採用2（同婚立場：反同丶挺同）X 2（假新聞立場：反同丶挺同）的獨立樣本二因子實驗設計，有效樣本238人，49.58%受試者支持同婚，50.42%反對同婚。線上實驗法結果發現：在認知不完全正確的114名受試者中，同婚議題雖然有逆火效應，但不普遍，僅三成四的受試者出現逆火效應。立場越挺同，越容易產生逆火效應。挺同者較反同者更涉入同婚議題、對同婚熟悉程度高，可能是同婚議題對挺同者涉及自我認同，該議題影響大於反同者，較反同者更容易出現逆火效應，此發現呼應先前研究，受試者熱衷、關心的議題較容易產生逆火效應。
將近六成認知錯誤的受試者，看過更正新聞後，認知仍錯（三成四有逆火效應、兩成四維持錯誤認知）。即使超過半數的受試者相信更正新聞，也難以改變錯誤認知。代表人們只相信自己認定的事實，假新聞只是強化既有認知。整體來說，更正無效的現象比逆火效應嚴重，顯示錯誤認知一旦建立之後，即使相信更正訊息，也很難改變。

This study is the first empirical research on the backfire effect using the case of same-sex marriage in Taiwan, extendsing the framework to a highly controversial social issue. It incorporates the variables of news literacy efficacy, familiarity with same-sex marriage, and issue involvement to examine the effectiveness of corrective information and the degree of the backfire effect.
This study manipulated the consistency between the participants’stances and the fake news stances using a 2 (same-sex marriage stance: pro vs. anti) x 2 (fake news stance: pro vs. anti) between-subjects factorial experimental design. The valid sample included 238 participants, with 49.58% supporting same-sex marriage and 50.42% opposing it.
Results from the online experiment revealed that among the 114 participants with incomplete or partially incorrect understandings, the backfire effect was not as prevalent as expected: only 34% exhibited it. The more supportive that participants were of same-sex marriage, the more likely they were to experience the backfire effect. Supporters of same-sex marriage also tended to be more involved in the issue and more familiar with it. This finding aligns with previous studies suggesting that people are more prone to backfire effects on issues they care about.
Among those with incomplete or incorrect understandings, nearly 60% still held misconceptions after reading the corrective information: 34% experienced a backfire effect, and 24% retained their original misconceptions. Even though more than half of the participants reported believing the corrective information, their erroneous beliefs remained unchanged. This suggests that people tend to believe what they want to believe, and fake news serves merely to reinforce preexisting beliefs.
Overall, the phenomenon of ineffective correction was more severe than the backfire effect. Established misconceptions tend to persist, as beliefs in corrective information alone are typically inadequate to alter them.