Experiments examine the impact of message order on trust in homeopathy and beliefs about its effectiveness, revealing complex dynamics.
How do people whose beliefs conflict with the scientific consensus respond to two-sided messages that communicate both the belief-challenging consensus and isolated belief-affirming findings? Across three experiments ( N total = 1,124), we gave homeopathy supporters belief-challenging and belief-affirming information in varying orders. In Studies 1 and 2, we measured perceived trustworthiness of homeopathy-related science between both pieces of information. Compared with participants who received belief-challenging information first, participants who received belief-affirming information first reported higher trust in homeopathy-related science after the first information and were more likely to report believing that homeopathy is not effective after both pieces of information. Study 3 showed that the order effect on reported belief in the effectiveness of homeopathy did not occur without the interim measurement of perceived trustworthiness. This pattern is consistent with a consistency effect due to the interim measurement. Overall, two-sided messages did not outperform one-sided messages regarding changes in reported beliefs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liekefett et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: