Purpose

COVID-19 misinformation contributed to vaccine hesitancy and preventable illness. This record covers three sequential randomized studies (conducted in Canada and the United States, November-December 2020) testing whether a brief online game helps adults identify COVID-19 and vaccine misinformation. In the game, participants judged whether statements about COVID-19 or COVID-19 vaccines were true or false and immediately received the correct answer with a brief evidence-based explanation, delivered in a game-like format with points, ranks, and feedback. Study 1 (Canada, n = 2,018) randomized participants to complete the knowledge assessment either before playing the game or immediately after playing it. Studies 2 (U.S., n = 822) and 3 (U.S., n = 797) compared the game against the identical corrective content presented as plain text, for general COVID-19 misinformation and vaccine-specific misinformation, respectively. The hypothesis was that gamified corrective information produces more accurate knowledge than non-gamified information. The primary outcome was accuracy in identifying true and false claims; vaccination intention was a secondary outcome.

Conditions

Eligibility

Eligible Ages
Over 18 Years
Eligible Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Inclusion Criteria

  • Adults aged 18 or older - Trial 1: Canadian residents residing outside Quebec, with internet access, able to complete the questionnaire in English - Trials 2-3: Amazon Mechanical Turk workers located in the United States, with a HIT approval rate of at least 95% and more than 100 approved HITs.

Exclusion Criteria

  • Trial 1: employment in market research, advertising, media, or by a political party

Study Design

Phase
N/A
Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel Assignment
Intervention Model Description
Three sequential, independently fielded two-arm parallel randomized trials under one protocol. Trial 1 (Canada): assessment before vs. assessment after gamified quiz (general COVID-19 misinformation). Trials 2-3 (U.S.): gamified quiz vs. identical content as static text (general COVID-19 and vaccine-specific misinformation, respectively). Participants were randomized only between the two arms of their respective trial and were never randomized among all six arms.
Primary Purpose
Other
Masking
None (Open Label)

Arm Groups

ArmDescriptionAssigned Intervention
Other
Trial 1: Assessment-First Control
Completed the knowledge assessment before receiving the gamified refutation quiz (single session).
  • Behavioral: Gamified misinformation refutation quiz
    Single-session online game: participants judge true/false statements about COVID-19 (Trials 1-2) or COVID-19 vaccines (Trial 3) and immediately after each response receive the correct answer with a brief evidence-based refutation, within a gamified interface (points, ranks, feedback). 6-19 knowledge items depending on trial.
Experimental
Trial 1: Game
Played the gamified refutation quiz using general COVID-19 items with immediate per-item feedback, followed by the post-intervention assessments.
  • Behavioral: Gamified misinformation refutation quiz
    Single-session online game: participants judge true/false statements about COVID-19 (Trials 1-2) or COVID-19 vaccines (Trial 3) and immediately after each response receive the correct answer with a brief evidence-based refutation, within a gamified interface (points, ranks, feedback). 6-19 knowledge items depending on trial.
Active Comparator
Trial 2: Text Control
Judged all general COVID-19 items, then received all refutational content as a single static text block without game elements, confirmed reading the text, and then completed the post-intervention assessments.
  • Behavioral: Refutational text (active control)
    Identical evidence-based refutational content presented as a single static text block without game elements or item-level feedback. Participants confirmed reading the text before completing the post-intervention assessments.
Experimental
Trial 2: Game
Played the gamified refutation quiz using general COVID-19 items with immediate per-item feedback, followed by the post-intervention assessments.
  • Behavioral: Gamified misinformation refutation quiz
    Single-session online game: participants judge true/false statements about COVID-19 (Trials 1-2) or COVID-19 vaccines (Trial 3) and immediately after each response receive the correct answer with a brief evidence-based refutation, within a gamified interface (points, ranks, feedback). 6-19 knowledge items depending on trial.
Active Comparator
Trial 3: Text Control
Judged all vaccine-specific items, then received all refutational content as a single static text block without game elements, confirmed reading the text, and then completed the post-intervention assessments.
  • Behavioral: Refutational text (active control)
    Identical evidence-based refutational content presented as a single static text block without game elements or item-level feedback. Participants confirmed reading the text before completing the post-intervention assessments.
Experimental
Trial 3: Game
Played the gamified refutation quiz using vaccine-specific items with immediate per-item feedback, followed by the post-intervention assessments.
  • Behavioral: Gamified misinformation refutation quiz
    Single-session online game: participants judge true/false statements about COVID-19 (Trials 1-2) or COVID-19 vaccines (Trial 3) and immediately after each response receive the correct answer with a brief evidence-based refutation, within a gamified interface (points, ranks, feedback). 6-19 knowledge items depending on trial.

Recruiting Locations

More Details

NCT ID
NCT07758309
Status
Completed
Sponsor
University of South Carolina

Detailed Description

This protocol comprised three sequential randomized controlled studies evaluating digital educational interventions to counter COVID-19 misinformation, conducted under a single IRB approval (University of South Carolina, Pro00099400) with study specific amendments. The University of South Carolina Institutional Review Board determined the study to be exempt before participant enrollment. A fourth study in the research program, conducted under a separate IRB approval (Pro00122534), is registered separately. Study 1 enrolled a national non-probability online panel sample in Canada (Nanos Research); Study 2 enrolled a U.S. MTurk sample on general COVID-19 misinformation; Study 3 enrolled a U.S. MTurk sample on vaccine misinformation. This record registers the three completed trials retrospectively. All three trials used the same intervention platform: a true/false quiz over circulating misinformation items, each response followed immediately by item-level refutational feedback (correct answer plus brief evidence-based explanation) embedded in a gamified interface (points, ranks, response-contingent feedback). Trial 1 (Canada, N = 2,018; non-probability online panel fielded by Nanos Research, December 4-14, 2020; general COVID-19 content, 6 items): both arms received identical quiz-and-game content; arms differed in timing of the knowledge assessment within the single session (in Control assessed before playing, in Game immediately after). Trial 2 (United States, N = 822; Amazon Mechanical Turk, November-December 2020; general COVID-19 content, 19 items): Game versus active-text control receiving the identical refutational content as a static text. Trial 3 (United States, N = 797; Amazon Mechanical Turk, November-December 2020; vaccine-specific content, 17 items): same two-arm design as Trial 2. All trials were single session. Knowledge accuracy was the primary outcome; vaccination intention was secondary. Data quality exclusions were applied at analysis: item-level missingness on the knowledge scale (Trial 1) and duplicate/non-U.S. IP screening plus, in the Game arm, completion code validation (Trials 2 and 3).

Notice

Study information shown on this site is derived from ClinicalTrials.gov (a public registry operated by the National Institutes of Health). The listing of studies provided is not certain to be all studies for which you might be eligible. Furthermore, study eligibility requirements can be difficult to understand and may change over time, so it is wise to speak with your medical care provider and individual research study teams when making decisions related to participation.