Funny myth busting: Are humorous messages effective at correcting misinformation regarding food safety?

Abstract

Food safety misinformation is highly prevalent among the population and could potentially be increased by individuals efforts reduce waste, and stakeholders promoting efforts such as The present body of literature has provided insight in the “art” of correcting misinformation in many different topics. However, the topic of food safety has not received such attention. This paper aims to explore the effectiveness corrective messages has on correcting misinformation on a food myth. The study moreover looks into the tone of the message (humorous and non-humorous) and endorser type (expert vs celebrity) is able to correct a current held misinformation. Using a mixed experimental design with between- and within subjects variables, repeated measures ANOVA analysis reveal that the the corrective information is successful in adjusting participants (n = 157) belief in the food safety myth. However, the current study is not able to provide proof that a humorous correction differs in effectiveness from a non-humorous correcting. Likewise, for endorser type (celebrity vs expert) no significant difference in misinformation correction is found. Lastly, there are no significant differences in corrective effectiveness when comparing humorous and non-humorous messages with expert and celebrity endorsers. However there are tendencies in the data that indicates at marginally insignificant level that the combination expert endorser and nonhumorous message is more effective myth buster.