Disclosure of Protective MessageNCT05030883
The Effect of a Protective Message on Critical Evaluation of Fake News
A study testing Source of news in people with Disclosure of Protective Message, run by Tilburg University at 1 site in Netherlands.
Trial summary
Background: Disinformation has become an increasing societal concern, especially due to the speed that news is shared in the current digital era. In particular in the healthcare sector disinformation can lead to serious casualties, as the current COVID-19 crisis clearly shows. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Disclosure of Protective Message
- What is being tested?
- Source of news
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 400 participants
- Where
- 1 siteNetherlands
- Study dates
- 10 May 2019to 1 Jul 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Facebook user
- older than 18
- Dutch
Who cannot join
- younger than 18 years
- no facebook
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Netherlands1 site
Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences
Tilburg
About this study
Official title: The Effect of Source Type and Protective Message on the Critical Evaluation of News Messages on Facebook: An Experimental Study in the Netherlands.
Background: Disinformation has become an increasing societal concern, especially due to the speed that news is shared in the current digital era. In particular in the healthcare sector disinformation can lead to serious casualties, as the current COVID-19 crisis clearly shows.
Objective: The main aim of this study was to experimentally examine the effects of information about the source's and a displayed protective warning message on users' critical evaluation of news items, as well as the perception of accuracy of the news item.
Methods: A 3(unreliable versus reliable versus no identified source) x 2 (protective message: with versus without) between subject design has been conducted among 307 participants (mean age = 29 years, SD = 10.9 years).
- Conditions
- Disclosure of Protective Message
- Being tested
- Source of news
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Source of newsBehavioural
The main intervention was the source of the news that was shown to participants
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| unreliable source | Experimental | In this condition participants receive a news message from an unreliable source Receives: Behavioral: Source of news |
| reliable source | Experimental | In this condition participants receive a news message from an reliable source Receives: Behavioral: Source of news |
| no source | Experimental | In this condition participants receive a news message without a source Receives: Behavioral: Source of news |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Critical evaluation of source and news
questionnaire
Measured: immediately after exposure, 5 minutes
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Sep 2021
- Study start10 May 2019
- Primary completion20 Jun 2019
- Study completion1 Jul 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Disclosure of Protective MessageStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 400 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Tilburg University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Frans Folkvord, Tilburg University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05030883
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- TiU-1
- Status last verified
- Aug 2021
- First submitted
- 3 Aug 2021
- Last updated
- 5 Sep 2025
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided: Upon reasonable request we will decide to share the data with other researchers
Publications
Folkvord F, Snelting F, Anschutz D, Hartmann T, Theben A, Gunderson L, Vermeulen I, Lupianez-Villanueva F. Effect of Source Type and Protective Message on the Critical Evaluation of News Messages on Facebook: Randomized Controlled Trial in the Netherlands. J Med Internet Res. 2022 Mar 31;24(3):e27945. doi: 10.2196/27945.
PubMed 35357314
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Sep 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Effect of Source Type and Protective Message on the Critical Evaluation of News Messages on Facebook: An Experimental Study in the Netherlands.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05030883
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TiU-1
- Conditions
- Disclosure of Protective Message
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 400 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Tilburg UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 10 May 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 20 Jun 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Jul 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 1 Sep 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Background: Disinformation has become an increasing societal concern, especially due to the speed that news is shared in the current digital era. In particular in the healthcare sector disinformation can lead to serious casualties, as the current COVID-19 crisis clearly shows.
Objective: The main aim of this study was to experimentally examine the effects of information about the source's and a displayed protective warning message on users' critical evaluation of news items, as well as the perception of accuracy of the news item.
Methods: A 3(unreliable versus reliable versus no identified source) x 2 (protective message: with versus without) between subject design has been conducted among 307 participants (mean age = 29 years, SD = 10.9 years).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| unreliable source | Experimental | Behavioral: Source of newsIn this condition participants receive a news message from an unreliable source |
| reliable source | Experimental | Behavioral: Source of newsIn this condition participants receive a news message from an reliable source |
| no source | Experimental | Behavioral: Source of newsIn this condition participants receive a news message without a source |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Facebook user
- older than 18
- Dutch
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- younger than 18 years
- no facebook
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Source of newsThe main intervention was the source of the news that was shown to participants | Behavioural | no source, reliable source, unreliable source |
Primary outcome
Critical evaluation of source and news
Time frame: immediately after exposure, 5 minutes
questionnaire
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Sep 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35357314Folkvord F, Snelting F, Anschutz D, Hartmann T, Theben A, Gunderson L, Vermeulen I, Lupianez-Villanueva F. Effect of Source Type and Protective Message on the Critical Evaluation of News Messages on Facebook: Randomized Controlled Trial in the Netherlands. J Med Internet Res. 2022 Mar 31;24(3):e27945. doi: 10.2196/27945.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided. Upon reasonable request we will decide to share the data with other researchers
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Source of news in people with Disclosure of Protective Message, run by Tilburg University at 1 site in Netherlands.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Sep 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Critical evaluation of source and news (time frame: immediately after exposure, 5 minutes). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05030883, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 5 Sep 2025.