Abstract
Debunking interventions to tackle misconceptions related to scientific issues have gained momentum, especially in the context of health care. In this randomized controlled experiment, we assessed the effectiveness of tailored (i.e., contrarian information addressing participants’ specific motives with an affirmation of their psychological profile) and non-tailored (i.e., general contrarian information regardless of participants’ psychological profile) debunking interventions in a sample of 167 Peruvian participants with positive attitudes toward egg cleanse, a popular local alternative medicine treatment. Our debunking interventions did not significantly correct attitudinal variables related to egg cleanse, such as belief in effectiveness, future use, and preference over conventional medicine. However, exploratory analyses showed significant reductions in endorsement of usage reasons within both the tailored debunk (d = 0.50) and non-tailored debunk (d = 0.62) groups. Moreover, a comparison between the two debunking groups indicated that participants who received a tailored debunk were more satisfied with the interaction with the physician than those who received a non-tailored debunk (d = 0.73). These results suggest that debunking interventions on misinformed health beliefs could have an impact also in the Peruvian cultural context and for alternative medicine, even though more direct attitudinal variables are particularly resistant to change. Strengths and weaknesses of tailored and non-tailored approaches to health misinformation, as well as future research pathways to shed light on the impact and pitfalls of debunking interventions, are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
All data and codes used in the study are available at https://www.osf.io/9xbzq.
References
Lewandowsky, S. et al. When science becomes embroiled in conflict: recognizing the public’s need for debate while combating conspiracies and misinformation. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 700, 26–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027162221084663 (2022).
Ernst, E. Alternative medicine: a critical assessment of 202 modalities (Copernicus Books, 2022).
Schmid, P., Altay, S. & Scherer, L. The psychological impacts and message features of health misinformation. Eur. Psychol. 28, 162–172. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000494 (2023).
Karlsson, L. et al. Testing psychological inoculation to reduce reactance to vaccine-related communication. Health Commun. 39, 3450–3458. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2024.2325185 (2024).
Schmid, P. & Betsch, C. Benefits and pitfalls of debunking interventions to counter mRNA vaccination misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sci. Commun. 44, 531–558. https://doi.org/10.1177/10755470221129608 (2022).
Swire-Thompson, B., DeGutis, J. & Lazer, D. Searching for the backfire effect: measurement and design considerations. J. Appl. Res. Mem. Cogn. 9, 286–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.06.006 (2020).
Swire-Thompson, B., Miklaucic, N., Wihbey, J. P., Lazer, D. & DeGutis, J. The backfire effect after correcting misinformation is strongly associated with reliability. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 151, 1655–1665. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001131 (2022).
Ecker, U. et al. The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nat. Rev. Psychol. 1, 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y (2022).
Holford, D. L., Schmid, P., Fasce, A. & Lewandowsky, S. The empathetic refutational interview to tackle vaccine misconceptions: four randomized experiments. Health Psychol. 43, 426–437. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0001354 (2024).
Fasce, A. et al. A taxonomy of anti-vaccination arguments from a systematic literature review and text modelling. Nat. Hum. Behav. 7, 1462–1480. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01644-3 (2023).
Hornsey, M. J. Why facts are not enough: understanding and managing the motivated rejection of science. Curr. Direct. Psychol. Sci. 29, 583–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420969364 (2020).
World Health Organization. Who Global Report on Traditional and Complementary Medicine 2019. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/312342 (2019).
Niggemann, B. & Grüber, C. Side-effects of complementary and alternative medicine. Allergy 58, 707–716. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1398-9995.2003.00219.x (2023).
Wardle, J. L. & Adams, J. Indirect and non-health risks associated with complementary and alternative medicine use: An integrative review. Eur. J. Integr. Med. 6, 409–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2014.01.001 (2014).
Recuero, R., Soares, F. & Zago, G. Polarization, hyperpartisanship and echo chambers: How the disinformation about COVID-19 circulates on Twitter. Contracampo. https://doi.org/10.22409/contracampo.v40i1.45611 (2021).
Mejía Gálvez, J. A., Carrasco, E., Miguel, J. L. & Flores, S. A. Conocimiento, aceptación y uso de medicina tradicional peruana y de medicina alternativa/complementaria en usuarios de consulta externa en Lima Metropolitana. Revista Peruana de Medicina Integrativa. 2, 47–57. https://doi.org/10.26722/rpmi.2017.21.44 (2017).
Nexos. Botando la cáscara negativa: la limpia de huevo https://nexos.ulima.edu.pe/2023/11/30/botando-la-cascara-negativa-la-limpia-de-huevo/ (2023).
La República. ¿Por qué razón se usa el huevo en las limpias contra las malas energías? https://larepublica.pe/datos-lr/respuestas/2022/02/18/por-que-utilizan-el-huevo-como-un-ritual-para-eliminar-las-energias-negativas-evat (2022).
García, R. Medicina tradicional o complementaria: Pacientes que lo usan al mismo tiempo que su tratamiento farmacológico. Ciencia y Desarrollo. 22, 25–30. https://doi.org/10.21503/cyd.v22i1.1735 (2019).
Tangkiatkumjai, M., Boardman, H. & Walker, D. M. Potential factors that influence usage of complementary and alternative medicine worldwide: A systematic review. BMC Complement. Med. Ther. 20, 363. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12906-020-03157-2 (2020).
Campos Briceño, G. R., & Condor Iturrizaga, R. M. La etnicidad en el Perú y su naturaleza multidimensional: una propuesta de medición. Desde el Sur. 14, 1–24 (2022). https://doi.org/10.21142/des-1401-2022-0012
Santa María, L.A. Intercultural health: The life cycle stages in the Andes. Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Publica. 34, 293–298 (2017). https://doi.org/10.17843/rpmesp.2017.342.2732
Flores Rojas, M. X. VIH/sida awajún: nociones y experiencias de enfermedad y daño en un contexto de epidemia en la Amazonía Peruana. Anthropologica 38, 235–266. https://doi.org/10.18800/anthropologica.202001.010 (2020).
Del Mastro, I. et al. Home birth preference, childbirth, and newborn care practices in rural Peruvian Amazon. PLoS ONE 16, e0250702. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250702 (2021).
Barrón, M. Exclusion and discrimination as sources of inter-ethnic inequality in Peru. Economia 31, 51–80. https://doi.org/10.18800/economia.200801.003 (2008).
Córdoba-Villota, E. E. & Velásquez-Mantilla, D. A. Ancestral knowledge the midwives of traditional medicine, immemorial learnings that are still preserved. Techno Rev. Int. Technol. Sci. Soc. Rev. 13, 1–10 (2023). https://doi.org/10.37467/revtechno.v13.4797
León, G. B., Acosta, M., Saavedra, M. E. & Almonacid, S. Traditional medicine as a treatment for COVID-19 in students and family members at a university in the mountains of Peru. Prim. Care 55, 102526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aprim.2022.102526 (2023).
Santiváñez-Acosta, R., Valenzuela-Oré, F. & Angulo-Bazán, Y. Use of complementary and alternative medicine therapies in the Coronel Portillo province, Ucayali, Peru. Rev. Peru. Med. Exp. Salud Publica 37, 510–515 (2020).
Villena-Tejada, M. et al. Use of medicinal plants for COVID-19 prevention and respiratory symptom treatment during the pandemic in Cusco, Peru: A cross-sectional survey. PLoS ONE 16, e0257165. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257165 (2021).
Luján-Carpio, E. et al. El servicio de medicina complementaria de EsSalud, una alternativa en el sistema de salud peruano. Revista Médica Herediana. 25, 105–106 (2014). https://doi.org/10.20453/rmh.v25i2.255
Fasce, A. et al. Psychosocial predictors and justification patterns of traditional and alternative medicine in Peru (2025). Preprint at https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/7kg3v
Holford, D. L., Fasce, A., Costello, T. & Lewandowsky, S. Psychological profiles of anti-vaccination argument endorsement. Sci. Rep. 13, 11219. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30883-7 (2023).
Holford, D. L., Lopez-Lopez, E., Fasce, A., Karlsson, L. & Lewandowsky, S. Identifying the underlying psychological constructs from self-expressed anti-vaccination argumentation. Hum. Soc. Sci. Commun. 11, 926. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03416-4 (2024).
Fasce, A. et al. A field test of empathetic refutational and motivational interviewing to address vaccine hesitancy among patients. npj Vaccines. 10, 142 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41541-025-01197-8
JITSUVAX. Vaccine attitudes resource https://jitsuvax.info/welcome/ (2025).
Holford, D. et al. Implementing psychology-based empathetic refutational interview training to support vaccine-confident conversations for health workers. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.10.08.25337588 (2025).
Holford, D. L. et al. A randomized controlled trial of empathetic refutational learning with health care professionals. BMC Public Health 25, 583. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-21787-4 (2025).
Betsch, C. et al. Beyond confidence: Development of a measure assessing the 5C psychological antecedents of vaccination. PLoS ONE 13, e0208601. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0208601 (2018).
Fasce, A. et al. Endorsement of alternative medicine and vaccine hesitancy among physicians: a cross-sectional study in four European countries. Hum. Vacc. Immunother. 19, 2242748. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2023.2242748 (2023).
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. A.F. received funding from the Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung by means of a research fellowship for experienced researchers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.F: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision, writing of the original draft, review and editing of the manuscript; J.R.T.: Conceptualization, data curation, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, writing of the original draft, review and editing of the manuscript; I.B.: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, review and editing of the manuscript; E.P.Y.: Conceptualization, funding acquisition, editing of the manuscript; J.M.E.N.: Conceptualization, funding acquisition, editing of the manuscript; W.M.O.T.: Conceptualization, funding acquisition, editing of the manuscript; C.D.P.M.: Conceptualization, funding acquisition, editing of the manuscript; M.R.B.: Conceptualization, funding acquisition, editing of the manuscript; C.C.L.: Conceptualization, funding acquisition, editing of the manuscript; J.R.F.: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, supervision, review and editing of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Fasce, A., Rosales-Trabuco, J., Barberia, I. et al. Effects of debunking interventions on endorsement of alternative medicine: a randomized controlled experiment in Peru. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-38260-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-38260-w
