Familiarity backfire effects? Disentangling the competing effects of repetition and fact-checking corrections of brand misinformation

Abstract

• Five studies (N = 4,337) test fact-check label corrections on brand misinformation. • No evidence was found that correcting misinformation causes a familiarity backfire. • Stronger corrections even reverse the harmful effect of repeated misinformation. • Corrections benefit unknown brands more than well-known global brands. • Correction cues are effective, even when absent in later misinformation encounters. Misinformation poses a growing threat to firms, distorting consumer beliefs and damaging brand evaluations. A common corrective strategy involves attaching fact-checking labels to false claims, yet concerns persist that such corrections may backfire by strengthening familiarity with the misinformation. Across five studies (N = 4337), this article systematically compares the competing effects of repetition and correction on belief in corporate misinformation and brand evaluations. Repetition reliably increases belief in misinformation (illusory truth effect), while correction typically offsets this effect and even reverses it with strong, unambiguous labels. This research finds no evidence of a familiarity backfire effect: in none of the studies, repetition increases belief in the misinformation more than correction reduces it. While brand evaluations are less affected by repetition, they do decline following exposure to misinformation and are only partially restored by corrections. The article further examines how brand familiarity and the timing of assessment shape these effects. Corrections are effective both immediately and after a delay, and benefit unfamiliar brands more than familiar ones. Finally, corrections issued at first exposure, reaching new audiences, also reduce belief in misinformation without backfiring during future exposures. These findings inform managerial decisions on misinformation response and contribute to understanding how misinformation familiarity and correction compete in shaping consumer judgments.