Cross-Cultural Media Literacy: Do Misinformation Games Work Globally?

The fight against misinformation is increasingly global, yet the tools designed to combat it often aren’t. A modern study, published in Nature’s Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, highlights a critical challenge: can media literacy interventions – specifically, games designed to improve discernment of false information – effectively translate across cultures? The research suggests the answer is nuanced, and that a one-size-fits-all approach simply won’t work.

Cultural Logic and the Prebunking Approach

Researchers at the University of Notre Dame and UIN Sunan Kalijaga, led by Matthew Facciani, tested two distinct media literacy games in both Indonesia and the United States. The core strategy employed by both games is “prebunking” – a technique rooted in inoculation theory, first proposed by William McGuire in the 1960s. McGuire’s theory posits that exposing individuals to weakened versions of misleading arguments can build cognitive resistance before they encounter the full force of misinformation. Rather than correcting false claims *after* exposure (debunking), prebunking aims to proactively equip people with the skills to identify manipulation tactics.

The study compared Gali Fakta, a game specifically designed for an Indonesian audience, with Harmony Square, a game created for Western audiences. Gali Fakta simulates a WhatsApp-style group chat, a platform widely used in Indonesia, where players evaluate the credibility of messages from friends, and family. The game’s design reflects the way misinformation commonly spreads within Indonesian social networks – through direct messaging and peer recommendations. Players can strive the game themselves here. Previous research, including a study detailed by the Misinformation Review at Harvard Kennedy School, demonstrated that playing Gali Fakta improved Indonesian participants’ ability to detect false news.

Harmony Square, places players in the role of a “Chief Disinformation Officer” tasked with actively spreading misinformation – trolling, fearmongering, and stoking polarization – within a fictional town. The intent is to help players recognize these tactics by experiencing them firsthand. The game is designed to resonate with the politically charged media environment common in the United States and is available to play here. It has previously been shown to improve Americans’ ability to identify manipulation techniques.

What the Studies Revealed: Indonesia vs. The U.S.

The researchers surveyed nearly 1,600 participants – 799 in Indonesia and 790 in the United States – randomly assigning them to play either Gali Fakta, Harmony Square, or a control game (Tetris). After gameplay, participants evaluated both real and false headlines, and researchers assessed their ability to discern accuracy and their likelihood of sharing false information.

In Indonesia, the results were striking. Gali Fakta significantly improved “sharing discernment” – meaning players were less likely to share false headlines after playing the game. Although, Harmony Square had virtually no effect. Indonesian participants also reported significantly higher engagement with Gali Fakta than with Harmony Square. This suggests that the satirical, politically-focused approach of Harmony Square didn’t resonate within the Indonesian cultural context, where spreading misinformation can carry legal repercussions and social stigma.

Interestingly, the results in the United States were different. Both games effectively improved both accuracy and sharing discernment. Although Harmony Square replicated previous findings, Gali Fakta – the Indonesian WhatsApp-inspired game – also significantly improved outcomes even when translated for an American audience. Engagement levels were similar for both games in the U.S.

The Role of Engagement

A key finding across both countries was the strong correlation between engagement and effectiveness. In Indonesia, higher engagement with Gali Fakta directly predicted better discernment skills. In the U.S., higher engagement with *either* game correlated with improved outcomes. This suggests that active involvement in the game – rather than passive exposure – is a crucial factor in building resistance to misinformation. Cultural fit appears to drive engagement, and engagement, in turn, drives learning.

Implications for Global Media Literacy

These findings challenge the assumption that successful digital interventions can be universally deployed. The study demonstrates that a format effective in one cultural context may not translate to another. The Western-style satire and political framing of Harmony Square didn’t resonate in Indonesia, while Gali Fakta’s simpler, peer-based chat format proved effective in both countries.

The research suggests that interventions that prioritize familiar communication formats, simplicity, and prosocial values are more likely to succeed across cultures. The focus should be on replicating the social dynamics through which misinformation spreads, rather than attempting to impose external frameworks.

The researchers acknowledge several limitations. They used different sets of headlines in each country, making direct comparisons challenging. They also only measured the immediate effects of gameplay, leaving open the question of how long the benefits last. Prebunking games tend to attract individuals already interested in the topic of misinformation, raising concerns about reaching those who are less engaged.

Looking Ahead: Building Culturally Relevant Interventions

As the study authors emphasize, misinformation is fundamentally a social problem, spreading through relationships and trust networks. The most effective interventions may be those that meet people within those existing social dynamics, rather than asking them to step outside of them. Future research should focus on developing and testing culturally tailored interventions that leverage existing social structures and communication patterns. This will require a shift away from a “one-size-fits-all” approach and towards a more nuanced understanding of how misinformation operates in different cultural contexts. Further investigation into long-term effects and strategies for reaching less-engaged populations is also crucial.