Keywords
Conspiracy theory, game, html

Technologies
Qualtrics, html, css

Conspiracy theories and online misinformation are a problem in digital spaces, shaping how people interpret events, trust institutions, and make decisions. In response, researchers have explored interactive digital interventions, especially serious games, to help people recognise misleading information and think more critically. However, these interventions can be time-consuming, difficult, and resource-intensive to develop. This project examines whether that complexity is actually necessary. It compares a game-like interactive intervention with a simpler text-based version to see whether both can improve critical thinking to a similar degree. To investigate this, I designed a 14-day longitudinal study with two conditions. One uses an interactive puzzle-based format, while the other uses a text-based scenario task. In both, participants assess claims, interpret evidence, make credibility judgments, and receive feedback through a Reputation Score. At the end, participants complete the CTAC test to measure discernment and compare the effectiveness of both approaches. The aim is to assess whether simpler interventions offer a more practical way to improve misinformation resistance.