Measles Misinformation and Vaccine Confidence
A 15-minute engagement improved recognition of vaccine misinformation tactics, increased confidence in MMR safety, and raised vaccination intent without increasing stigma toward unvaccinated families.
Goodbit · January 2026 · 3 min read
Goodbit engagements combine short game-based learning with AI-moderated conversation and measurement. Participants first respond to claims or scenarios, then talk through what surprised them, what felt credible, and what they would repeat. The results below combine those layers: what people knew, what shifted, what held, and what the conversations revealed.
At a glance
- 634 Canadian participants completed a measles-misinformation recognition engagement in Ontario and Alberta in January 2026.
- Vaccination intent rose by +0.150.
- Trust in Health Canada rose by +0.148.
- Confidence in identifying health misinformation rose by +0.206.
- Confidence in MMR safety rose by +0.134; confidence in MMR effectiveness rose by +0.081.
- Stigma toward unvaccinated families moved only +0.065, staying below the campaign's safety threshold.
- First-try accuracy across 25 misinformation claims was 77.5%; recall accuracy after correction was 81.7%.
- Recall accuracy rose +15.3 points on scientific-minority-views framing and +13.0 points on natural-immunity false equivalence.
Summary
Canada lost measles-elimination status in November 2025 after 27 years. That reversal made measles a useful test of a broader public-health problem: people were not only encountering false claims about vaccination, but also deciding what those claims meant for trust, safety, and how they should talk about families who remained unvaccinated.
In January 2026, Goodbit deployed a digital measles-misinformation recognition engagement to 634 Canadian participants in Ontario and Alberta. The engagement tested whether a short, game-based experience could improve recognition of vaccine misinformation tactics, strengthen confidence in MMR safety and effectiveness, increase vaccination intent, and avoid increasing stigma toward unvaccinated families.
The engagement produced measurable gains on every primary outcome, including vaccination intent, while staying below the campaign's stigma safety threshold.
Methodology
Participants completed a structured Goodbit engagement built around three layers: a 25-claim true-or-false battery, a paired pre/post Likert battery, and a post-game recall mechanism. The claim battery exposed participants to common misinformation tactics and tested whether they could distinguish manipulative framing from reliable information. The Likert battery measured changes in trust, confidence, vaccination intent, and stigma-related attitudes before and after the experience. The recall mechanism tested whether the lessons held after correction.
The campaign used explicit safety criteria, including a stigma red line of +0.20 on suspicion toward unvaccinated families. That safeguard mattered because an intervention can improve confidence while still creating the wrong social effect.
The sample was not a probability sample, and the engagement measured a single-session experience. Scenario instruments designed for future testing were not deployed in this campaign.
Findings
The engagement improved both recognition and confidence. Vaccination intent rose by +0.150. Trust in Health Canada rose by +0.148. Confidence in identifying health misinformation rose by +0.206. Confidence in MMR safety rose by +0.134, and confidence in MMR effectiveness rose by +0.081.
The recall results showed that participants were not simply clicking through the experience. First-try accuracy across the claims was 77.5%, and recall accuracy rose to 81.7%. The hardest claims were often manipulation-recognition claims, which reinforces the point that vaccine misinformation is not only a factual problem. It is also tactical.
The largest recall gains appeared on tactics that are especially important in vaccine misinformation: scientific-minority-views framing improved by +15.3 points, and natural-immunity false equivalence improved by +13.0 points.
The stigma measure was central to the assessment. A campaign that increases vaccination intent but also increases contempt toward unvaccinated families creates a different kind of problem. In this engagement, stigma toward unvaccinated families moved only +0.065, while the primary confidence and intent measures moved more substantially and remained below the pre-set red line.
Methodology portability
This case study shows how Goodbit can measure more than immediate knowledge gain. The platform can test whether people recognize a tactic, whether they retain the correction, whether their trust changes, and whether the campaign creates harmful spillover effects.
That distinction is important for public health. In charged environments, an intervention can appear successful if it improves the right answer on a knowledge question. The harder question is whether the intervention changes how people reason, what they feel safe saying, and whether it produces collateral harm.
Goodbit makes those differences visible.
About Goodbit
Goodbit is a Canadian engagement and measurement platform for understanding how people think and talk about contested issues. We combine short game-based learning, AI-moderated conversation, and campaign analytics to reveal where information lands, where trust breaks down, and what makes people more willing to engage.
Contact: hello@madebygoodbit.com
Goodbit · January 2026