According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, to "debunk" is defined as: "to expose the sham or falseness of."[2] TheNew Oxford American Dictionary defines "debunk" as "expose the falseness or hollowness of (a myth, idea, or belief)".[3]
If debunkers are not careful, their communications may backfire – increasing an audience's long-term belief in myths. Backfire effects can occur if a message spends too much time on the negative case, if it is too complex, or if the message is threatening.[4]
The term "debunk"originated in a 1923 novelBunk, by American journalist and popular historianW. E. Woodward (1874–1950), who used it to mean to "take thebunk out of things".[6]
The term "debunkery" is not limited to arguments about scientific validity; it is also used in a more general sense at attempts to discredit any opposing point of view, such as that of a political opponent.
Lucian wrote a book namedAlexander the False Prophet against mystic and oracleAlexander of Abonoteichus (c. 105 – c. 170 CE) who led theGlycon cult then widely popular in the Roman Empire. He described Alexander's alleged miracles as tricks, including the appearance of the god Glycon being an elaborate puppet.[7] Lucian also describes him as using thuggery against critics to silence them, including himself.[8]
Dorothy Dietrich is a professional magician and Houdini expert and historian. Has been put in charge of Houdini's grave site, and is the founder of The Houdini Museum in Scranton, Pennsylvania.[14][15]
Phil Mason is a scientist andYouTuber with the online pseudonym "Thunderf00t" (also "VoiceofThunder"), who debunks various snake-oil merchants and fundraiser campaigns for certain products, using basic scientific understanding, e.g. the laws ofthermodynamics, to show that the advertised things simply make no sense and cannot deliver what is promised. He is known for criticising religion, pseudoscience, creationism,Hyperloop,Solar Roadways, etc.
Alan Melikdjanian (Captain Disillusion) is a debunker of viral videos and hoaxes on the Internet, usually deconstructing them and explaining the post production techniques and software used to create the illusions.[28]
Penn & Teller are an entertainment team who often demystify magic tricks and illusions.[29] They have also debunked many other aspects of popular belief on their show,Penn & Teller: Bullshit!.
Phil Plait is an astronomer and science writer whose speciality is fighting pseudoscience related to space and astronomy. He establishedBadastronomy.com to counter public misconceptions about astronomy and space science, providing critical analysis of pseudoscientific theories related to these subjects.[30][31][32]
Benjamin Radford is an American writer, investigator, andskeptic who has authored, coauthored or contributed to over twenty books and written over a thousand articles and columns debunking topics such as urban legends, unexplained mysteries and the paranormal.[38][39]
The authors of theDebunking Handbook warn that a failed debunking can actually worsen misconceptions. They recommend simple, positive, and emotionally sensitive education (e.g., bolstering the learner's ego, or avoiding threatening words).
Australian Professorial FellowStephan Lewandowsky[42] and John Cook, Climate Communication Fellow for the Global Change Institute at the University of Queensland (and author atSkeptical Science)[43] co-wroteDebunking Handbook,[4] in which they warn that debunking efforts may backfire. Backfire effects occur when science communicators accidentally reinforce false beliefs by trying to correct them,[44] a phenomenon known asbelief perseverance.[45][46]
Cook and Lewandowsky offer possible solutions to the backfire effects as described in different psychological studies. They recommend spending little or no time describing misconceptions because people cannot help but remember ideas that they have heard before. They write "Your goal is to increase people's familiarity with the facts."[4][47][48] They recommend providing fewer and clearer arguments, considering that more people recall a message when it is simpler and easier to read. "Less is more" is especially important because scientific truths can get overwhelmingly detailed; pictures, graphs, and memorable tag lines all help keep things simple.[4][49]
The authors write that debunkers should try to build up people's egos in some way before confronting false beliefs because it is difficult to consider ideas that threaten one's worldviews[4][50] (i.e., threatening ideas causecognitive dissonance). It is also advisable to avoid words with negative connotations.[4][51] The authors describe studies which have shown that people abhor incomplete explanations – they write "In the absence of a better explanation, [people] opt for the wrong explanation". It is important to fill in conceptual gaps, and to explain the cause of the misconception in the first place.[4][52] The authors believe these techniques can reduce the odds of a "backfire" – that an attempt to debunk bad science will increase the audience's belief in misconceptions.
The Debunking Handbook, 2020, explains that "backfire effects occur only occasionally and the risk of occurrence is lower in most situations than once thought". The authors recommend to "not refrain from attempting to debunk or correct misinformation out of fear that doing so will backfire or increase beliefs in false information".[53]
^"Debunker".Dictionary.com Unabridged. RetrievedSeptember 26, 2007. "to expose or excoriate (a claim, assertion, sentiment, etc.) as being pretentious, false, or exaggerated: to debunk advertising slogans."
^"debunk".The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed.). Boston:Houghton Mifflin. 2000. Archived fromthe original on April 6, 2008.
^"Author: Mick West".Skeptical Inquirer. Center for Inquiry. RetrievedJune 7, 2025.
^"Area parents seek answer for Autism",Times Leader, April 1, 2002, "That is coincidence, said Dr. Stephen Barrett of Allentown, a veteran debunker and operator of Quackwatch.com."
^Houdini and the spiritualists,Summit Daily News, November 3, 2007, "Houdini himself wouldn’t have believed in his second coming anyway, because he didn’t believe in spirit manifestations. In fact, he spent much of his life and career debunking spiritualists and mediums – an admirable mission that history and forensic specialists now tell us probably led to his untimely death at the age of 52."
^The wizard gets a windfall – even the Amazing Randi needs advice on how to keep his $272,000 prize from vanishing,CNN Money, September 1, 1986, "Randi began his campaign against fakes in earnest in 1964, during a stint as the host of a radio talk show in Manhattan. He had become disturbed by the number of listeners phoning in with such flummery as tales of self-styled clairvoyants' uncannily correct forecasts. Gradually, his work as a debunker began to rival his show-business career, gathering momentum in the early 1970s, when Uri Geller caught Randi's attention."
^"Obituaries; Betty Hill, 85; Claim of Abduction by Aliens Led to Fame",Los Angeles Times, Oct 24, 2004, "Carl Sagan, the Pulitzer Prize-winning astronomer, was among the Hills' debunkers, yet he considered their story noteworthy."
^"Stephan Lewandowsky".psy.uwa.edu.au. Cognitive Science Laboratories, University of Western Australia. Archived fromthe original on November 25, 2011. RetrievedDecember 15, 2011.
^Beveridge, W. I. B. (1950).The Art of Scientific Investigation. New York: Norton. p. 106.
^Skurnik, I.; Yoon, C.; Park, D.; Schwarz, N. (2005). "How warnings about false claims become recommendations".Journal of Consumer Research.31 (4):713–724.doi:10.1086/426605.S2CID145120950.
^Weaver, K.; Garcia, S.M.; Schwarz, N.; Miller, D.T. (2007). "Inferring the popularity of an opinion from its familiarity: A repetitive voice sounds like a chorus".Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.92 (5):821–833.doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.821.PMID17484607.
^Schwarz, N.; Sanna, L.; Skurnik, I.; Yoon, C. (2007).Metacognitive experiences and the intricacies of setting people straight: Implications for debiasing and public information campaigns. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol. 39. pp. 127–161.doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(06)39003-X.ISBN978-0120152391.
^Hardisty, D.J.; Johnson, E.J.; Weber, E.U. (1999). "A dirty word or a dirty world?: Attribute framing, political affiliation, and query theory".Psychological Science.21 (1):86–92.doi:10.1177/0956797609355572.PMID20424028.S2CID6588052.
