Is myth-busting working against us? How to maximise D&I impact and address misinformation

Myth-busting has become a popular tool in diversity and inclusion (D&I) practice, often used to educate audiences and deliver key messages. But is this actually the most effective way to combat misinformation and drive positive change?

At a recent DCA event, CEO Catherine Hunter hosted a panel of industry-leading experts who challenged traditional approaches to myth-busting. Together, they explored why it may not work in the long run, and what D&I practitioners can do instead to achieve a more positive impact.

The flaw in myth-busting approaches

Dr. Eryn Newman, Associate Professor in Psychology at ANU, explained a key challenge in tackling misinformation – people don’t always necessarily assess information analytically.

Even when misinformation is framed as false, repetition and familiarity can make it feel true.

“People have a default to believe information that they encounter,” Eryn explained. “This helps support trust and contributes to social cohesion, but it can also make us vulnerable to false narratives.”

Building on this, Tash Freeburn, Senior Advisor at the Behavioural Insights Team, pointed to the mere exposure and illusory truth effects, the idea that the more often we see or hear something, the more likely we are to believe it.

“The more times that we see something and hear something, it feels more familiar, we’re more likely to believe that it’s true,” she added.

With this understanding of how misinformation takes hold, Gemma Pitcher, Associate at Common Cause Australia, argued that traditional myth-busting approaches often “work against us.”

Rather than directly engaging with every false or inaccurate claim, Gemma stated that it is more important to lead with values.

“When you stick to your story, and you make a compelling values-based story the centre of your campaign, that’s when you win,” she said.

Understanding why people are vulnerable to misinformation

The panel explored several psychological factors that explain why people are especially vulnerable to misinformation when discussing topics such as diversity and inclusion.

Tash explained that common D&I myths, like “diversity is the enemy of merit” or “D&I lowers standards”, often feel personally threatening to some people.

“When our identity feels threatened and we’re in this hot state… we become a lot more prone to misinformation and relying on mental shortcuts,” she said.

Workplace settings can make things worse, with constant digital distractions – like slack messages, team messages, and emails – reducing people’s ability to think critically, as Tash added: “There’s a lot of information coming at people. Under high cognitive load, they’re more likely to default to these mental shortcuts.”

This combination of emotion, repetition, and cognitive shortcuts makes it easy for misinformation to spread, even when people are trying to stay informed.

The “truth sandwich”

When D&I practitioners are directly confronted with misinformation and can’t ignore it, Gemma recommended a technique called the “truth sandwich”, which is a more effective format for myth-busting. This approach involves three simple steps:

1. Start with your truth and clearly state the accurate information or value you want to highlight.
2. Acknowledge misinformation exists, note why it can be misleading or is wrong.
3. Return to your truth by reinforcing your core message to leave the right impression.

This allows practitioners to stay in control of the narrative, avoiding repeating harmful myths, while still addressing audience concerns.

Gemma illustrated this with a real-world example: instead of arguing about parking in a debate about bike lanes, a council advocate reframed the issue entirely around youth mental health and community connection – a values-based strategy that shifted the conversation.

When debunking can work

The panel acknowledged there are specific scenarios where it can be used strategically, particularly in a pre-bunking context. This involves getting ahead of misinformation before it spreads.

Tash highlighted work by her colleague Saul Wodak from the Behavioural Insights Team, who co-authored a practical framework with the UNSW Kaldor Centre on misinformation. This framework includes a decision tree with clear examples to help organisations decide when and how to respond to misinformation effectively.

One key insight from the framework is that if misinformation is expected, such as before launching a new diversity initiative, pre-bunking can be a useful strategy.

Practical strategies for D&I practitioners

• Focus on what you want people to remember – instead of centring messages on “10 myths,” highlight “10 truths” or positive stories that reflect your values and goals.
• Control the conversation – lead with your own framing rather than reacting to opponents’ language. Use consistent messaging aligned with your organisation’s purpose.
• Begin with shared values – start discussions by finding common ground to build trust before addressing more complex or sensitive topics.
• Check information carefully – use credible research with large, representative samples and cross-check facts across multiple trusted sources before sharing information.