This study investigated an intervention's effectiveness in increasing misinformation resistance by addressing truth bias: the tendency to accept unfamiliar claims as accurate, even when meta-information concerning their falsity is provided. Understanding truth bias is crucial for mitigating negative societal impacts, including its influence on people's judgment of misinformation. Truth bias was assessed, consistent with prior research, by observing judgment differences across varying misinformation exposure circumstances (attenuating vs. aggravating conditions). The research hypothesized a positive relationship between conspiracy belief and truth bias, alongside a potential moderating role of conspiracy belief on intervention effectiveness. A central aim was to replicate existing findings of truth bias and determine if an online critical thinking/media literacy intervention could mitigate it. A moderated multiple linear regression analysis was conducted using an existing dataset (N=1007). However, no evidence for truth bias was found within this study's design. Furthermore, conspiracy belief did not predict truth bias, nor did the intervention reduce it, and their interaction was also non-significant. These results suggest a need for further investigation into brief awareness-raising interventions' efficacy and conspiracy beliefs' precise role in misinformation processing. The evidence of absence of truth bias, contrary to its robust findings in prior studies, underscores the importance of contextual factors and measurement. Future research should explore alternative truth bias measurement paradigms beyond traditional judgments and memory assessments. Limitations of the study, including a highly unequal participant distribution in the intervention condition, are discussed. The study highlights the inherent complexity of measuring truth bias and combating misinformation, emphasizing future research's importance in exploring contexts where truth bias is prevalent, identifying effective interventions, and examining the role of individual differences concerning interventions.