[Purpose/significance] Understanding how to achieve better results in correcting scientific misinformation on the Internet is of great significance for better exerting the influence of debunking, restraining misinformation spreading ,and purifying the environment of public opinion. Although many studies have focused on the debunking behavior of misinformation on the Internet, most studies tend to examine the role of a single variable in it, rather than using a configuration perspective to study which combinations of variables are helpful to facilitate the debunking of misinformation on the Internet. [Method/process] Based on the framework of "content logic", this study systematically examines how different variables of content logic work together to achieve better results in correcting scientific misinformation. This paper conducts a Crisp-set Qualitative Comparative (csQCA) Analysis of 50 representative misinformation cases in the "Science Rumors Ending List" (2016-2020) of the "CHINA SCIENCE COMMUNICATION" website. [Result/conclusion] The results showed that frame variables, emotional variables, group variables, and public issue-related variables are the key factors for scientific misinformation to achieve better debunking effects. Moreover, this study finds three micro-paths that can explain this phenomenon. Micro-path one: scientific misinformation belongs to the text framework of conventional popular science and shows a "positive or no obvious tendency" attitude, and at the same time has a high degree of dissemination. Micro-path two: while scientific misinformation has the first two variables of the previous path, it does not point to a specific group of people, and has a strong correlation with social and public issues. Micro-path three: scientific misinformation belongs to the textual framework of risk events, conflict events, or appeals to fear, and presents a negative attitude, the content is directed to a specific group of people, and has a strong correlation with social public issues. The research suggests that the positive effects of the high popularity of scientific misinformation should be recognized. To promote public understanding of science in the process of debunking scientific misinformation is of great significance. In addition, it is necessary to focus on the occurrence-development cycle of public issues and conduct scientific interpretations while conducting information disclosure. The findings above implies the importance to identify the targeting groups of those specific misinformation to debunk the scientific rumors accordingly.