Repetition increases belief in climate-skeptical claims, even for climate science endorsers

counter-attitudinal, and even for the strongest endorsers of climate science, known as the “Alarmed” segment. General discussion More than 90% of our participants endorsed climate science and were more inclined to believe climate scientist-aligned claims over skeptic or denial-aligned claims. Nonetheless, a single repetition was sufficient to increase the perceived truth of all claims–it made pro-attitudinal climate scientist-aligned claims seem more true and counter-attitudinal skeptic-aligned claims seem less false. In both experiments, repetition moved counter-attitudinal claims towards the midpoint of the scale, leading people to lean towards believing such claims. In combination, these findings highlight the benefits of repeating true information and the adverse Fig 5. Forest plot of effect sizes (dz) of repetition for skeptic aligning claims across climate change-endorsing SASSY groups (Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307294.g005 Table 5. Estimates of fixed effects in Experiment 2 for Alarmed group. Variable b SE df t p 95% CI Intercept 2.89 0.21 155.87 13.79 < .001 [2.48, 3.30] Repetition [repeated] 0.64 0.26 249.00 2.45 0.015 [.13, 1.15] Claim Type [scientist-aligning] 0.89 0.26 249.00 3.42 < .001 [.38, 1.40] Repetition [repeated] * Claim Type [scientist-aligning] 0.24 0.37 249.00 0.64 0.52 [-.49, .96] https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307294.t005 PLOS ONE Illusory truth effect for climate-skeptical claims PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307294 August 7, 2024 13 / 19