Repetition increases belief in climate-skeptical claims, even for climate science endorsers
pmc-PMC11305575.pdf · Phiên bản 1 · 19 trang
Illusory truth effect for climate-skeptical claims PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307294 August 7, 2024 17 / 19
28. Gawronski B, Strack F. Cognitive Consistency: A Fundamental Principle in Social Cognition. Guilford Press; 2012. 514 p. 29. Kahan DM. Ideology, motivated reasoning, and cognitive reflection. Judgm Decis Mak. 2013 Jul; 8 (4):407–24. 30. Kahan DM. Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem. Polit Psychol. 2015; 36 (S1):1–43. 31. Jost JT, Hennes EP, Lavine H. “Hot” Political Cognition: Its Self-, Group-, and System-Serving Pur- poses. In: Carlston D, editor. The Oxford Handbook of Social Cognition. Oxford University Press; 2013. p. 851–75. 32. Taber CS, Cann D, Kucsova S. The Motivated Processing of Political Arguments. Polit Behav. 2009 Jun 1; 31(2):137–55. 33. Strickland AA, Taber CS, Lodge M. Motivated Reasoning and Public Opinion. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2011 Dec 1; 36(6):935–44. https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-1460524 PMID: 22232418 34. Erisen C, Redlawsk DP, Erisen E. Challenging people’s political views and values makes them think even harder and produce better arguments to defend themselves [Internet]. USApp - American Politics and Policy Blog. London School of Economics and Political Science; 2017 [cited 2023 Jun 9]. Available from: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2017/09/22/challenging-peoples-political-views-and-values- makes-them-think-even-harder-and-produce-better-arguments-to-defend-themselves/ 35. Petty RE, Briñol P. The elaboration likelihood model. In: Handbook of theories of social psychology, Vol 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd; 2012. p. 224–45.
36. Drummond C, Siegrist M, A´ rvai J. Limited effects of exposure to fake news about climate change. Envi- ron Res Commun. 2020 Aug; 2(8):081003. 37. Kahne J, Bowyer B. Educating for Democracy in a Partisan Age: Confronting the Challenges of Moti- vated Reasoning and Misinformation. Am Educ Res J. 2017 Feb 1; 54(1):3–34. 38. Eagly AH, Chaiken S. Attitude strength, attitude structure, and resistance to change. In: Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc; 1995. p. 413–32. (Ohio State University series on attitudes and persuasion, Vol. 4.). 39. Howe LC, Krosnick JA. Attitude Strength. Annu Rev Psychol. 2017 Jan 3; 68(1):327–51. https://doi.org/ 10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033600 PMID: 27618943 40. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007 May 1; 39(2):175–91. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146 PMID: 17695343 41. Hauser DJ, Moss AJ, Rosenzweig C, Jaffe SN, Robinson J, Litman L. Evaluating CloudResearch’s Approved Group as a solution for problematic data quality on MTurk. Behav Res Methods. 2022 Nov 3;1–12. 42. Hauser DJ, Schwarz N. Attentive Turkers: MTurk participants perform better on online attention checks than do subject pool participants. Behav Res Methods. 2016 Mar 1; 48(1):400–7. https://doi.org/10. 3758/s13428-015-0578-z PMID: 25761395 43. Corp IBM. IBM SPSS Statistics for Macintosh. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp; 2021.
44. Chryst B, Marlon J, van der Linden S, Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C. Global Warming’s “Six Americas Short Survey”: Audience Segmentation of Climate Change Views Using a Four Question Instrument. Environ Commun. 2018 Nov 17; 12(8):1109–22. 45. Uanhoro J. Effect Size Calculators [Internet]. Effect Size Calculators. 2017 [cited 2023 Jun 10]. Avail- able from: https://effect-size-calculator.herokuapp.com/ 46. Farias M, Newheiser AK, Kahane G, de Toledo Z. Scientific faith: Belief in science increases in the face of stress and existential anxiety. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2013 Nov 1; 49(6):1210–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jesp.2013.05.008 PMID: 24187384 47. Schwarz N, Sanna LJ, Skurnik I, Yoon C. Metacognitive Experiences and the Intricacies of Setting Peo- ple Straight: Implications for Debiasing and Public Information Campaigns. In: Advances in Experimen- tal Social Psychology. Elsevier; 2007. p. 127–61. 48. Unkelbach C, Greifeneder R. Experiential fluency and declarative advice jointly inform judgments of truth. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2018 Nov; 79:78–86. 49. Song H, Schwarz N. If It’s Hard to Read, It’s Hard to Do: Processing Fluency Affects Effort Prediction and Motivation. Psychol Sci. 2008 Oct 1; 19(10):986–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008. 02189.x PMID: 19000208 50. Bild E, Redman A, Newman EJ, Muir BR, Tait D, Schwarz N. Sound and credibility in the virtual court: Low audio quality leads to less favorable evaluations of witnesses and lower weighting of evidence. Law Hum Behav. 2021; 45(5):481–95. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000466 PMID: 34871019
PLOS ONE Illusory truth effect for climate-skeptical claims PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307294 August 7, 2024 18 / 19
51. De keersmaecker J, Dunning D, Pennycook G, Rand DG, Sanchez C, Unkelbach C, et al. Investigating the Robustness of the Illusory Truth Effect Across Individual Differences in Cognitive Ability, Need for Cognitive Closure, and Cognitive Style. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2020 Feb 1; 46(2):204–15. https://doi. org/10.1177/0146167219853844 PMID: 31179863 52. Newman EJ, Jalbert MC, Schwarz N, Ly DP. Truthiness, the illusory truth effect, and the role of need for cognition. Conscious Cogn. 2020 Feb 1; 78:102866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2019.102866 PMID: 31935624 53. Lodge M, Taber CS. The Rationalizing Voter. Cambridge University Press; 2013. 301 p. 54. Achen C, Bartels L. Democracy for realists: Holding up a mirror to the electorate. Juncture. 2016; 22 (4):269–75. 55. Flynn DJ, Nyhan B, Reifler J. The Nature and Origins of Misperceptions: Understanding False and Unsupported Beliefs About Politics. Polit Psychol. 2017; 38(S1):127–50. 56. Ditto PH, Liu BS, Clark CJ, Wojcik SP, Chen EE, Grady RH, et al. At Least Bias Is Bipartisan: A Meta- Analytic Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019 Mar 1; 14(2):273–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617746796 PMID: 29851554 57. Cotter RG, Lodge M, Vidigal R. The Boundary Conditions of Motivated Reasoning. In: Suhay E, Grof- man B, Trechsel AH, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Persuasion. Oxford University Press; 2020. p. 65–87. 58. de Hoog N. Processing of Social Identity Threats A Defense Motivation Perspective. Soc Psychol. 2013 Jan 1; 44:361.
59. Correll J, Spencer SJ, Zanna MP. An affirmed self and an open mind: Self-affirmation and sensitivity to argument strength. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2004 May 1; 40(3):350–6. 60. Cohen GL, Sherman DK, Bastardi A, Hsu L, McGoey M, Ross L. Bridging the partisan divide: Self-affir- mation reduces ideological closed-mindedness and inflexibility in negotiation. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007; 93(3):415–30. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.3.415 PMID: 17723057 61. Treen KM d’ I., Williams HTP, O’Neill SJ. Online misinformation about climate change. WIREs Clim Change. 2020; 11(5):e665. 62. Boykoff MT, Boykoff JM. Balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press. Glob Environ Change. 2004 Jul 1; 14(2):125–36. 63. McAllister L, Daly M, Chandler P, McNatt M, Benham A, Boykoff M. Balance as bias, resolute on the retreat? Updates & analyses of newspaper coverage in the United States, United Kingdom, New Zea- land, Australia and Canada over the past 15 years. Environ Res Lett. 2021 Aug; 16(9):094008. 64. Grundmann R, Krishnamurthy R. The discourse of climate change: a corpus-based approach. Crit Approaches Discourse Anal Discip. 2010 Sep; 4(2):125–46. 65. Henderson EL, Simons DJ, Barr DJ. The Trajectory of Truth: A Longitudinal Study of the Illusory Truth Effect. J Cogn. 2021; 4(1):29. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.161 PMID: 34164597 66. Fazio LK, Pillai RM, Patel D. The effects of repetition on belief in naturalistic settings. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2022 Oct; 151(10):2604–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001211 PMID: 35286116
67. Hassan A, Barber SJ. The effects of repetition frequency on the illusory truth effect. Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2021 May 13; 6(1):38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00301-5 PMID: 33983553 68. Peterson E, Iyengar S. Partisan Gaps in Political Information and Information-Seeking Behavior: Moti- vated Reasoning or Cheerleading? Am J Polit Sci. 2021; 65(1):133–47. 69. Zappalà G. Drought Exposure and Accuracy: Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Beliefs. Environ Resour Econ. 2023 Aug 1; 85(3):649–72. PLOS ONE Illusory truth effect for climate-skeptical claims PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307294 August 7, 2024 19 / 19