Literature DB >> 31291546

The Illusion of Consensus: A Failure to Distinguish Between True and False Consensus.

Sami R Yousif1, Rosie Aboody1, Frank C Keil1.   

Abstract

When evaluating information, we cannot always rely on what has been presented as truth: Different sources might disagree with each other, and sometimes there may be no underlying truth. Accordingly, we must use other cues to evaluate information-perhaps the most salient of which is consensus. But what counts as consensus? Do we attend only to surface-level indications of consensus, or do we also probe deeper and consider why sources agree? Four experiments demonstrated that individuals evaluate consensus only superficially: Participants were equally confident in conclusions drawn from a true consensus (derived from independent primary sources) and a false consensus (derived from only one primary source). This phenomenon was robust, occurring even immediately after participants explicitly stated that a true consensus was more believable than a false consensus. This illusion of consensus reveals a powerful means by which misinformation may spread.

Entities:  

Keywords:  conformity; consensus; open data; open materials; preregistered; reasoning; social learning

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31291546     DOI: 10.1177/0956797619856844

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Sci        ISSN: 0956-7976


  7 in total

1.  Citizens Versus the Internet: Confronting Digital Challenges With Cognitive Tools.

Authors:  Anastasia Kozyreva; Stephan Lewandowsky; Ralph Hertwig
Journal:  Psychol Sci Public Interest       Date:  2020-12

Review 2.  The diversity principle and the evaluation of evidence.

Authors:  Nathan Couch
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2022-02-22

3.  Learning from multiple informants: Children's response to epistemic bases for consensus judgments.

Authors:  Sunae Kim; Elizabeth S Spelke
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2020-01-02

4.  Verifying Feighner's Hypothesis; Anorexia Nervosa Is Not a Psychiatric Disorder.

Authors:  Per Södersten; Ulf Brodin; Modjtaba Zandian; Cecilia E K Bergh
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2019-09-16

5.  The potential for effective reasoning guides children's preference for small group discussion over crowdsourcing.

Authors:  Emory Richardson; Frank C Keil
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Sensitivity to Evidential Dependencies in Judgments Under Uncertainty.

Authors:  Belinda Xie; Brett Hayes
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2022-05

7.  Factors affecting conspiracy theory endorsement in paranoia.

Authors:  A G Greenburgh; A Liefgreen; V Bell; N Raihani
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 2.963

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.