Literature DB >> 33612006

Corrections of political misinformation: no evidence for an effect of partisan worldview in a US convenience sample.

Ullrich K H Ecker1, Brandon K N Sze1, Matthew Andreotta1,2.   

Abstract

Misinformation often has a continuing effect on people's reasoning despite clear correction. One factor assumed to affect post-correction reliance on misinformation is worldview-driven motivated reasoning. For example, a recent study with an Australian undergraduate sample found that when politically situated misinformation was retracted, political partisanship influenced the effectiveness of the retraction. This worldview effect was asymmetrical, that is, particularly pronounced in politically conservative participants. However, the evidence regarding such worldview effects (and their symmetry) has been inconsistent. Thus, the present study aimed to extend previous findings by examining a sample of 429 pre-screened US participants supporting either the Democratic or Republican Party. Participants received misinformation suggesting that politicians of either party were more likely to commit embezzlement; this was or was not subsequently retracted, and participants' inferential reasoning was measured. While political worldview (i.e. partisanship) influenced the extent to which participants relied on the misinformation overall, retractions were equally effective across all conditions. There was no impact of political worldview on retraction effectiveness, let alone evidence of a backfire effect, and thus we did not replicate the asymmetry observed in the Australian-based study. This pattern emerged despite some evidence that Republicans showed a stronger emotional response than Democrats to worldview-incongruent misinformation. This article is part of the theme issue 'The political brain: neurocognitive and computational mechanisms'.

Entities:  

Keywords:  backfire effect; continued influence effect; misinformation; motivated reasoning; partisan attitudes; worldview

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33612006      PMCID: PMC7934973          DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0145

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8436            Impact factor:   6.237


  35 in total

Review 1.  Political conservatism as motivated social cognition.

Authors:  John T Jost; Jack Glaser; Arie W Kruglanski; Frank J Sulloway
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 17.737

2.  Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing.

Authors:  Stephan Lewandowsky; Ullrich K H Ecker; Colleen M Seifert; Norbert Schwarz; John Cook
Journal:  Psychol Sci Public Interest       Date:  2012-12

3.  Correcting false information in memory: manipulating the strength of misinformation encoding and its retraction.

Authors:  Ullrich K H Ecker; Stephan Lewandowsky; Briony Swire; Darren Chang
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2011-06

4.  At Least Bias Is Bipartisan: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives.

Authors:  Peter H Ditto; Brittany S Liu; Cory J Clark; Sean P Wojcik; Eric E Chen; Rebecca H Grady; Jared B Celniker; Joanne F Zinger
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2018-05-31

5.  The automatic conservative: ideology-based attentional asymmetries in the processing of valenced information.

Authors:  Luciana Carraro; Luigi Castelli; Claudia Macchiella
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Do people keep believing because they want to? Preexisting attitudes and the continued influence of misinformation.

Authors:  Ullrich K H Ecker; Stephan Lewandowsky; Olivia Fenton; Kelsey Martin
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-02

7.  Exploring the neural substrates of misinformation processing.

Authors:  Andrew Gordon; Jonathan C W Brooks; Susanne Quadflieg; Ullrich K H Ecker; Stephan Lewandowsky
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2017-10-04       Impact factor: 3.139

8.  Some people just want to watch the world burn: the prevalence, psychology and politics of the 'Need for Chaos'.

Authors:  Kevin Arceneaux; Timothy B Gravelle; Matthias Osmundsen; Michael Bang Petersen; Jason Reifler; Thomas J Scotto
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  Misperceiving Bullshit as Profound Is Associated with Favorable Views of Cruz, Rubio, Trump and Conservatism.

Authors:  Stefan Pfattheicher; Simon Schindler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The cognitive and perceptual correlates of ideological attitudes: a data-driven approach.

Authors:  Leor Zmigrod; Ian W Eisenberg; Patrick G Bissett; Trevor W Robbins; Russell A Poldrack
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 6.237

View more
  4 in total

1.  The backfire effect after correcting misinformation is strongly associated with reliability.

Authors:  Briony Swire-Thompson; Nicholas Miklaucic; John P Wihbey; David Lazer; Joseph DeGutis
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2022-02-07

2.  Can you believe it? An investigation into the impact of retraction source credibility on the continued influence effect.

Authors:  Ullrich K H Ecker; Luke M Antonio
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2021-01-15

3.  Vaccination against misinformation: The inoculation technique reduces the continued influence effect.

Authors:  Mikołaj Buczel; Paulina D Szyszka; Adam Siwiak; Malwina Szpitalak; Romuald Polczyk
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-28       Impact factor: 3.752

4.  Computational and neurocognitive approaches to the political brain: key insights and future avenues for political neuroscience.

Authors:  Leor Zmigrod; Manos Tsakiris
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 6.237

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.