Expertise Effects in the Moses Illusion: Detecting Contradictions With Stored Knowledge

Cantor, Allison; Marsh, E. Neil G.

doi:10.1037/e528942014-969

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further research substantiated these findings; the illusion partially depends on the direction of focus (Bredart & Modolo, 1988), higher semantic relatedness between the names used in the questions (e.g., Noah and Moses vs. Noah and Adam) increases the illusion (Van Oostendorp & De Mul, 1990), and phonetic relatedness (e.g., identical number of syllables, identical first vowel) increases the illusion (Shafto & MacKay, 2000). In addition, lower processing fluency decreases the illusion (Song & Schwarz, 2008), expertise decreases the illusion (Cantor & Marsh, 2017), and olfactory cues metaphorically related to suspicion decrease the illusion (Lee, Kim, & Schwarz, 2015). In addition, there seem to be interindividual differences in access to long-term memory knowledge as well as shortterm memory capacity that influence the illusion (Hannon & Daneman, 2001).…”

Section: Previous Research On the Moses Illusionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Moses, money, and multiple-choice: The Moses illusion in a multiple-choice format with high incentives

Speckmann

Unkelbach

2020

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When people answer the question “How many animals of each kind did Moses take on the Ark?”, they usually respond with “two,” although Moses does not appear in the biblical story of the Ark. We investigated this “Moses illusion” in a multiple-choice format and tested the influence of monetary incentives on the illusion’s strength. Thereby, we addressed the role of a cooperative communication context for the illusion’s emergence, as well as the role of participants’ motivation. In four experiments (total N = 914), we found that the Moses illusion persists in a multiple-choice format. As the multiple-choice format realizes a cooperative context in which the correct answer is always available, we exclude a cooperative context explanation for the illusion. Monetary incentives reduced the strength of the illusion. However, the reduction was numerically and statistically small. We thereby show that the illusion is not due to violations of cooperative communications, and not due to a lack of motivation. The multiple-choice approach will facilitate further research on the Moses illusion and the data provide additional evidence for the Moses illusion’s empirical robustness and constrain its theoretical explanations.

show abstract

Section: Previous Research On the Moses Illusionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Moses, money, and multiple-choice: The Moses illusion in a multiple-choice format with high incentives

Speckmann

Unkelbach

2020

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…history graduates asked "In what US state were the forty-niners searching for oil?"). Results showed that expertise does not eliminate the illusion, even when errors were underlined or bolded (Cantor & Marsh, 2017). This suggests that even strong prior knowledge does not guarantee that we will notice inconsistencies and that we still often use adaptive heuristics and shortcuts.…”

Section: Trialsmentioning

confidence: 97%

The magician’s choice: Providing illusory choice and sense of agency with the equivoque forcing technique.

Pailhès¹,

Kumari

Kuhn³

2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forcing techniques allow magicians to subtly influence spectators' choices and the outcome of their actions, and they provide powerful tools to study decision-making and the illusory sense of agency and freedom over choices we make. We investigate the Equivoque force, a technique that exploits semantic ambiguities and people's failure to notice inconsistencies, to ensure that a spectator ends up with a predetermined outcome. Similarly to choice blindness paradigms, the Equivoque forces participants to end up with an item they did not choose in the first place. However, here, the subterfuge is accomplished in full view. In three experiments, we showed that the Equivoque is highly effective in providing participants an illusory sense of agency over the outcome of their actions, even after two repetitions of the trick (experiment 2), and using items for which pre-existing preferences can be present (experiment 3). Across all experiments, participants were oblivious to inconsistencies in the procedure used to guide their decisions, and they were genuinely surprised by the experimenter's matching prediction. Contrary to our prediction, the Equivoque force did not significantly change participants' preference for the chosen item. We discuss the results with regards to other illusions of agency (e.g. forcing, choice blindness), failures in noticing semantic inconsistencies (e.g Moses illusion), and issues surrounding choice-induced-preference literature.

show abstract

“…All participants were warned not to answer questions with incorrect presuppositions, as illustrated in an example. These disciplinary experts performed slightly better in their thesis domain, but they still missed about 30% of the incorrect presuppositions in questions that targeted their field of graduate study (Cantor & Marsh, 2017).…”

Section: Principle #5: We Do Not Always Retrieve And/or Apply What We...mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…This problem occurs even with well-learned information. Cantor and Marsh (2017) created biology (e.g., "Water contains two atoms of Helium and how many atoms of oxygen?") and history questions with incorrect presuppositions ("The British congress imposed fees on the colonies' sugar, tea, and stamps that were called what?")…”

Section: Principle #5: We Do Not Always Retrieve And/or Apply What We...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Psychology of Fake News

Greifeneder¹,

Jaffé²,

Newman³

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This volume provides a great entry point into the vast and growing psychological literature on one of the defining problems of the early 21st century fake news and its dissemination. The chapters by leading scientists first focus on how (false) information spreads online and then examine the cognitive processes involved in accepting and sharing (false) information. The volume concludes by reviewing some of the available countermeasures. Anyone new to this area will find much here to satisfy their curiosity.

show abstract

Expertise Effects in the Moses Illusion: Detecting Contradictions With Stored Knowledge

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Moses, money, and multiple-choice: The Moses illusion in a multiple-choice format with high incentives

Moses, money, and multiple-choice: The Moses illusion in a multiple-choice format with high incentives

The magician’s choice: Providing illusory choice and sense of agency with the equivoque forcing technique.

The Psychology of Fake News

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About