2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2010.09.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fluency and positivity as possible causes of the truth effect

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
23
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…If a person makes the same judgment many times, they also seem to be more confident that the answer is correct (e.g., Hertwig et al, 1997; Knutsson et al, 2011; Koriat, 2011, 2012; Unkelbach et al, 2011). Thus, when making the same perceptual judgment several times (e.g., “blue and black” ) people may convince themselves this must be the correct answer.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If a person makes the same judgment many times, they also seem to be more confident that the answer is correct (e.g., Hertwig et al, 1997; Knutsson et al, 2011; Koriat, 2011, 2012; Unkelbach et al, 2011). Thus, when making the same perceptual judgment several times (e.g., “blue and black” ) people may convince themselves this must be the correct answer.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This so-called truth effect (see Dechêne, Stahl, Hansen, & Wänke, 2009) occurs regardless of a statement's content (Schwarz et al, 1991). The experience of fluency itself is influenced by a variety of factors, such as the frequency of prior stimulus exposure, previous primes, and the linguistic complexity as well as the visual clarity of the target information (see Alter & Oppenheimer, 2009;Unkelbach, Bayer, Alves, Koch, & Stahl, 2011). It is this last fluency manipulation that will be used here.…”
Section: Processing Fluency and Truth Judgmentsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…There was no interaction between mood and fluency, F(2, 76) = 0.08, NS, confirming that responses to fluent rather than disfluent claims were consistently faster across all mood conditions (Δt[positive]=425 ms, Δt[neutral]= 535 ms, Δt[negative] = 643 ms). Response latency is a common index of processing fluency, "although the relation between processing speed and the subjective fluency experience is far from perfect" (Unkelbach et al, 2011).…”
Section: Fluency Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Enhanced processing fluency leads to a feeling of familiarity: People consider statements that are, for instance, easier to read (e.g., owing to color contrast or large font sizes) to be more familiar and, in turn, more credible when compared with statements that are more difficult to read (Reber & Schwarz, ; Unkelbach, ). The feeling of familiarity finally leads to higher subjectively perceived statement credibility (e.g., Parks & Toth, ; Reber & Schwarz, ; Unkelbach, ; Unkelbach, Bayer, Alves, Koch, & Stahl, ).…”
Section: Increased Credibility Of Statements Through Repetition: the mentioning
confidence: 99%