2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106947
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How strong is the association between social media use and false consensus?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Not receiving enough ‘Likes’ on social media posts, on the other hand, may result in negative feelings, especially in individuals with low self-esteem and those with high levels of self-monitoring (Hou et al 2019; Scissors et al 2016). In addition, heavier social media users are more likely to believe that others share their attributes and opinions (Bunker and Varnum 2021). Pertaining to autobiographical memory, aspects of experiences that are shared with and endorsed by the virtual audience are likely to be remembered and thus remain part of the represented self (Hirst and Echterhoff 2012; Hou et al 2021).…”
Section: The Inferred Self and The Transactive Mindmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Not receiving enough ‘Likes’ on social media posts, on the other hand, may result in negative feelings, especially in individuals with low self-esteem and those with high levels of self-monitoring (Hou et al 2019; Scissors et al 2016). In addition, heavier social media users are more likely to believe that others share their attributes and opinions (Bunker and Varnum 2021). Pertaining to autobiographical memory, aspects of experiences that are shared with and endorsed by the virtual audience are likely to be remembered and thus remain part of the represented self (Hirst and Echterhoff 2012; Hou et al 2021).…”
Section: The Inferred Self and The Transactive Mindmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compared to those with higher health literacy, those with lower health literacy had the same or greater confidence in health literacy, but experienced more problems engaging in health behaviors [ 18 ]. The mechanisms driving the Dunning-Kruger effect consist of two main types: One is the better than average effect, in which individuals overestimate their self-ratings when comparing themselves to their peers [ 19 ]; and the other is the false consensus effect, in which people overestimate how similar others are to themselves [ 20 ]. Currently, the Dunning-Kruger effect has been widely used in research in the areas of healthy choices [ 21 ], information literacy skills [ 22 ], intercultural competence (awareness) [ 23 ], intellectual ability [ 24 ], subjective financial literacy [ 25 ], and high-level reasoning [ 26 ].…”
Section: Problem Statement and Research Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kreuger and Mueller ( 2002 ) argue that rather than relying solely on a metacognitive process, errors in the predictions of one’s own performance can be explained by the regression of these predictions to the overall inflated mean, which has since been studied more extensively to understand the statistical artifacts of DKE. Another key mechanism driving the DKE is the false consensus effect, such that people overestimate how much others are like themselves, which can be explained through selective exposure, availability, resolution of ambiguity, or motivation (Bunker & Varnum, 2021 ). The DKE has been assessed and identified across a variety of cultures and populations (Coutinho et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Dunning–kruger Effectmentioning
confidence: 99%