Source credibility modulates the validation of implausible information

Wertgen, Andreas Gabriel; Richter, Tobias

doi:10.3758/s13421-020-01067-9

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The experimental materials were 36 eight-sentence short stories (number of words: M = 100.66, SD = 12.75) that were based on the materials developed by Wertgen and Richter (2020) and extended by five newly developed stories. The stories described everyday situations (e.g., vacations, restaurant visits).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The present research tested the assumption whether the degree of (im-)plausibility affects how source credibility is considered in validation during comprehension. To this end, we extended the experimental design used by Wertgen and Richter (2020) by adding a level of plausibility that is between extreme points of plausibility. We used sentences that were highly plausible (world-knowledge consistent), somewhat implausible and highly implausible (clearly world-knowledge inconsistent).…”

Section: Rationale Of the Present Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The bottom line of this research is that validation seems to rely primarily on the fit between text information and the world knowledge that readers activate during comprehension, but source credibility can exert an additional modulating influence (e.g., Braasch et al, 2012;Foy et al, 2017, Wertgen & Richter, 2020. Nevertheless, the underlying cognitive mechanisms are still unclear because the interactive patterns differ across experiments.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In other words, the size and the direction of the modulating effect of source credibility might depend on the extent that the information is (im-)plausible. To test this assumption, we manipulated plausibility gradually by extending the experimental design used by Wertgen and Richter (2020) with an additional intermediate level of plausibility between plausible (world-knowledge consistent) and highly implausible (world-knowledge inconsistent) information.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Role of Source Credibility in the Validation of Information Depends on the Degree of (Im-)Plausibility

Wertgen

Richter

Rouet

2021

Discourse Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the role of source credibility in the validation of factual information embedded in short narratives. In a self-paced reading experiment, we tested the assumption that the degree of (im-)plausibility determines the extent that source credibility affects validation during comprehension. We used reading times of target and spillover sentences and plausibility judgments as indicators of validation. Participants read stories with a high-vs. low-credible person (expert vs. non-expert) who made plausible, somewhat implausible, or highly implausible assertions. Reading times increased and plausibility judgments varied as a function of knowledge consistency, decreasing from knowledge-consistent to implausible to knowledgeinconsistent items. Moreover, interactions of source credibility and plausibility were found for reading times of spillover sentences and plausibility judgements, indicating that source credibility and plausibility are jointly considered in validation. High-credible sources mitigated the perceived implausibility of somewhat implausible sentences but exacerbated the perceived implausibility of highly implausible information. A corresponding interactive pattern was found for the reading times of the spillover sentences. Thus, implicit and explicit indicators provided converging evidence that the modulating role of source credibility in validation depends on the degree of implausibility.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Rationale Of the Present Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Role of Source Credibility in the Validation of Information Depends on the Degree of (Im-)Plausibility

Wertgen

Richter

Rouet

2021

Discourse Processes

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results from Experiments 2a and 2b are consistent with this idea, because differences in event interpretations due to political affiliation were strongest amongst those already familiar with the event. The second explanation is that people do not rely on source information when evaluating news content that is already relatively plausible [38][39][40]. The third explanation-and one we should take seriously when designing interventions to help people detect fake news-is that people are increasingly skeptical of news sources in general [18][19][20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Source Information Affects Interpretations of the News across Multiple Age Groups in the United States

Michael

Sanson

2021

Societies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People have access to more news from more sources than ever before. At the same time, they increasingly distrust traditional media and are exposed to more misinformation. To help people better distinguish real news from “fake news,” we must first understand how they judge whether news is real or fake. One possibility is that people adopt a relatively effortful, analytic approach, judging news based on its content. However, another possibility—consistent with psychological research—is that people adopt a relatively effortless, heuristic approach, drawing on cues outside of news content. One such cue is where the news comes from: its source. Beliefs about news sources depend on people’s political affiliation, with U.S. liberals tending to trust sources that conservatives distrust, and vice versa. Therefore, if people take this heuristic approach, then judgments of news from different sources should depend on political affiliation and lead to a confirmation bias of pre-existing beliefs. Similarly, political affiliation could affect the likelihood that people mistake real news for fake news. We tested these ideas in two sets of experiments. In the first set, we asked University of Louisiana at Lafayette undergraduates (Experiment 1a n = 376) and Mechanical Turk workers in the United States (Experiment 1a n = 205; Experiment 1b n = 201) to rate how “real” versus “fake” a series of unfamiliar news headlines were. We attributed each headline to one of several news sources of varying political slant. As predicted, we found that source information influenced people’s ratings in line with their own political affiliation, although this influence was relatively weak. In the second set, we asked Mechanical Turk workers in the United States (Experiment 2a n = 300; Experiment 2b n = 303) and University of Louisiana at Lafayette undergraduates (Experiment 2b n = 182) to watch a highly publicized “fake news” video involving doctored footage of a journalist. We found that people’s political affiliation influenced their beliefs about the event, but the doctored footage itself had only a trivial influence. Taken together, these results suggest that adults across a range of ages rely on information other than news content—such as how they feel about its source—when judging whether news is real or fake. Moreover, our findings help explain how people experiencing the same news content can arrive at vastly different conclusions. Finally, efforts aimed at educating the public in combatting fake news need to consider how political affiliation affects the psychological processes involved in forming beliefs about the news.

show abstract

The Achilles’ heel of the truth bias? High personal stakes reduce vulnerability to false information

Pantazi,

Klein,

Kissine

2024

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While, by default, people tend to believe communicated content, it is also possible that they become more vigilant when personal stakes increase. A lab (N = 72) and an online (N = 284) experiment show that people make judgements affected by explicitly tagged false information and that they misremember such information as true – a phenomenon dubbed the ‘truth bias’. However, both experiments show that this bias is significantly reduced when personal stakes – instantiated here as a financial incentive – become high. Experiment 2 also shows that personal stakes mitigate the truth bias when they are high at the moment of false information processing, but they cannot reduce belief in false information a posteriori, that is once participants have already processed false information. Experiment 2 also suggests that high stakes reduce belief in false information whether participants’ focus is directed towards making accurate judgements or correctly remembering information truthfulness. We discuss the implications of our findings for models of information validation and interventions against real‐world misinformation.

show abstract

Source credibility modulates the validation of implausible information

Cited by 16 publications

References 59 publications

The Role of Source Credibility in the Validation of Information Depends on the Degree of (Im-)Plausibility

The Role of Source Credibility in the Validation of Information Depends on the Degree of (Im-)Plausibility

Source Information Affects Interpretations of the News across Multiple Age Groups in the United States

The Achilles’ heel of the truth bias? High personal stakes reduce vulnerability to false information

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About