The Roles of Identity Conflict, Emotion, and Threat in Learning from Refutation Texts

Trevors, Greg

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3555148

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The studies by Trevors (2021) and Jacobson et al (2021) went one step further by considering texts on controversial topics. By covering such topics, the texts themselves were likely to trigger intense emotions, especially when conflicting with participants' own values and beliefs.…”

Section: Evidence From Eight Studies: Emotions Are Pivotal For Learning From Textsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By covering such topics, the texts themselves were likely to trigger intense emotions, especially when conflicting with participants' own values and beliefs. Trevors (2021) sampled participants who were likely to hold strong beliefs about either of two controversial topics, immigration or vaccination. The authors first assessed prior misconceptions and attitudes about these topics and then let participants read refutation texts describing the misconception, refuting it, and providing correct information.…”

Section: Evidence From Eight Studies: Emotions Are Pivotal For Learning From Textsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Especially if emotions, antecedents, and outcomes are assessed at the same time, it is difficult to derive causal conclusions from their correlational associations. For example, in the study by Trevors (2021), identity conflict, emotions, and threat were measured simultaneously. As noted, the associations between these variables were largely consistent with theory: Identity conflict related to negative emotions, and negative emotions, in turn, related to perceptions that the text was threatening.…”

Section: Causal Designs and Reciprocal Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Emotions in Reading and Learning from Texts: Progress and Open Problems

Pekrun

2021

Discourse Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reading texts can prompt intense emotions, and these emotions profoundly influence learning from texts. I first discuss the findings from the eight studies reported in this special issue. The studies represent pivotal advances in research on reading. Focusing on learning from science texts, they show that different emotions and different types of text influence reading in different ways. Furthermore, they document how the interplay of emotions, text features, and reading processes impacts knowledge acquisition, conceptual change, and attitude change. I then outline core directions for future research. We need to (a) expand current theories to adequately explain the multiple links between emotions, cognitive processes, and motivational processes during reading; (b) use causal designs to disentangle the causeeffect relations linking these processes to antecedents and outcomes, including reciprocal causation; (c) complement between-person designs with intraindividual analysis; (d) use dynamic measurement and multichannel indicators to capture emotional processes; and (e) investigate the generalizability of current findings across diverse groups of learners and sociocultural contexts.

show abstract

Section: Evidence From Eight Studies: Emotions Are Pivotal For Learning From Textsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evidence From Eight Studies: Emotions Are Pivotal For Learning From Textsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Causal Designs and Reciprocal Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Emotions in Reading and Learning from Texts: Progress and Open Problems

Pekrun

2021

Discourse Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Messages that use moral-emotional language are more likely to spread widely online and individuals’ own moral foundations shape whether they accept persuasive messages (Brady et al, 2019; Wolsko et al, 2016). Conflicts between public health messages and moral values evoke emotions, which in turn impact learning (Haidt, 2003; Pekrun, 2006; Trevors, 2020). However, it is unknown to what extent efforts to correct COVID-19 misconceptions may be undermined by such perceived conflict, which is likely to be prevalent in communities with the strongest opposition to public health measures adopted in response to the pandemic.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Correcting COVID-19 Misconceptions Requires Caution

Trevors

Duffy

2020

Educational Researcher

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals generally revise their misconceptions when corrected with carefully designed educational materials. However, early reports suggest that correcting COVID-19 misconceptions may be especially challenging, which may be due to conflicts with individuals’ moral values and emotions. This study explores the mechanisms and boundaries of correction effectiveness. Those highest in moral concerns for group cohesion or for individual freedoms were more likely to affectively or cognitively reject corrective information. Corrections of COVID-19 misconceptions should be carefully framed to connect with the morality of recipients and anticipate their emotional and cognitive reactions.

show abstract

“…Messages that use moral-emotional language are more likely to spread widely online and individuals' own moral foundations shape whether they accept persuasive messages (Brady, Wills, Burkart, Jost, & Van Bavel, 2019;Wolsko, Ariceaga, & Seiden, 2016). Conflicts between public health messages and moral values evoke emotions, which in turn impact learning (Haidt, 2003;Pekrun, 2006;Trevors, 2020). However, it is unknown to what extent efforts to correct COVID-19 misconceptions may be undermined by such perceived conflict, which is likely to be prevalent in communities with the strongest opposition to public health measures adopted in response to the pandemic.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Correcting COVID-19 misconceptions requires caution

Trevors¹,

Duffy²

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals generally revise their misconceptions when corrected with carefully designed educational materials. However, early reports suggest that correcting COVID-19 misconceptions may be especially challenging, which may be due to conflicts with individuals’ moral values and emotions. The present study explores the mechanisms and boundaries of correction effectiveness. Those highest in moral concerns for group cohesion or for individual freedoms were more likely to affectively or cognitively reject corrective information. Corrections of COVID-19 misconceptions should be carefully framed to connect with the morality of recipients and anticipate their emotional and cognitive reactions.

show abstract

The Roles of Identity Conflict, Emotion, and Threat in Learning from Refutation Texts

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

Emotions in Reading and Learning from Texts: Progress and Open Problems

Emotions in Reading and Learning from Texts: Progress and Open Problems

Correcting COVID-19 Misconceptions Requires Caution

Correcting COVID-19 misconceptions requires caution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About