How Accurate Are Accuracy-Nudge Interventions? A Preregistered Direct Replication of Pennycook et al. (2020)
-
- Jon Roozenbeek
- Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge
-
- Alexandra L. J. Freeman
- Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication, University of Cambridge
-
- Sander van der Linden
- Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge
抄録
<jats:p>As part of the Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE) program, the present study consisted of a two-stage replication test of a central finding by Pennycook et al. (2020), namely that asking people to think about the accuracy of a single headline improves “truth discernment” of intentions to share news headlines about COVID-19. The first stage of the replication test ( n = 701) was unsuccessful ( p = .67). After collecting a second round of data (additional n = 882, pooled N = 1,583), we found a small but significant interaction between treatment condition and truth discernment (uncorrected p = .017; treatment: d = 0.14, control: d = 0.10). As in the target study, perceived headline accuracy correlated with treatment impact, so that treatment-group participants were less willing to share headlines that were perceived as less accurate. We discuss potential explanations for these findings and an unreported change in the hypothesis (but not the analysis plan) from the preregistration in the original study.</jats:p>
収録刊行物
-
- Psychological Science
-
Psychological Science 32 (7), 1169-1178, 2021-06-11
SAGE Publications