Accuracy prompts protect professional content moderators from the illusory truth effect.

IF 2.2 Q2 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
PNAS nexus Pub Date : 2024-11-19 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae481
Hause Lin, Marlyn Thomas Savio, Xieyining Huang, Miriah Steiger, Rachel L Guevara, Dali Szostak, Gordon Pennycook, David G Rand
{"title":"Accuracy prompts protect professional content moderators from the illusory truth effect.","authors":"Hause Lin, Marlyn Thomas Savio, Xieyining Huang, Miriah Steiger, Rachel L Guevara, Dali Szostak, Gordon Pennycook, David G Rand","doi":"10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Content moderators review problematic content for technology companies. One concern is that repeated exposure to false claims could cause moderators to come to believe the very claims they are supposed to moderate, via the \"illusory truth effect.\" In a first lab-in-field experiment (<i>N</i> = 199) with a global content moderation company, we found that exposure to false claims while working as moderators increased subsequent belief among (mostly Indian and Philippine) employees by 7.1%. We tested an intervention to mitigate this effect: inducing an accuracy mindset. In both general population samples (<i>N</i> <sub>India</sub> = 997; <i>N</i> <sub>Philippines</sub> = 1,184) and a second lab-in-field experiment with professional moderators (<i>N</i> = 239), inducing participants to consider accuracy when first exposed to the claims eliminates the negative effects of exposure on belief in falsehoods. Our results show that the illusory truth effect and the protective power of an accuracy mindset generalize to non-Western populations and professional moderators.</p>","PeriodicalId":74468,"journal":{"name":"PNAS nexus","volume":"3 11","pages":"pgae481"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11574866/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PNAS nexus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae481","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Content moderators review problematic content for technology companies. One concern is that repeated exposure to false claims could cause moderators to come to believe the very claims they are supposed to moderate, via the "illusory truth effect." In a first lab-in-field experiment (N = 199) with a global content moderation company, we found that exposure to false claims while working as moderators increased subsequent belief among (mostly Indian and Philippine) employees by 7.1%. We tested an intervention to mitigate this effect: inducing an accuracy mindset. In both general population samples (N India = 997; N Philippines = 1,184) and a second lab-in-field experiment with professional moderators (N = 239), inducing participants to consider accuracy when first exposed to the claims eliminates the negative effects of exposure on belief in falsehoods. Our results show that the illusory truth effect and the protective power of an accuracy mindset generalize to non-Western populations and professional moderators.

准确性提示可保护专业内容审核员免受虚幻真相效应的影响。
内容审核员为技术公司审核有问题的内容。一个令人担忧的问题是,通过 "虚幻真实效应",反复接触虚假声明可能会导致版主相信他们本应审核的声明。在与一家全球内容审核公司进行的首次实验室-现场实验(N = 199)中,我们发现,在担任审核员期间接触虚假声明会使员工(主要是印度和菲律宾员工)的后续相信率提高 7.1%。我们测试了一种缓解这种影响的干预措施:诱导准确性思维。在一般人群样本(印度=997 人;菲律宾=1184 人)和以专业主持人为对象的第二次实验室-现场实验(印度=239 人)中,诱导参与者在首次接触索赔时考虑准确性,消除了接触对虚假信息的负面影响。我们的研究结果表明,虚幻的真相效应和准确性思维模式的保护力适用于非西方人群和专业主持人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信