揭穿关于错误信息的三个神话

IF 7.4 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Bertram Gawronski, Lea S. Nahon, Nyx L. Ng
{"title":"揭穿关于错误信息的三个神话","authors":"Bertram Gawronski, Lea S. Nahon, Nyx L. Ng","doi":"10.1177/09637214241280907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent years have seen a surge in research on why people fall for misinformation and what can be done about it. Drawing on a framework that conceptualizes truth judgments of true and false information as a signal-detection problem, the current article identifies three inaccurate assumptions in the public and scientific discourse about misinformation: (1) People are bad at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias is not a driving force in judgments of misinformation, and (3) gullibility to false information is the main factor underlying inaccurate beliefs. Counter to these assumptions, we argue that (1) people are quite good at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias in responses to true and false information is pervasive and strong, and (3) skepticism against belief-incongruent true information is much more pronounced than gullibility to belief-congruent false information. These conclusions have significant implications for person-centered misinformation interventions to tackle inaccurate beliefs.","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":"57 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Debunking Three Myths About Misinformation\",\"authors\":\"Bertram Gawronski, Lea S. Nahon, Nyx L. Ng\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09637214241280907\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recent years have seen a surge in research on why people fall for misinformation and what can be done about it. Drawing on a framework that conceptualizes truth judgments of true and false information as a signal-detection problem, the current article identifies three inaccurate assumptions in the public and scientific discourse about misinformation: (1) People are bad at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias is not a driving force in judgments of misinformation, and (3) gullibility to false information is the main factor underlying inaccurate beliefs. Counter to these assumptions, we argue that (1) people are quite good at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias in responses to true and false information is pervasive and strong, and (3) skepticism against belief-incongruent true information is much more pronounced than gullibility to belief-congruent false information. These conclusions have significant implications for person-centered misinformation interventions to tackle inaccurate beliefs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10802,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Directions in Psychological Science\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Directions in Psychological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214241280907\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214241280907","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,关于人们为何会误信虚假信息以及如何应对的研究激增。本文借鉴将真假信息的真伪判断概念化为信号检测问题的框架,指出了公众和科学界关于误导信息讨论中的三个不准确假设:(1) 人们不善于辨别真假信息;(2) 党派偏见不是误导信息判断的驱动力;(3) 轻信虚假信息是导致不准确信念的主要因素。与这些假设相反,我们认为:(1) 人们非常善于辨别真假信息;(2) 在对真假信息的反应中,党派偏见是普遍而强烈的;(3) 对信念一致的真实信息的怀疑态度比对信念一致的虚假信息的轻信态度要明显得多。这些结论对于以人为本的错误信息干预措施解决不准确的信念问题具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Debunking Three Myths About Misinformation
Recent years have seen a surge in research on why people fall for misinformation and what can be done about it. Drawing on a framework that conceptualizes truth judgments of true and false information as a signal-detection problem, the current article identifies three inaccurate assumptions in the public and scientific discourse about misinformation: (1) People are bad at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias is not a driving force in judgments of misinformation, and (3) gullibility to false information is the main factor underlying inaccurate beliefs. Counter to these assumptions, we argue that (1) people are quite good at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias in responses to true and false information is pervasive and strong, and (3) skepticism against belief-incongruent true information is much more pronounced than gullibility to belief-congruent false information. These conclusions have significant implications for person-centered misinformation interventions to tackle inaccurate beliefs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Current Directions in Psychological Science PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
13.00
自引率
1.40%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: Current Directions in Psychological Science publishes reviews by leading experts covering all of scientific psychology and its applications. Each issue of Current Directions features a diverse mix of reports on various topics such as language, memory and cognition, development, the neural basis of behavior and emotions, various aspects of psychopathology, and theory of mind. These articles allow readers to stay apprised of important developments across subfields beyond their areas of expertise and bodies of research they might not otherwise be aware of. The articles in Current Directions are also written to be accessible to non-experts, making them ideally suited for use in the classroom as teaching supplements.
×
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