• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

信任信息、政治身份与大脑:一项跨学科 fMRI 研究

Trust in information, political identity and the brain: an interdisciplinary fMRI study.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, 7 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ, UK.

Neuropolitics Research Lab, School of Social and Political Science, University of Edinburgh, 18 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LN, UK.

出版信息

Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021 Apr 12;376(1822):20200140. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0140. Epub 2021 Feb 22.

DOI:10.1098/rstb.2020.0140
PMID:33611998
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7935065/
Abstract

Misinformation has triggered government inquiries and threatens the perceived legitimacy of campaign processes and electoral outcomes. A new identity polarization has arisen between Remain and Leave sympathizers in the UK Brexit debate, with associated accusations of misinformation use. Competing psychological accounts of how people come to accept and defend misinformation pit self-reinforcing motivated cognition against lack of systematic reasoning as possible explanations. We harness insights from political science, cognitive neuroscience and psychology to examine the impact of trust and identity on information processing regarding Brexit in a group of Remain identifiers. Behaviourally, participants' affective responses to Brexit-related information are affected by whether the emotional valence of the message is compatible with their beliefs on Brexit (positive/negative) but not by their trust in the source of information. However, belief in the information is significantly affected by both (dis)trust in information source and by belief compatibility with the valence of the information. Neuroimaging results confirm this pattern, identifying areas involved in judgements of the self, others and automatic processing of affectively threatening stimuli, ultimately supporting motivated cognition accounts of misinformation endorsement. This article is part of the theme issue 'The political brain: neurocognitive and computational mechanisms'.

摘要

虚假信息引发了政府调查,威胁到竞选过程和选举结果的合法性。在英国脱欧辩论中,支持留欧和脱欧的双方出现了新的身份极化,随之而来的是对虚假信息使用的指责。人们如何接受和捍卫虚假信息的竞争心理解释将自我强化的动机认知与缺乏系统推理进行了对比,将其作为可能的解释。我们利用政治学、认知神经科学和心理学的见解,在一群支持留欧的人中研究了信任和身份对英国脱欧相关信息处理的影响。从行为上看,参与者对与英国脱欧相关信息的情感反应受到信息情绪效价与他们对英国脱欧的信念(正面/负面)是否一致的影响,但不受他们对信息来源信任程度的影响。然而,对信息的信任受到(不信任)信息来源和信息与情绪刺激的效价一致性的双重影响。神经影像学结果证实了这一模式,确定了涉及自我、他人和自动处理情感威胁刺激的判断的区域,最终支持虚假信息认可的动机认知解释。本文是“政治大脑:神经认知和计算机制”主题特刊的一部分。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/090e/7935065/428ab70897b7/rstb20200140f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/090e/7935065/b1c3ffd6dc01/rstb20200140f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/090e/7935065/8bec996ab9de/rstb20200140f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/090e/7935065/428ab70897b7/rstb20200140f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/090e/7935065/b1c3ffd6dc01/rstb20200140f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/090e/7935065/8bec996ab9de/rstb20200140f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/090e/7935065/428ab70897b7/rstb20200140f03.jpg

相似文献

1
Trust in information, political identity and the brain: an interdisciplinary fMRI study.信任信息、政治身份与大脑:一项跨学科 fMRI 研究
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021 Apr 12;376(1822):20200140. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0140. Epub 2021 Feb 22.
2
Immigration, political trust, and Brexit - Testing an aversion amplification hypothesis.移民、政治信任与英国脱欧——检验厌恶放大假说。
Br J Soc Psychol. 2018 Apr;57(2):310-326. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12233. Epub 2018 Jan 10.
3
Explaining voting in the UK's 2016 EU referendum: Values, attitudes to immigration, European identity and political trust.解读英国2016年脱欧公投中的投票行为:价值观、对移民的态度、欧洲身份认同与政治信任
Soc Sci Res. 2020 Nov;92:102476. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2020.102476. Epub 2020 Sep 17.
4
Computational and neurocognitive approaches to the political brain: key insights and future avenues for political neuroscience.计算神经科学与政治大脑:政治神经科学的关键见解与未来方向
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021 Apr 12;376(1822):20200130. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0130. Epub 2021 Feb 22.
5
Misinformation about COVID-19: evidence for differential latent profiles and a strong association with trust in science.关于 COVID-19 的错误信息:不同潜在特征的证据,以及与对科学的信任之间的强关联。
BMC Public Health. 2021 Jan 7;21(1):89. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-10103-x.
6
Political uncertainty moderates neural evaluation of incongruent policy positions.政治不确定性调节对不一致政策立场的神经评估。
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021 Apr 12;376(1822):20200138. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0138. Epub 2021 Feb 22.
7
Neural bases of motivated reasoning: an FMRI study of emotional constraints on partisan political judgment in the 2004 U.S. Presidential election.动机性推理的神经基础:一项关于2004年美国总统选举中情感因素对党派政治判断影响的功能磁共振成像(fMRI)研究
J Cogn Neurosci. 2006 Nov;18(11):1947-58. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2006.18.11.1947.
8
Corrections of political misinformation: no evidence for an effect of partisan worldview in a US convenience sample.纠正政治错误信息:在美国便利样本中,没有证据表明党派世界观有影响。
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021 Apr 12;376(1822):20200145. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0145. Epub 2021 Feb 22.
9
Negative news dominates fast and slow brain responses and social judgments even after source credibility evaluation.即使在评估消息来源可信度之后,负面新闻仍会主导快速和慢速大脑反应以及社会判断。
Neuroimage. 2021 Dec 1;244:118572. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118572. Epub 2021 Sep 8.
10
Cognitive underpinnings of nationalistic ideology in the context of Brexit.英国脱欧背景下民族主义意识形态的认知基础。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 May 8;115(19):E4532-E4540. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1708960115. Epub 2018 Apr 19.

引用本文的文献

1
Shared disbelief and shared belief: Belief and disbelief as drivers of interpersonal neural synchronization during narrative processing.共同的怀疑与共同的信念:叙事加工过程中,信念与怀疑作为人际神经同步的驱动因素
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Jun 10;122(23):e2422396122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2422396122. Epub 2025 Jun 5.
2
Intuitive judgements towards artificial intelligence verdicts of moral transgressions.对人工智能关于道德违规判定的直观判断。
Br J Soc Psychol. 2025 Jul;64(3):e12908. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12908.
3
Tracking politically motivated reasoning in the brain: the role of mentalizing, value-encoding, and error detection networks.

本文引用的文献

1
Distinguishing deliberate from systematic thinking.区分刻意思维与系统性思维。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2021 Mar;120(3):765-788. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000284. Epub 2020 Mar 5.
2
Automated anatomical labelling atlas 3.自动解剖学标注图谱 3.
Neuroimage. 2020 Feb 1;206:116189. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116189. Epub 2019 Sep 12.
3
Emotion schemas are embedded in the human visual system.情绪图式嵌入在人类视觉系统中。
追踪大脑中的政治动机推理:心理化、价值编码和错误检测网络的作用。
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2024 Sep 19;19(1). doi: 10.1093/scan/nsae056.
4
Computational and neurocognitive approaches to the political brain: key insights and future avenues for political neuroscience.计算神经科学与政治大脑:政治神经科学的关键见解与未来方向
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021 Apr 12;376(1822):20200130. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0130. Epub 2021 Feb 22.
Sci Adv. 2019 Jul 24;5(7):eaaw4358. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aaw4358. eCollection 2019 Jul.
4
The neural circuitry of affect-induced distortions of trust.情感诱发信任扭曲的神经回路。
Sci Adv. 2019 Mar 13;5(3):eaau3413. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aau3413. eCollection 2019 Mar.
5
False Equivalence: Are Liberals and Conservatives in the United States Equally Biased?错误的等同:美国的自由派和保守派是否同样存在偏见?
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019 Mar;14(2):292-303. doi: 10.1177/1745691618788876.
6
PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy.心理物理学 2 版:简单易用的行为实验。
Behav Res Methods. 2019 Feb;51(1):195-203. doi: 10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y.
7
Belief in conspiracy theories: Basic principles of an emerging research domain.对阴谋论的信念:一个新兴研究领域的基本原则。
Eur J Soc Psychol. 2018 Dec;48(7):897-908. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2530. Epub 2018 Aug 24.
8
Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning.懒惰而非偏见:党派虚假新闻的易感性可以更好地用缺乏推理来解释,而不是用动机推理来解释。
Cognition. 2019 Jul;188:39-50. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.011. Epub 2018 Jun 20.
9
At Least Bias Is Bipartisan: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives.至少偏见是两党都有的:对自由派和保守派党派偏见的元分析比较。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019 Mar;14(2):273-291. doi: 10.1177/1745691617746796. Epub 2018 May 31.
10
The Partisan Brain: An Identity-Based Model of Political Belief.《党派大脑:基于身份认同的政治信仰模式》
Trends Cogn Sci. 2018 Mar;22(3):213-224. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2018.01.004. Epub 2018 Feb 20.