Department of Psychology, University of Marburg, Gutenbergstrasse 18, 35032 Marburg, Germany; Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel, Missionsstrasse 64A, 4055 Basel, Switzerland.
Department of Psychology, University of Marburg, Gutenbergstrasse 18, 35032 Marburg, Germany.
Cognition. 2021 Oct;215:104819. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104819. Epub 2021 Jul 2.
Information is more likely believed to be true when it feels easy rather than difficult to process. An ecological learning explanation for this fluency-truth effect implicitly or explicitly presumes that truth and fluency are positively associated. Specifically, true information may be easier to process than false information and individuals may reverse this link in their truth judgments. The current research investigates the important but so far untested precondition of the learning explanation for the fluency-truth effect. In particular, five experiments (total N = 712) test whether participants experience information known to be true as easier to process than information known to be false. Participants in Experiment 1a judged true statements easier to read than false statements. Experiment 1b was a preregistered direct replication with a large sample and again found increased legibility for true statements-importantly, however, this was not the case for statements for which the truth status was unknown. Experiment 1b thereby shows that it is not the actual truth or falsehood of information but the believed truth or falsehood that is associated with processing fluency. In Experiment 2, true calculations were rated as easier to read than false calculations. Participants in Experiment 3 judged it easier to listen to calculations generally known to be true than to calculations generally known to be false. Experiment 4 shows an effect of truth on processing fluency independent of statement familiarity. Discussion centers on the current explanation for the fluency-truth effect and the validity of processing fluency as a cue in truth judgments.
当信息处理起来感觉容易而不是困难时，人们更有可能相信它是真实的。流畅性-真实性效应的生态学习解释隐含或明确地假定真实性和流畅性是正相关的。具体来说，真实信息可能比虚假信息更容易处理，而个体可能会在他们的真实性判断中反转这种联系。当前的研究调查了流畅性-真实性效应学习解释的一个重要但迄今为止未经检验的前提条件。特别是，五个实验（总共 N=712）测试了参与者是否认为已知为真的信息比已知为假的信息更容易处理。实验 1a 的参与者认为真实陈述比虚假陈述更容易阅读。实验 1b 是一个预先注册的大样本直接复制，再次发现真实陈述的可读性增加——重要的是，然而，对于真实性未知的陈述则并非如此。实验 1b 表明，与处理流畅性相关的不是信息的实际真实性或虚假性，而是信息的被认为的真实性或虚假性。在实验 2 中，真实的计算被评为比虚假的计算更容易阅读。实验 3 的参与者认为，一般来说，听到被认为是真实的计算比听到被认为是虚假的计算更容易。实验 4 表明，真实性对处理流畅性的影响独立于陈述的熟悉程度。讨论集中在当前对流畅性-真实性效应的解释以及处理流畅性作为真实性判断线索的有效性上。
