Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Drive, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA.
Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, 502 Portola Plaza, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.
Behav Res Methods. 2023 Jun;55(4):1907-1923. doi: 10.3758/s13428-022-01904-6. Epub 2022 Jul 5.
We offer short story ("vignette") materials that have been developed and tested with the intention of influencing people's true and false beliefs about the world. First, we present norming data on the baseline rates at which participants from both U.S.-census matched and general U.S. online samples were correctly able to classify a selected set of accurate (e.g., aerobic exercise strengthens your heart and lungs) and inaccurate (e.g., aerobic exercise weakens your heart and lungs) assertions as "True" or "False." Next, we present data which validate that reading vignettes in which people discuss these accurate and inaccurate assertions influences participants' subsequent judgments of the validity of the asserted claims. These vignettes are brief, easy-to-read, allow for flexible and accountable online data collection, and reflect realistic accurate and inaccurate claims that people routinely encounter (e.g., preventative health behaviors, use of alternative medicines and therapies, etc.). As intended, vignettes containing inaccurate assertions increased participants' subsequent judgment errors, while vignettes containing accurate assertions decreased participants' subsequent judgment errors, both relative to participants' judgments after not reading related information. In an additional experiment, we used the vignette materials to replicate findings from Salovich et al. (2021), wherein participants reported lower confidence in correct judgments and higher confidence in incorrect judgments after having read inaccurate assertions. Overall, these materials are well suited for investigations on the consequences of exposures to accurate and inaccurate information, address limitations in currently available stimuli, and align with trends in research practice (e.g., online sampling) within psychological science.
我们提供短篇故事（“小插曲”）材料，这些材料是为了影响人们对世界的真实和虚假信念而开发和测试的。首先，我们呈现了来自美国人口普查匹配样本和普通美国在线样本的参与者正确地将一组精选的准确（例如，有氧运动增强心肺功能）和不准确（例如，有氧运动削弱心肺功能）断言分类为“正确”或“错误”的基本比率的常模数据。接下来，我们提供的数据验证了阅读小插曲会影响参与者对断言主张有效性的后续判断，这些小插曲简短易读，允许灵活且可问责的在线数据收集，并反映人们经常遇到的现实准确和不准确的主张（例如，预防保健行为、替代药物和疗法的使用等）。正如预期的那样，包含不准确断言的小插曲增加了参与者随后的判断错误，而包含准确断言的小插曲减少了参与者随后的判断错误，这两种情况都与参与者在没有阅读相关信息后的判断相比。在一项额外的实验中，我们使用这些小插曲材料复制了 Salovich 等人（2021 年）的研究结果，即参与者在阅读了不准确的断言后，报告对正确判断的信心降低，对错误判断的信心提高。总的来说，这些材料非常适合研究接触准确和不准确信息的后果，解决目前可用刺激物的局限性，并与心理科学研究实践中的趋势（例如在线抽样）保持一致。
