Repository logo
 

How Accurate Are Accuracy-Nudge Interventions? A Preregistered Direct Replication of Pennycook et al. (2020).

Published version
Peer-reviewed

Change log

Authors

Roozenbeek, Jon 
Freeman, Alexandra LJ 
van der Linden, Sander  ORCID logo  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0269-1744

Abstract

As part of the Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE) program, the present study consisted of a two-stage replication test of a central finding by Pennycook et al. (2020), namely that asking people to think about the accuracy of a single headline improves "truth discernment" of intentions to share news headlines about COVID-19. The first stage of the replication test (n = 701) was unsuccessful (p = .67). After collecting a second round of data (additional n = 882, pooled N = 1,583), we found a small but significant interaction between treatment condition and truth discernment (uncorrected p = .017; treatment: d = 0.14, control: d = 0.10). As in the target study, perceived headline accuracy correlated with treatment impact, so that treatment-group participants were less willing to share headlines that were perceived as less accurate. We discuss potential explanations for these findings and an unreported change in the hypothesis (but not the analysis plan) from the preregistration in the original study.

Description

Funder: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; FundRef: https://doi.org/10.13039/100000185


Funder: Winton Centre for Risk & Evidence Communication


Funder: David & Claudia Harding Foundation

Keywords

accuracy nudge, fake news, misinformation, open data, open materials, preregistered, priming, social media, COVID-19, Humans, Information Dissemination, Intention, Mass Media, Reproducibility of Results, Thinking, Truth Disclosure

Journal Title

Psychol Sci

Conference Name

Journal ISSN

0956-7976
1467-9280

Volume Title

32

Publisher

SAGE Publications
Sponsorship
ESRC (ES/V011960/1)