.png){kind=icon}
返回
.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
摘要
En 中文
Survey data are commonly cited as evidence of widespread misperceptions and misinformed beliefs. This paper shows that surveys generally fail to identify the firm, deep, steadfast, confidently held beliefs described in leading accounts. Instead, even those who report 100% certain belief in falsehoods about well-studied topics like climate change, vaccine side effects, and the COVID-19 death toll exhibit substantial response instability over time. Similar levels of response stability are observed among those who report 100% certain belief in benign, politically uncontested falsehoods-for example, that electrons are larger than atoms and that lasers work by focusing sound waves. As opposed to firmly held misperceptions, claims to be highly certain of incorrect answers are best interpreted as miseducated guesses based on mistaken inferential reasoning. Those reporting middling and low levels of certainty are best viewed as making close-to-blind guesses. These findings recast existing evidence as to the prevalence, predictors, correction, and consequences of misperceptions and misinformed beliefs.
Keyword:
PARTISAN BIAS
BELIEF
MISINFORMATION
INFORMATION
PREVALENCE
STABILITY
KNOWLEDGE
IGNORANCE
STRENGTH
IMPACT
期刊
IF:
5.8
论文数:
8.7K
被引数:
2.1W
机构
引用论文
.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏Hopf Bifurcation and Control for the Bioeconomic Predator–Prey Model with Square Root Functional Response and Nonlinear Prey Harvesting.png)
Mathematics.png)
OAAI
MathematicsIF0
OAAI分享收藏Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing错误信息及其纠正: 持续的影响和成功的去偏性
OAAI
OAAI分享收藏
查看更多内容