Matching Items (2)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

193588-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Studies have repeatedly shown that mere exposure to ideas makes those ideas seem more true, a finding referred to as the “illusory truth” effect. This feature of cognition may heighten existing concerns surrounding the spread of misinformation. Recent studies have shown that the effect extends to fake news headlines and

Studies have repeatedly shown that mere exposure to ideas makes those ideas seem more true, a finding referred to as the “illusory truth” effect. This feature of cognition may heighten existing concerns surrounding the spread of misinformation. Recent studies have shown that the effect extends to fake news headlines and may increase the likelihood that someone shares misinformation. But is this evidence that mere exposure can affect our beliefs? The two leading accounts of the illusory truth effect argue that after initial exposure, participants sense a feeling of familiarity or “fluency” at test that they use as a sign the statement is true. Beliefs however, extend further than just truth ratings. Beliefs also guide actions and imply other beliefs. Three pre-registered experiments were conducted to examine whether mere exposure to statements induces genuine beliefs by first examining if participants draw implications from mere exposure in Study 1. Surprisingly, results indicated that exposure to “premise” statements affect participants’ truth ratings for novel “implied” statements, which cannot be explained by the familiarity or fluency accounts of the illusory truth effect. Study 2 replicated results from Study 1 and ruled out consistency pressure as an explanation for prior findings. Finally, Study 3 replicated results from Studies 1 and 2 and ensured they were not due to demand characteristics by conducting separate analysis for suspicious and non-suspicious participants. Since these findings cannot be explained by the predominant accounts of the illusory truth effect, the authors believe this is evidence of a new effect the “illusory implication” effect. More importantly, these findings suggest that the consequences of misinformation may be larger than previously thought and warrants further study into potential mechanisms driving the illusory implication effect.
ContributorsMikell, Justin (Author) / Powell, Derek (Thesis advisor) / Smalarz, Laura (Committee member) / Duran, Nicholas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2024
161740-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
As any group-work member can attest, conveying information, and confirming understanding among group members can be a challenging first step in problem-solving. Despite being a ubiquitous strategy employed in many educational and organizational settings, there are collaborations that fall flat while others succeed. Recent strides have been made in the

As any group-work member can attest, conveying information, and confirming understanding among group members can be a challenging first step in problem-solving. Despite being a ubiquitous strategy employed in many educational and organizational settings, there are collaborations that fall flat while others succeed. Recent strides have been made in the psycholinguistic approach to communication, evaluating the extent to which speakers align across lexical, syntactic, and semantic usages of language within various task environments, but gaps remain in understanding the role of language in open-ended, emergent problem-solving spaces. Study 1 examines the specific trends and functions of lexical, syntactic, and semantic alignment among speakers in a complex, creative problem-solving effort. As collaborators work through their tasks, lexical alignment decreases as semantic alignment increases and syntactic re-use decreases. These findings suggest alignment may be a sensitive mechanism that hinges on time spent in a collaborative environment and the influencing factor of goal type. More research is needed to understand the varying mechanisms across unique problem-solving spaces that vary in complexity, silence of referents, and cognitive load placed upon performers. Follow-up analyses explore how speakers use specific terms in their collaborative dialogues, assessing the roles of cognition- and action-related language. The use of thinking words (e.g. “think”, “wonder”) predicts when participants may hit an impasse in their collaborations. One interpretation suggests that cognition-related language tends to be involved when groups struggle to convey ideas. Findings from the current work have implications for interventions in organizational and educational domains, along with potential artificial intelligence applications.
ContributorsPaige, Amie Joy (Author) / Duran, Nicholas D (Thesis advisor) / Lucca, Kelsey (Committee member) / Powell, Derek (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021