The Effect of Repetition on Truth Judgments Across Development

Research-Problem Validity in Primary Research: Precision and Transparency in Characterizing Past Knowledge

Four validity types evaluate the approximate truth of inferences communicated by primary research. However, current validity frameworks ignore the truthfulness of empirical inferences that are central to research-problem statements. Problem statements contrast a review of past research with other knowledge that extends, contradicts, or calls into question specific features of past research. Authors communicate empirical inferences, or quantitative judgments, about the frequency (e.g., "few," "most") and variability (e.g., "on the one hand," "on the other hand") in their reviews of existing theories, measures, samples, or results. We code a random sample of primary research articles and show that 83% of quantitative judgments in our sample are vague and do not have a transparent origin, making it difficult to assess their validity. We review validity threats of current practices. We propose that documenting the literature search, reporting how the search was coded, and quantifying the search results facilitates more precise judgments and makes their origin transparent. This practice enables research questions that are more closely tied to the existing body of knowledge and allows for more informed evaluations of the contribution of primary research articles, their design choices, and how they advance knowledge. We discuss potential limitations of our proposed framework.

Older children verify adult claims because they are skeptical of those claims

We investigated children's information seeking in response to a surprising claim (Study 1, N = 109, 54 Female, Range = 4.02-6.94 years, 49% White, 21% Mixed Ethnicity, 19% Southeast Asian, September 2019-March 2020; Study 2, N = 154, 74 Female, Range = 4.09-7.99, 50% White, 20% Mixed Ethnicity, 17% Southeast Asian, September 2020-December 2020). Relative to younger children, older children more often expressed skepticism about the adult's surprising claims (1-year increase, OR = 2.70) and more often suggested exploration strategies appropriate for testing the specific claim they heard (1-year increase, OR = 1.42). Controlling for age, recommending more targeted exploration strategies was associated with a greater likelihood of expressing skepticism about the adult's claim.

Never trust a stranger: Effects of explicit belief statements from strangers on children's reality status beliefs and beliefs about consensus

Children learn about much of the world through testimony and may hear explicit belief statements (e.g., "I believe in God" or "climate change is real") about entities whose existence is controversial. Prior research has shown that these statements, when spoken by a parent, influence children's beliefs about the reality status of the entity and their beliefs about societal consensus surrounding that reality status, in contrast to statements that only imply belief (e.g., "God lives in heaven"; Dore et al., 2019, Journal of Cognition and Development, 20, 35), suggesting that children are attuned to the nature of parental statements about reality. In the current study, we tested whether explicit versus implicit belief statements from strangers differentially affect children's beliefs. We followed procedures by Dore et al. (2019, Journal of Cognition and Development, 20, 35) but used strangers to provide testimony rather than parents. Results showed that explicit belief statements from strangers did not influence children's beliefs. This lack of an effect of explicit belief statements relative to implicit ones suggests that, despite being attuned to these statements when spoken by parents, children may not be attuned to explicit statements about reality that they hear from strangers. Although even very young children often learn words and other facts from unfamiliar speakers, these findings suggest that nuances perceived in parent speech about reality may not be picked up in the speech of strangers.

Believing and social interactions: effects on bodily expressions and personal narratives

The processes of believing integrate external perceptual information from the environment with internal emotional states and prior experience to generate probabilistic neural representations of events, i.e., beliefs. As these neural representations manifest mostly below the level of a person's conscious awareness, they may inadvertently affect the spontaneous person's bodily expressions and prospective behavior. By yet to be understood mechanisms people can become aware of these representations and reflect upon them. Typically, people can communicate the content of their beliefs as personal statements and can summarize the narratives of others to themselves or to other people. Here, we describe that social interactions may benefit from the consistency between a person's bodily expressions and verbal statements because the person appears authentic and ultimately trustworthy. The transmission of narratives can thus lay the groundwork for social cooperation within and between groups and, ultimately, between communities and nations. Conversely, a discrepancy between bodily expressions and narratives may cause distrust in the addressee(s) and eventually may destroy social bonds.

Parental praise and children's exploration: a virtual reality experiment

When children practice a new skill and fail, it is critical for them to explore new strategies to succeed. How can parents encourage children's exploration? Bridging insights from developmental psychology and the neuroscience of motor control, we examined the effects of parental praise on children's motor exploration. We theorize that modest praise can spark exploration. Unlike inflated praise, modest praise acknowledges children's performance, without setting a high standard for future performance. This may be reassuring to children with lower levels of self-esteem, who often doubt their ability. We conducted a novel virtual-reality experiment. Children (N = 202, ages 8-12) reported self-esteem and performed a virtual-reality 3D trajectory-matching task, with success/failure feedback after each trial. Children received modest praise ("You did well!"), inflated praise ("You did incredibly well!"), or no praise from their parent. We measured motor exploration as children's tendency to vary their movements following failure. Relative to no praise, modest praise-unlike inflated praise-encouraged exploration in children with lower levels of self-esteem. By contrast, modest praise discouraged exploration in children with higher levels of self-esteem. Effects were small yet robust. This experiment demonstrates that modest praise can spark exploration in children with lower levels of self-esteem.

Poison Parasite Counter: Turning Duplicitous Mass Communications Into Self-Negating Memory-Retrieval Cues

Disinformation in politics, advertising, and mass communications has proliferated in recent years. Few counterargumentation strategies have proven effective at undermining a deceptive message over time. This article introduces the Poison Parasite Counter (PPC), a cognitive-science-based strategy for durably countering deceptive communications. The PPC involves inserting a strong (poisonous) counter-message, just once, into a close replica of a deceptive rival's original communication. In parasitic fashion, the original communication then "hosts" the counter-message, which is recalled on each reexposure to the original communication. The strategy harnesses associative memory to turn the original communication into a retrieval cue for a negating counter-message. Seven experiments (N = 3,679 adults) show that the PPC lastingly undermines a duplicitous rival's original communication, influencing judgments of communicator honesty and favorability as well as real political donations.

Racial Awareness and Bias Begin Early: Developmental Entry Points, Challenges, and a Call to Action

Overt expressions of racial intolerance have surged precipitously. The dramatic uptick in hate crimes and hate speech is not lost on young children. But how, and how early, do children become aware of racial bias? And when do their own views of themselves and others become infused with racial bias? This article opens with a brief overview of the existing experimental evidence documenting developmental entry points of racial bias in infants and young children and how it unfolds. The article then goes on to identify gaps in the extant research and outlines three steps to narrow them. By bringing together what we know and what remains unknown, the goal is to provide a springboard, motivating a more comprehensive psychological-science framework that illuminates early steps in the acquisition of racial bias. If we are to interrupt race bias at its inception and diminish its effects, then we must build strong cross-disciplinary bridges that span the psychological and related social sciences to shed light on the pressing issues facing our nation's young children and their families.

The effects of repeating false and misleading information on belief

False and misleading information is readily accessible in people's environments, oftentimes reaching people repeatedly. This repeated exposure can significantly affect people's beliefs about the world, as has been noted by scholars in political science, communication, and cognitive, developmental, and social psychology. In particular, repetition increases belief in false information, even when the misinformation contradicts prior knowledge. We review work across these disciplines, identifying factors that may heighten, diminish, or have no impact on these adverse effects of repetition on belief. Specifically, we organize our discussion around variations in what information is repeated, to whom the information is repeated, how people interact with this repetition, and how people's beliefs are measured. A key cross-disciplinary theme is that the most influential factor is how carefully or critically people process the false information. However, several open questions remain when comparing findings across different fields and approaches. We conclude by noting a need for more interdisciplinary work to help resolve these questions, as well as a need for more work in naturalistic settings so that we can better understand and combat the effects of repeated circulation of false and misleading information in society. This article is categorized under: Psychology > Memory Psychology > Reasoning and Decision Making.

The effects of repetition frequency on the illusory truth effect

Repeated information is often perceived as more truthful than new information. This finding is known as the illusory truth effect, and it is typically thought to occur because repetition increases processing fluency. Because fluency and truth are frequently correlated in the real world, people learn to use processing fluency as a marker for truthfulness. Although the illusory truth effect is a robust phenomenon, almost all studies examining it have used three or fewer repetitions. To address this limitation, we conducted two experiments using a larger number of repetitions. In Experiment 1, we showed participants trivia statements up to 9 times and in Experiment 2 statements were shown up to 27 times. Later, participants rated the truthfulness of the previously seen statements and of new statements. In both experiments, we found that perceived truthfulness increased as the number of repetitions increased. However, these truth rating increases were logarithmic in shape. The largest increase in perceived truth came from encountering a statement for the second time, and beyond this were incrementally smaller increases in perceived truth for each additional repetition. These findings add to our theoretical understanding of the illusory truth effect and have applications for advertising, politics, and the propagation of "fake news."