This study examines how people evaluate the credibility of information when updating their beliefs about numerical facts. Participants will complete an incentivized belief-updating task involving both political and general-knowledge topics. On each topic, they will estimate a numerical value, receive feedback indicating whether the correct answer is higher or lower than their estimate, and judge how likely the feedback is to have come from a reliable news source. The study also includes questionnaires assessing prior attitudes, thinking styles, cognitive performance, intellectual humility, and demographic characteristics. The primary aim is to test whether the perceived credibility of information depends on whether it is consistent with participants' prior attitudes. In an incentivized belief-updating task, participants state a median guess for a numeric question on each topic and then receive a message stating that the correct answer is higher or lower than their guess. Each message comes from either a True News source, whose messages give correct information, or a Fake News source, whose messages give incorrect information. Participants then rate message accuracy on a scale from 0 to 100 (0 = definitely not from a true news source; 100 = definitely from a true news source).

Math problems of the day for 8/7/26.

Similarity Ratings data analyses, for the manuscript "Stimulus Presentation Duration Affects Category-Learning Accuracy" by Fotis A. Fotiadis, Iris Antonatou Stamatopoulou, & Argiro Vatakis

Statistik məlumat dəsti