Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27790164›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2016

Changing Conspiracy Beliefs through Rationality and Ridiculing.

Gábor Orosz, Péter Krekó, Benedek Paskuj, István Tóth-Király, Beáta Bőthe, Christine Roland-Lévy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Associative Learning in a Conspiratorial Frame.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Gábor OroszDepartment of Social Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd UniversityBudapest, Hungary; Research Centre for Natural Sciences, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and Psychology, Hungarian Academy of SciencesBudapest, Hungary.
Péter KrekóDepartment of Social Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd UniversityBudapest, Hungary; Central Eurasian Studies Department, Indiana UniversityBloomington, IN, USA.
Benedek PaskujDepartment of Psychology, University College London London, UK.
István Tóth-KirályDepartment of Social Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd UniversityBudapest, Hungary; Doctoral School of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd UniversityBudapest, Hungary.
Beáta BőtheDepartment of Social Psychology, Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd UniversityBudapest, Hungary; Doctoral School of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd UniversityBudapest, Hungary.
Christine Roland-LévyC2S, Department of Psychology, University of Reims Champagne-Ardenne Rheims, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conspiracy theory (CT) beliefs can be harmful. How is it possible to reduce them effectively? Three reduction strategies were tested in an online experiment using general and well-known CT beliefs on a comprehensive randomly assigned Hungarian sample (

Indexed as

beliefconspiracy theoryempathyrationalityridiculing

Identifiers

PMID27790164
PMCPMC5061726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.