ArticleScience advances2022
Using a cognitive network model of moral and social beliefs to explain belief change.
Article in Science advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Network temperature and stability of symptom clusters in colorectal cancer patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy: a prospective longitudinal study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Observational
- A semantic embedding space based on large language models for modelling human beliefs.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Network temperature as a metric of stability in depression symptoms across adolescence.Nature. Mental health · 2025Article
- Emergence of simple and complex contagion dynamics from weighted belief networks.Science advances · 2024Article
- Manifestations, social impact, and decay of conceptual beliefs: A cultural perspective.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
- Implicit racial biases are lower in more populous more diverse and less segregated US cities.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Escape from fraught states in a coordination game.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Article
- Nuclear energy acceptance in Poland: From societal attitudes to effective policy strategies-Network modeling approach.PloS one · 2024Article
- Editorial: Credition-An interdisciplinary approach to the nature of beliefs and believing.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Skepticism toward childhood vaccines and genetically modified food has grown despite scientific evidence of their safety. Beliefs about scientific issues are difficult to change because they are entrenched within many interrelated moral concerns and beliefs about what others think. We propose a cognitive network model that estimates network ties between all interrelated beliefs to calculate the overall dissonance and interdependence. Using a probabilistic nationally representative longitudinal study, we test whether our model can be used to predict belief change and find support for our model's predictions: High network dissonance predicts subsequent belief change, and people are driven toward lower network dissonance. We show the advantages of measuring dissonance using the belief network structure compared to traditional measures. This study is the first to combine a unifying predictive model with an experimental intervention and to shed light on the dynamics of dissonance reduction leading to belief change.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.