Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39405299›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Cognitive support for political partisans' understanding of policy data.

Shuyuan Yu, John E Opfer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Shuyuan YuDepartment of Cognitive Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5993-1681
John E OpferDepartment of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Political partisanship might lead educated adults-even the highly numerate-to reason selectively about numbers that are relevant to and support their ideology ("motivated numeracy"). In this pre-registered study, we sought to examine the replicability of motivated numeracy, and investigate whether cognitive support (number lines) that improves the reasoning of children might also improve the reasoning of political partisans. To test this, we asked 1000 adults about their political ideology and asked them to interpret fictional data, in a table or number-line format, about ideology relevant (i.e., the effect of gun control on crime) or irrelevant (i.e., the effect of skin cream on rash) issues. We failed to replicate motivated numeracy when political identity was used but observed motivated numeracy when prior attitude was used. Moreover, data presented on number lines elicited 75 percent greater accuracy than data presented in tables, regardless of whether the information was ideology-relevant, or whether data supported, was neutral to, or contradicted participants' political outlooks. Findings imply that political partisans require cognitive support to be more objective about policy data.

Indexed as

CognitionPoliticsAdolescentAdultAttitudeComprehensionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotivationYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39405299
PMCPMC11478866

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.