Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39578568›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Question framing affects accurate-inaccurate discrimination in responses to sharing questions, but not in responses to accuracy questions.

Raoul Bell, Axel Buchner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 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.

Raoul BellDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany. raoul.bell@hhu.de.ORCID 0000-0002-0592-0362
Axel BuchnerDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4529-3444

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous research suggests that even when people are capable of judging to the best of their knowledge whether claims are accurate or inaccurate, they do not sufficiently discriminate between accurate and inaccurate information when asked to consider whether they would share stories on social media. However, question framing ("To the best of your knowledge…", "Would you consider…?") differed between the questions about accuracy and the questions about sharing. Here we examine the effects of question framing on responses to accuracy questions and responses to sharing questions. The framing of accuracy questions had no effect on accurate-inaccurate discrimination. In contrast, accurate-inaccurate discrimination in response to sharing questions increased when participants were asked to respond, to the best of their knowledge, whether they would share claims compared to when they were asked whether they would consider sharing stories. At a theoretical level, the findings support the inattention-based account, according to which contextual cues shifting the focus toward accuracy can enhance accurate-inaccurate discrimination in sharing responses. At a methodological level, these findings suggest that researchers should carefully attend to the verbal framing of questions about sharing information on social media, as the framing may significantly influence participants' focus on accuracy.

Indexed as

Social MediaAdultFemaleHumansInformation DisseminationJudgmentMaleYoung AdultAccuracy promptFake newsSharing intentionTruth judgmentVerbal framing effect

Identifiers

PMID39578568
PMCPMC11584869

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.