Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39630644›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2024

The role of epistemic trust and epistemic disruption in vaccine hesitancy, conspiracy thinking and the capacity to identify fake news.

Michal Tanzer, Chloe Campbell, Rob Saunders, Thomas Booker, Patrick Luyten, Peter Fonagy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Michal TanzerResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Chloe CampbellResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0592-9949
Rob SaundersResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Thomas BookerResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8674-8217
Patrick LuytenResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Peter FonagyResearch Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epistemic trust - defined as readiness to regard knowledge, communicated by another agent, as significant, relevant to the self, and generalizable to other contexts-has recently been applied to the field of developmental psychopathology as a potential risk factor for psychopathology. The work described here sought to investigate how the vulnerability engendered by disruptions in epistemic trust may not only impact psychological resilience and interpersonal processes but also aspects of more general social functioning. We undertook two studies to examine the role of epistemic trust in determining capacity to recognise fake/real news, and susceptibility to conspiracy thinking-both in general and in relation to COVID-19. Measuring three different epistemic dispositions-trusting, mistrusting and credulous-in two studies (study 1, n = 705; study 2 n = 502), we found that Credulity was associated with inability to discriminate between fake/real news. We also found that both Mistrust and Credulity mediated the relationship between exposure to childhood adversity and difficulty in distinguishing between fake/real news, although the effect sizes were small. Finally, Mistrust and Credulity were associated with general and COVID-19 related conspiracy beliefs and vaccine hesitancy. We discuss the implications of these findings for our understanding of fake news and conspiracy thinking.

Identifiers

PMID39630644
PMCPMC11616851

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.