SynthesisNature human behaviour2025
Spotting false news and doubting true news: a systematic review and meta-analysis of news judgements.
Synthesis in Nature human behaviour, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence for an illusory truth effect and its determinants.Nature communications · 2026Pooled it
- How Heuristic Credibility Cues Shape Perceived Credibility on Social Media: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Research.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- How AI-Generated Content Shapes User Trust: The Roles of Cognitive Processing, Perceived Risk, and Transparency Labels.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Beliefs and sharing intentions of human- and AI-generated fake news: Evidence from 27 European countries.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Understanding Partisan Bias in Judgments of Misinformation: Identity Protection Versus Differential Knowledge.Psychological science · 2026Article
- Autism and detecting verbal truth and lies: veracity decisions, cue selection, judgment confidence, and self-report reasoning.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- The simulation of judgment in LLMs.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Following news on social media boosts knowledge, belief accuracy and trust.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Debunking Three Myths About Misinformation.Current directions in psychological science · 2025Article
- Media choice and audience perceptions: Evidence from visual framing of immigration in news stories.PloS one · 2025Article
- People are skeptical of headlines labeled as AI-generated, even if true or human-made, because they assume full AI automation.PNAS nexus · 2024Article
- Collaboration, crowdsourcing, and misinformation.PNAS nexus · 2024Article
- Media literacy tips promoting reliable news improve discernment and enhance trust in traditional media.Communications psychology · 2024Article
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
How good are people at judging the veracity of news? We conducted a systematic literature review and pre-registered meta-analysis of 303 effect sizes from 67 experimental articles evaluating accuracy ratings of true and fact-checked false news (N
Indexed as
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.