Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40210703›Full record

ArticleNature human behaviour2025

Computational analysis of US congressional speeches reveals a shift from evidence to intuition.

Segun T Aroyehun, Almog Simchon, Fabio Carrella, Jana Lasser, Stephan Lewandowsky, David Garcia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Segun T AroyehunDepartment of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.
Almog SimchonDepartment of Psychology, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beersheba, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2629-2913
Fabio CarrellaSchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4918-3875
Jana LasserIDea_Lab, University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4274-4580
Stephan LewandowskySchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. Stephan.Lewandowsky@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1655-2013
David GarciaDepartment of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany.

Funding

EC | EC Seventh Framework Programm | FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (FP7-IDEAS-ERC - Specific Programme: "Ideas" Implementing the Seventh Framework Programme of the European Community for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activities (2007 to 2013)) 101020961EC | Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020) 101094752Volkswagen Foundation (VolkswagenStiftung) Restoring Autonomy OnlineVolkswagen Foundation (VolkswagenStiftung) Restroring Autonomy Online
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pursuit of honest and truthful decision-making is crucial for governance and accountability in democracies. However, people sometimes take different perspectives of what it means to be honest and how to pursue truthfulness. Here we explore a continuum of perspectives from evidence-based reasoning, rooted in ascertainable facts and data, at one end, to intuitive decisions that are driven by feelings and subjective interpretations, at the other. We analyse the linguistic traces of those contrasting perspectives in congressional speeches from 1879 to 2022. We find that evidence-based language has continued to decline since the mid-1970s, together with a decline in legislative productivity. The decline was accompanied by increasing partisan polarization in Congress and rising income inequality in society. The results highlight the importance of evidence-based language in political decision-making.

Indexed as

Decision MakingIntuitionPoliticsSpeechHumansLanguageUnited States

Identifiers

PMID40210703
PMCPMC12185346

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.