ArticleScientific reports2025
People adhere to content warning labels even when they are wrong due to ecologically rational adaptations.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
In this paper, we build on the theory of ecologically rational heuristics to demonstrate the effect of erroneously placed warning labels on news headlines. Through three between-subjects experiments (n = 1313), we show that people rely on warning labels when choosing to trust news, even when those labels are wrong. We argue that this over-reliance on content labels is due to ecological rationality adaptations to current media environments, where warning labels are human-generated and mostly correct. Specifically, news consumers form heuristics based on past interactions with warning labels, and those heuristics can spill-over into new media environments where warning label errors are more frequent. The most important implication of these results is that it is more important to thoughtfully consider what information needs to be labeled than it is to attempt to label all false information. We discuss how this implication impacts our ability to scale warning label systems.
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.