Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40334234›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Did he or didn't he? Mixed evidence for the continued influence of retracted misinformation on person impressions.

Amy J Mickelberg, Bradley Walker, Ullrich K H Ecker, Piers D L Howe, Andrew Perfors, Nicolas Fay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. 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

6 authors.

Amy J MickelbergSchool of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia.
Bradley WalkerSchool of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia.
Ullrich K H EckerSchool of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia.
Piers D L HoweSchool of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6171-1381
Andrew PerforsSchool of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Nicolas FaySchool of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9866-2800

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Retracted misinformation often continues to influence event-related reasoning, but there is mixed evidence that it influences person impressions. A recent study found no evidence for the continued influence of retracted misinformation on person impressions across four experiments. However, the study used a dynamic impression-rating measure that may have obscured any continued influence effects. Here we report three experiments that tested for the continued influence of retracted misinformation on person impressions using a non-dynamic impression-formation task that is comparable to tasks used in event-related misinformation research. Participants formed an impression of a fictitious person based on a series of behaviour statements. A negative behaviour statement (e.g., "John kicked his pet dog hard in the head when it didn't come when called") was subsequently retracted or not retracted. Evidence for the continued influence of the retracted behaviour statement was found in one experiment; in the other two experiments the retracted misinformation was fully discounted. The mixed findings indicate that, unlike retracted event-related misinformation, retracted person-related misinformation does not consistently show a continued influence effect. Future research should investigate potential moderating factors, such as the attributes of the misinformation and the presence of social-category information about the protagonist, to reveal the mechanisms underlying the continued influence effect in person impressions.

Indexed as

CommunicationAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40334234
PMCPMC12058158

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.