Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40374677›Full record

ArticleNPJ science of learning2025

Investigating epistemic emotions experienced while reading refutation texts through a fine-grained measure of emotion.

Yi-Lun Jheng, Leen Catrysse, Sander Van de Cruys, Panayiota Kendeou, Karolien Poels, David Gijbels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ science of learning, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Yi-Lun JhengDepartment of Training and Educational Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. yi-lun.jheng@uantwerpen.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5152-4192
Leen CatrysseDepartment of Online Learning and Instruction, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Open Universiteit, Heerlen, the Netherlands.
Sander Van de CruysAntwerp Social Lab, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Panayiota KendeouDepartment of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Karolien PoelsDepartment of Communication Studies, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
David GijbelsDepartment of Training and Educational Sciences, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8369-9213

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current study addressed the often-overlooked role of epistemic emotions in refuting misinformation by replicating and expanding on the work of Trevors and Kendeou (2020). It broadened the participant pool beyond well-educated college students and introduced a novel dynamic measure, "DynamicEmo", to capture epistemic emotions experienced while reading refutation texts in a more fine-grained way. Results reaffirmed that positive, negative, and standard refutation texts (vs. non-refutation texts) effectively enhanced knowledge revision. Analysis using DynamicEmo revealed that paragraphs presenting inconsistent information (misinformation+correction) in refutation texts elicited activating (curiosity and confusion) or suppressed deactivating epistemic emotions (boredom). Notably, in-the-moment negative epistemic emotions, triggered by critical correct-outcome sentences, were negatively predictive of knowledge revision, highlighting the significance of emotions experienced during critical parts of refutation text reading. This study demonstrated the key role of epistemic emotions in knowledge revision, while offering more granular insights through dynamic emotion measurement compared to traditional post-hoc self-reports.

Identifiers

PMID40374677
PMCPMC12081847

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.