ArticlePloS one2026
Do opinion leaders know more? Knowledge accuracy, self-confidence, and media use in agricultural issues.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
This empirical study examines the relationship between knowledge accuracy, self-confidence, and perceived opinion leadership in the context of agricultural issues. Using data from a representative online survey of the German population (n = 2,022), the study analyses how objective factual knowledge and subjective confidence are associated with individuals' self-reported role as opinion leaders, with particular attention to confidence calibration and the Dunning-Kruger Effect (DKE). The theoretical framing integrates Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) and the Two-Step Flow of Communication Model (TSFCM) as heuristic perspectives for understanding social learning and information exchange, while explicitly acknowledging their limitations in contemporary media environments. Across nine factual knowledge statements, the average correct response rate was 64%, while a substantial share of respondents exhibited measurable overconfidence, particularly for false statements. Individuals classified as opinion leaders report significantly higher confidence levels and more intensive use of both, traditional and digital media than the general population, yet they do not demonstrate higher knowledge accuracy. Regression analyses show that confidence and media use are substantially stronger predictors of perceived opinion leadership than factual knowledge. These findings highlight a systematic mismatch between confidence and knowledge among influential communicators in an information-sensitive domain. Rather than demonstrating misinformation effects directly, the results point to the importance of confidence calibration and critical source evaluation in public communication on agriculture and food. The study contributes to the literature by empirically linking confidence miscalibration and opinion leadership within a general population context. From an applied perspective, the findings underline the relevance of targeted communication and literacy initiatives that address overconfidence among highly confident communicators.
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.