ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
The field situation heuristics effect in online emergencies: the formation mechanism and differences of audience cognitive bias.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In the contemporary digital communication environment, online emergencies often trigger cognitive biases among audiences, affecting the health of public opinion ecosystems and potentially threatening social stability. While existing research has largely focused on the manifestations and consequences of cognitive biases, the formation mechanisms, particularly the role of contextual factors in the online environment, remain understudied. This study examines how field situational heuristics influence cognitive biases in online emergencies through the mediating pathways of adaptive expectations and implicit attributions. Methods: This research integrates field theory and heuristic information processing theory to construct a theoretical framework. Using anchoring heuristics, representativeness heuristics, and availability heuristics as independent variables, cognitive bias as the dependent variable, and adaptive expectations and implicit attributions as mediating variables, data were collected through questionnaires and analyzed using structural equation modeling with AMOS 22.0 statistical software. Results: The findings reveal that: (1) in online emergencies, anchoring heuristics, representativeness heuristics, and availability heuristics exert a significantly positive influence on cognitive biases, mediated by adaptive expectations and implicit attributions; (2) representativeness heuristics have the greatest impact on cognitive biases, followed by availability heuristics, and finally anchoring heuristics; (3) the effect of contextual heuristics on cognitive biases exhibits significant demographic differences both between and within groups. Discussion: The findings provide theoretical insights for improving online public opinion governance and enhancing audience media literacy. The study highlights the importance of understanding how situational heuristics shape cognitive outcomes in digital communication environments and offers practical implications for managing information dissemination during online emergencies.
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.