ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Cultivation mechanism of college students' ethical judgment in the post-truth era: a dual-dimensional model based on critical thinking and emotional education.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the post-truth era, the widespread use of social media and algorithmic recommendation technology has gradually made the influence of emotions and beliefs surpass objective facts. College students are particularly vulnerable to emotional and one-sided information, posing severe challenges to their ethical judgment. To address this issue, this study proposes and validates a dual-dimensional model based on critical thinking and emotional education. The aim is to systematically enhance college students' ethical judgment through collaborative intervention in cognitive and emotional dimensions. The study adopts a randomized controlled experiment design, selecting 600 college students to be divided into a dual-dimensional intervention group, a single-dimensional intervention group, and a control group. The effects are evaluated through pre-tests, post-intervention tests, and follow-up tests. The results show that the ethical judgment of the dual-dimensional intervention group significantly improves compared to the single-dimensional intervention group, and emotional education uniquely contributes to the emotional dimension of ethical judgment. Furthermore, post-truth sensitivity negatively moderates the intervention effect, indicating that individuals with a higher reliance on emotional information benefit relatively limitedly. This study not only fills the gap in ethical education research in the post-truth environment but also provides a modular and quantifiable intervention program for university curriculum design, possessing significant theoretical value and practical implications.
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.