These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30825195)

  • 1. The effectiveness of short-format refutational fact-checks.
    Ecker UKH; O'Reilly Z; Reid JS; Chang EP
    Br J Psychol; 2020 Feb; 111(1):36-54. PubMed ID: 30825195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The global effectiveness of fact-checking: Evidence from simultaneous experiments in Argentina, Nigeria, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.
    Porter E; Wood TJ
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2021 Sep; 118(37):. PubMed ID: 34507996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Can corrections spread misinformation to new audiences? Testing for the elusive familiarity backfire effect.
    Ecker UKH; Lewandowsky S; Chadwick M
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2020 Aug; 5(1):41. PubMed ID: 32844338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Examining the replicability of backfire effects after standalone corrections.
    Prike T; Blackley P; Swire-Thompson B; Ecker UKH
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2023 Jul; 8(1):39. PubMed ID: 37395864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Correcting vaccine misinformation: A failure to replicate familiarity or fear-driven backfire effects.
    Ecker UKH; Sharkey CXM; Swire-Thompson B
    PLoS One; 2023; 18(4):e0281140. PubMed ID: 37043493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Combining refutations and social norms increases belief change.
    Ecker UK; Sanderson JA; McIlhiney P; Rowsell JJ; Quekett HL; Brown GD; Lewandowsky S
    Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2023 Jun; 76(6):1275-1297. PubMed ID: 35748514
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Feeling angry: the effects of vaccine misinformation and refutational messages on negative emotions and vaccination attitude.
    Featherstone JD; Zhang J
    J Health Commun; 2020 Sep; 25(9):692-702. PubMed ID: 33103600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The backfire effect after correcting misinformation is strongly associated with reliability.
    Swire-Thompson B; Miklaucic N; Wihbey JP; Lazer D; DeGutis J
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2022 Jul; 151(7):1655-1665. PubMed ID: 35130012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Listening to Misinformation while Driving: Cognitive Load and the Effectiveness of (Repeated) Corrections.
    Sanderson JA; Bowden V; Swire-Thompson B; Lewandowsky S; Ecker UKH
    J Appl Res Mem Cogn; 2023 Sep; 12(3):325-334. PubMed ID: 37829768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Not wallowing in misery - retractions of negative misinformation are effective in depressive rumination.
    Chang EP; Ecker UKH; Page AC
    Cogn Emot; 2019 Aug; 33(5):991-1005. PubMed ID: 30319039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of fact-checking social media vaccine misinformation on attitudes toward vaccines.
    Zhang J; Featherstone JD; Calabrese C; Wojcieszak M
    Prev Med; 2021 Apr; 145():106408. PubMed ID: 33388335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Why the backfire effect does not explain the durability of political misperceptions.
    Nyhan B
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2021 Apr; 118(15):. PubMed ID: 33837144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Multiple-choice quizzes improve memory for misinformation debunks, but do not reduce belief in misinformation.
    Collier JR; Pillai RM; Fazio LK
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2023 Jun; 8(1):37. PubMed ID: 37278735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The role of familiarity in correcting inaccurate information.
    Swire B; Ecker UKH; Lewandowsky S
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2017 Dec; 43(12):1948-1961. PubMed ID: 28504531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluating the Impact of Attempts to Correct Health Misinformation on Social Media: A Meta-Analysis.
    Walter N; Brooks JJ; Saucier CJ; Suresh S
    Health Commun; 2021 Nov; 36(13):1776-1784. PubMed ID: 32762260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Time pressure reduces misinformation discrimination ability but does not alter response bias.
    Sultan M; Tump AN; Geers M; Lorenz-Spreen P; Herzog SM; Kurvers RHJM
    Sci Rep; 2022 Dec; 12(1):22416. PubMed ID: 36575232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Refuting misinformation: Examining theoretical underpinnings of refutational interventions.
    Amazeen MA; Krishna A
    Curr Opin Psychol; 2024 Apr; 56():101774. PubMed ID: 38101246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. How organisations promoting vaccination respond to misinformation on social media: a qualitative investigation.
    Steffens MS; Dunn AG; Wiley KE; Leask J
    BMC Public Health; 2019 Oct; 19(1):1348. PubMed ID: 31640660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparing the effects of simple and refutational narratives in misinformation correction: The moderating roles of correction placement and issue involvement.
    Wang W; Huang Y
    Public Underst Sci; 2023 Nov; 32(8):985-1002. PubMed ID: 37194942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Combating Misinformation by Sharing the Truth: a Study on the Spread of Fact-Checks on Social Media.
    Li J; Chang X
    Inf Syst Front; 2022 Jun; ():1-15. PubMed ID: 35729965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.