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 *

165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36988856)

  • 1. Mechanisms in continued influence: The impact of misinformation corrections on source perceptions.
    Westbrook V; Wegener DT; Susmann MW
    Mem Cognit; 2023 Aug; 51(6):1317-1330. PubMed ID: 36988856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Vaccination against misinformation: The inoculation technique reduces the continued influence effect.
    Buczel KA; Szyszka PD; Siwiak A; Szpitalak M; Polczyk R
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(4):e0267463. PubMed ID: 35482715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The role of discomfort in the continued influence effect of misinformation.
    Susmann MW; Wegener DT
    Mem Cognit; 2022 Feb; 50(2):435-448. PubMed ID: 34533754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Reminders of Everyday Misinformation Statements Can Enhance Memory for and Beliefs in Corrections of Those Statements in the Short Term.
    Wahlheim CN; Alexander TR; Peske CD
    Psychol Sci; 2020 Oct; 31(10):1325-1339. PubMed ID: 32976064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Correcting false information in memory: manipulating the strength of misinformation encoding and its retraction.
    Ecker UK; Lewandowsky S; Swire B; Chang D
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2011 Jun; 18(3):570-8. PubMed ID: 21359617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. On the role of memory in misinformation corrections: Repeated exposure, correction durability, and source credibility.
    Kemp PL; Goldman AC; Wahlheim CN
    Curr Opin Psychol; 2024 Apr; 56():101783. PubMed ID: 38171060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. You don't have to tell a story! A registered report testing the effectiveness of narrative versus non-narrative misinformation corrections.
    Ecker UKH; Butler LH; Hamby A
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2020 Dec; 5(1):64. PubMed ID: 33300094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The continued influence of implied and explicitly stated misinformation in news reports.
    Rich PR; Zaragoza MS
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2016 Jan; 42(1):62-74. PubMed ID: 26147670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Does explaining the origins of misinformation improve the effectiveness of a given correction?
    Connor Desai S; Reimers S
    Mem Cognit; 2023 Feb; 51(2):422-436. PubMed ID: 36125658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Keeping track of 'alternative facts': The neural correlates of processing misinformation corrections.
    Gordon A; Quadflieg S; Brooks JCW; Ecker UKH; Lewandowsky S
    Neuroimage; 2019 Jun; 193():46-56. PubMed ID: 30872047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effects of source expertise and trustworthiness on recollection: the case of vaccine misinformation.
    Pluviano S; Della Sala S; Watt C
    Cogn Process; 2020 Aug; 21(3):321-330. PubMed ID: 32333126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Can you believe it? An investigation into the impact of retraction source credibility on the continued influence effect.
    Ecker UKH; Antonio LM
    Mem Cognit; 2021 May; 49(4):631-644. PubMed ID: 33452666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Memory failure predicts belief regression after the correction of misinformation.
    Swire-Thompson B; Dobbs M; Thomas A; DeGutis J
    Cognition; 2023 Jan; 230():105276. PubMed ID: 36174261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. How do forewarnings and post-warnings affect misinformation reliance? The impact of warnings on the continued influence effect and belief regression.
    Buczel KA; Siwiak A; Szpitalak M; Polczyk R
    Mem Cognit; 2024 Jan; ():. PubMed ID: 38261249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Correction format has a limited role when debunking misinformation.
    Swire-Thompson B; Cook J; Butler LH; Sanderson JA; Lewandowsky S; Ecker UKH
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2021 Dec; 6(1):83. PubMed ID: 34964924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Exploring factors that mitigate the continued influence of misinformation.
    Kan IP; Pizzonia KL; Drummey AB; Mikkelsen EJV
    Cogn Res Princ Implic; 2021 Nov; 6(1):76. PubMed ID: 34837587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.