Argument evaluation and production in the correction of political innumeracy

References

• Aarøe, L., & Petersen, M. B. (2020). Cognitive biases and communication strength in social networks: The case of episodic frames. British Journal of Political Science, 50(4), 1561–1581. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123418000273
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altay, S., Majima, Y., & Mercier, H. (2020). It’s my idea! Reputation management and idea appropriation. Evolution and Human Behavior, 41(3), 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2019.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartlett, S. F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bode, L., & Vraga, E. K. (2018). See something, say something: Correction of global health misinformation on social media. Health Communication, 33(9), 1131–1140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2017.1331312
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bøggild, T., Aarøe, L., & Petersen, M. B. (2021). Citizens as complicits: Distrust in politicians and biased social dissemination of political information. American Political Science Review, 115(1), 269–285. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055420000805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonaccio, S., & Dalal, R. S. (2006). Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101(2), 127–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson, T. N. (2018). Modeling political information transmission as a game of telephone. The Journal of Politics, 80(1), 348–352. https://doi.org/10.1086/694767
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson, T. N. (2019). Through the grapevine: Informational consequences of interpersonal political communication. American Political Science Review, 113(2), 325–339. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305541900008X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelain, T., Bernard, S., & Mercier, H. (2018). Evidence that two-year-old children are sensitive to information presented in arguments. Infancy, 23(1), 124–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/infa.12202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American Political Science Review, 101(4), 637–655. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055407070554
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Claidière, N., Trouche, E., & Mercier, H. (2017). Argumentation and the diffusion of counter-intuitive beliefs. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 146(7), 1052–1066. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000323
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coppock, A. (2019). Generalizing from survey experiments conducted on mechanical Turk: A replication approach. Political Science Research and Methods, 7(3), 613–628. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2018.10
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delli Carpini, M., & Keeter, S. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilens, M. (2001). Political ignorance and collective policy preferences. American Political Science Review, 95(2), 379–396. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055401002222
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gino, F., & Moore, D. A. (2007). Effects of task difficulty on use of advice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.539
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gino, F. (2008). Do we listen to advice just because we paid for it? The impact of advice cost on its use. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 107(2), 234–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg, M. H., van der Linden, S., Maibach, E., & Leiserowitz, A. (2019). Discussing global warming leads to greater acceptance of climate science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(30), 14804–14805. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1906589116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grigorieff, A., Roth, C., & Ubfal, D. (2020). Does information change attitudes toward immigrants? Demography, 57(3), 1117–1143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-020-00882-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hahn, U., & Oaksford, M. (2007). The rationality of informal argumentation: A bayesian approach to reasoning fallacies. Psychological Review, 114(3), 704–732. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.3.704
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hampton, K. N., Shin, I., & Lu, W. (2017). Social media and political discussion: When online presence silences offline conversation. Information, Communication & Society, 20(7), 1090–1107. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1218526
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopkins, D. J., Sides, J., & Citrin, J. (2019). The muted consequences of correct information about immigration. The Journal of Politics, 81(1), 315–320. https://doi.org/10.1086/699914
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huckfeldt, R., Beck, P. A., Dalton, R. J., & Levine, J. (1995). Political environments, cohesive social groups, and the communication of public opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 39(4), 1025–1054. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111668
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, K. B. (2016). Two-step and multistep flows of communication. In K. B. Jensen, R. T. Craig, J. Pooley, & E. W. Rothenbuhler (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Communication Theory and Philosophy, (pp. 1–11). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118766804.wbiect186
   Google Scholar
• Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communications. Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Klapper, J. T. (1960). The effects of mass communication. The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kubin, E., Puryear, C., Schein, C., & Gray, K. (2021). Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(6), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2008389118
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of arguments. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schwieder, D., & Rich, R. F. (2000). Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. The Journal of Politics, 62(3), 790–816. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kull, S. (1995). What the public knows that Washington doesn’t. Foreign Policy, 101(101), 102–115. https://doi.org/10.2307/1149411
   Google Scholar
• Li, J., & Wagner, M. W. (2020). The value of not knowing: Partisan cue-taking and belief updating of the uninformed, the ambiguous, and the misinformed. Journal of Communication, 70(5), 646–669. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqaa022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercier, H. (2016). The Argumentative Theory: Predictions and Empirical Evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(9), 689–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.07.001 27450708
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercier, H. (2020). Not born yesterday: The science of who we trust and what we believe. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mercier, H., Majima, Y., Claidière, N., & Léone, J. (2019). Obstacles to the spread of unintuitive beliefs. Evolutionary Human Sciences, 1, e10. ‘ https://doi.org/10.1017/ehs.2019.10
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Minson, J. A., Liberman, V., & Ross, L. (2011). Two to tango: Effects of collaboration and disagreement on dyadic judgment. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(10), 1325–1338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211410436
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moussaïd, M., Herzog, S. M., Kämmer, J. E., & Hertwig, R. (2017). Reach and speed of judgment propagation in the laboratory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(16), 4117–4122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1611998114
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Prentice–Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Perkins, D. N. (1989). Reasoning as it is and could be: An empirical perspective. In D. M. Topping, D. C. Crowell, & V. N. Kobayashi (Eds.), Thinking across cultures: The third international conference on thinking (pp. 175–194). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1998). Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. In D. T. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 323–390). McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1999). The elaboration-likelihood model: Current status and controversies. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 41–72). The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rasch, D., & Guiard, V. (2004). The robustness of parametric statistical methods. Psychology Science, 46, 175–208.
   Google Scholar
• Resnick, L. B., Salmon, M., Zeitz, C. M., Wathen, S. H., & Holowchak, M. (1993). Reasoning in conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3-4), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.1993.9649029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sides, J. (2016). Stories or science? Facts, frames, and policy attitudes. American Politics Research, 44(3), 387–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X15610190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sides, J., & Citrin, J. (2007). How large the huddled masses? The causes and consequences of public misperceptions about immigrant populations. In Annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association.
   Google Scholar
• Soll, J. B., & Larrick, R. P. (2009). Strategies for revising judgment: how (and how well) people use others’ opinions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(3), 780–805. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015145 19379049
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperber, D., Clément, F., Heintz, C., Mascaro, O., Mercier, H., Origgi, G., & Wilson, D. (2010). Epistemic vigilance. Mind & Language, 25(4), 359–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2010.01394.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walter, N., Cohen, J., Holbert, R. L., & Morag, Y. (2020). Fact-checking: A meta-analysis of what works and for whom. Political Communication, 37(3), 350–375. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2019.1668894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaniv, I. (2004). Receiving other people’s advice: Influence and benefit. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 93(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2003.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar