Corrigendum: Hauntings, homeopathy, and the Hopkinsville Goblins: using pseudoscience to teach scientific thinking

Disproven but still believed: The role of information and individual differences in the prediction of topic‐related pseudoscience acceptance

“…To our knowledge, DI has never been included as a predictor in any regression-based model that has analyzed susceptibility to pseudoscientific claims. As we hypothesized (Hypothesis 3), our results suggest that having received information that discredits a particular claim is related to lower acceptance of that claim, which is crucial for educational interventions (Schmaltz & Lilienfeld, 2017). This is in line with previous work suggesting that offering information that refutes misconceptions about science is useful, as it helps recipients to re-evaluate their knowledge and consider alternatives to their current beliefs (Bensley et al, 2014;Lassonde et al, 2016).…”

“…Furthermore, this could also help us to identify predictors capable of explaining the variability in pseudoscience beliefs that have already received DI as well as whether the effect of DI depends on recipients' individual characteristics. This is especially relevant for the investigation of which variables might predict an effective integration of information in educational contexts in order to reduce beliefs in pseudoscience (Schmaltz & Lilienfeld, 2017).…”