Emotion Processes in Knowledge Revision

Trevors, Gregory; Kendeou, Panayiota; Butterfuss, Reese

doi:10.1080/0163853x.2017.1312201

Cited by 24 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, low-credibility sources disrupted knowledge revision processes and resulted in poorer performance on a posttest than high-credibility sources. In another study, Trevors, Kendeou, and Butterfuss (2017) investigated the moment-by-moment emotion processes during knowledge revision. Results showed that the emotion of surprise fluctuated in intensity at critical points during the knowledge revision process, suggesting the need to examine further the effects of emotions on competing activation and revision (see also Trevors, Muis, Pekrun, Sinatra, & Winne, 2016).…”

Section: The Knowledge Revision Components (Krec) Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge revision through the lenses of the three-pronged approach

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, we employed the three-pronged approach to determine the actual cognitive processes theorized in knowledge revision. First, the Knowledge Revision Components (KReC) framework was identified as the guiding theory. Second, think-aloud analysis highlighted at which points in refutation texts readers detected discrepancies between their incorrect, commonsense beliefs and the correct beliefs, and the exact processes with which they dealt with these discrepancies-successfully or unsuccessfully, as indicated by posttest scores. Third, corroborating reading-time data and posttest data demonstrated that the structure of the refutation texts facilitated the coactivation and integration of the explanation with the commonsense belief, resulting in knowledge revision. Finally, an analysis directly connected the processes identified during think-aloud to sentence reading times. These findings systematically identify the cognitive processes theorized during knowledge revision and, in doing so, provide evidence for the conditions for revision outlined in the KReC framework.

show abstract

Section: The Knowledge Revision Components (Krec) Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge revision through the lenses of the three-pronged approach

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With few notable exceptions, empirical research on refutations largely supports this theoretical account. At the point of contradicting a misconception, refutations are found to trigger cognitive conflict and epistemic emotions of surprise, curiosity, and confusion (Kendeou et al, 2019;Kendeou et al, 2013;Trevors, 2021;Trevors et al, 2017), which are associated with detecting and resolving knowledge inconsistencies via greater informational seeking, critical thinking, and elaborative learning processes (D'Mello et al, 2014;Foster & Keane, 2019;Muis, Chevrier, et al, 2018;Muis, Sinatra, et al, 2018). Refutations are associated with higher levels of epistemic judgements regarding the plausibility, credibility, and quality of refutational evidence, which in turn predict revising incorrect beliefs (Flemming et al, 2020;Lombardi et al, 2016;Muis et al, 2020).…”

Section: Belief Change Via Refutation Textmentioning

confidence: 97%

It’s Contagious! The Effects of Gamifying Refutation Texts on Emotions and Learning

Trevors¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study investigated the effects of gamifying refutations on emotions and learning. Refutations have a substantial body of evidence supporting their use to correct misconceptions, yet reduced efficacy has been observed for some topics that induce negative emotional reactions. We tested whether gamification could mitigate these limits given that it capitalizes on positive affective engagement. From May to December 2020, approximately 200,000 individuals were recruited from social media in Canada to engage with a non-game interactive survey as a control or a fully gamified platform focused on correcting COVID-19 misconceptions. Gamification resulted in higher levels of happiness and anxiety and lower levels of anger and skepticism in response to having misconceptions corrected by refutations. Further, participants who engaged with gamified refutations retained correct information after a brief period. Finally, positive emotions and anxiety positively predicted and negative emotions largely negatively predicted retention and support for related public health policies. Implications for scaling up and reinforcing the benefits of refutations for public engagement with science are discussed.

show abstract

“…Factors that influence the allocation of activation will likewise affect the probability and strength of knowledge revision (Jones et al, 2015). We contend that the competing activation mechanism may also vary as a function of emotional content (Trevors et al, 2017). We test this prediction in the current studies.…”

Section: Integrating Emotions and Knowledge Revisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of positive and negative emotional text content on knowledge revision

Trevors

Kendeou

2020

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Across three experiments, we sought to determine the effects of positive and negative emotional content in refutation texts on misconceptions about vaccines. The addition of negative emotional content to texts that identify, refute, and explain vaccine misconceptions improved knowledge revision observed during reading (Experiment 1). However, the addition of positive emotional content to refutation texts weakened this effect (Experiment 2). A direct comparison between negative and positive emotional content provided corroborating evidence for these findings (Experiment 3). Across experiments, results show that all refutation texts (with or without positive or negative emotional content) improved learning assessed after reading. These findings show the differential effects of emotional content on processing misconceptions about an important socio-scientific topic and provide consistent support for refutation texts as a potentially useful tool in these corrective efforts.

show abstract

Emotion Processes in Knowledge Revision

Cited by 24 publications

References 72 publications

Knowledge revision through the lenses of the three-pronged approach

Knowledge revision through the lenses of the three-pronged approach

It’s Contagious! The Effects of Gamifying Refutation Texts on Emotions and Learning

The effects of positive and negative emotional text content on knowledge revision

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About