2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.057
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How attitude strength biases information processing and evaluation on the web

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
43
0
4

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
3
43
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Text-belief consistency effects occurred in research regardless of whether prior beliefs were assessed only with one item (Kardash & Howell, 2000;Kardash & Scholes, 1996;Mason & Boscolo, 2004;McCrudden & Barnes, 2016;McCrudden & Sparks, 2014;Wiley, 2005) or with multiple items representing the two divergent argumentative stances on the controversy (Kobayashi, 2010(Kobayashi, , 2014Maier & Richter, 2013, 2014, 2016avan Strien et al, 2014;van Strien et al, 2016). Moreover, text-belief consistency effects also occurred even when they were not directly the focus of the research (Anmarkrud et al, 2014), and they were even stronger than the effects of the interventions (Kobayashi, 2010).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Text-belief consistency effects occurred in research regardless of whether prior beliefs were assessed only with one item (Kardash & Howell, 2000;Kardash & Scholes, 1996;Mason & Boscolo, 2004;McCrudden & Barnes, 2016;McCrudden & Sparks, 2014;Wiley, 2005) or with multiple items representing the two divergent argumentative stances on the controversy (Kobayashi, 2010(Kobayashi, , 2014Maier & Richter, 2013, 2014, 2016avan Strien et al, 2014;van Strien et al, 2016). Moreover, text-belief consistency effects also occurred even when they were not directly the focus of the research (Anmarkrud et al, 2014), and they were even stronger than the effects of the interventions (Kobayashi, 2010).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research has also indicated that preexisting topic beliefs are used to assess whether unsupported conclusions have been made against the available evidence (Braasch, Bråten, Britt, Steffens, & Strømsø, 2014) and information content inconsistent with reader's prior beliefs is evaluated as less reliable (Bråten et al, 2016). Moreover, the biased effects of prior attitude strength on both processing and evaluation of sources and information has been documented in an eye-tracking study by van Strien et al (2016). Participants with a strong attitude toward the current topic (i.e., organic foods) paid less attention to the logos of the websites with information inconsistent with their attitude.…”
Section: Source Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An additional factor that may play a role, especially when reading about controversial issues, is a reader's prior beliefs, or stance, on an issue. This may affect how a reader interprets textual evidence (Nickerson, 1998) or evaluates websites (van Strien, Kammerer, Brand-Gruwel, & Boshuizen, 2016).…”
Section: Reading Skills and Prior Knowledge In Relation To The Evaluamentioning
confidence: 99%