Repeating stereotypes: Increased belief and subsequent discrimination

Unkelbach, Christian; Taşbaş, Esra Hatice Oğuz

doi:10.1002/ejsp.2835

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…People perceive statements they have encountered before as truer than new ones (Hasher et al, 1977; for meta-analysis, see Dechêne et al, 2010). This truth effect manifests across diverse domains, including consumer advertising (Johar & Roggeveen, 2007), social-political opinions (Arkes et al, 1989), rumors (DiFonzo et al, 2016), health (Unkelbach & Speckmann, 2021;Morgan & Cappella, 2023), and stereotypes (Oğuz Taşbaş & Unkelbach, 2022;. The truth effect is remarkably difficult to resist; repetition increases truth judgments even when participants are explicitly told at the time of exposure that the information is false (Begg et al, 1992;Skurnik et al, 2005;Unkelbach & Stahl, 2009).…”

Section: Repetition Increases Perceived Truth Of Interpersonal Statem...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Repetition increases perceived truth of interpersonal statements from both politically congruent and incongruent sources

Mattavelli,

Béna,

Corneille

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People judge repeated information as truer than new information. In politics, this truth effect may be used to manipulate beliefs and evaluations of other politicians (e.g., by repeatedly derogating an opponent). We investigate the truth effect for such statements about others in political contexts. In two pre-registered experiments, we examined how repetition and source-recipient political congruency influence believability of statements about unknown individuals and the evaluation of these individuals. In Experiment 1 (N=234), using negative statements, and Experiment 2 (N=235), using both negative and positive statements, the truth effect emerged consistently: repeated statements were rated as truer than new ones. Notably, this effect was not significantly influenced by the political congruency between statement source (manipulated political affiliation) and recipient (measured political affiliation). Turning to evaluations, a higher number of repetitions strengthened positive evaluations for targets described by positive traits, and increased to a lesser extent negative evaluations for targets described negatively. Our findings indicate that, under the conditions examined here, repetition increases believability of interpersonal statements to the same extent across political divides.

show abstract

Section: Repetition Increases Perceived Truth Of Interpersonal Statem...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Repetition increases perceived truth of interpersonal statements from both politically congruent and incongruent sources

Mattavelli,

Béna,

Corneille

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regardless of wheter the truth effect is epistemiologically justified, it has been repeatedly found with various statements on several domains. For instance, repetition increases truth judgments of consumer advertising (Johar & Roggeveen, 2007), social-political opinions (Arkes et al, 1989), rumors (DiFonzo et al, 2016), health , stereotypes (Oğuz Taşbaş & Unkelbach, 2022), and importantly, both fake news (Pennycook et al, 2018) and conspiracy statements (Béna et al, 2023). This domain generality of the truth effect shows its pervasiveness, including in current societal issues associated with the spread of misinformation.…”

Section: The Truth Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

People underestimate the influence of repetition on truth judgments (and more so for themselves than for others)

Mattavelli¹,

Béna²,

Corneille³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People judge repeated statements as more true than new statements: a truth effect. In three preregistered experiments (N = 463), we examined whether people predict others’ truth judgments to be more biased by repetition than their own: a bias blind spot for the truth effect. In Experiment 1, using uncertain but moderately plausible statements, participants predicted repetition to increase truth judgments in general. There was no significant difference between predictions for the self and others. Experiment 2 used implausible statements and found a significant bias blind spot: participants predicted a larger effect of repetition for others than for themselves. Experiment 3 considered again moderately plausible statements, but this time in a larger sample of participants. Critically, we compared actual performance after a two-day delay with participants’ predictions for the self and others. This experiment replicated the bias blind spot. Importantly, participants underestimated the magnitude of the truth effect. Finally, predictions and actual truth effect scores were not significantly related to each other. Overall, the results highlight that although people assume repetition to influence their truth judgments, they generally underestimate the effect’s magnitude, particularly for themselves.

show abstract

“…The truth effect is a robust and pervasive phenomenon (for a metanalysis, see Dechêne et al, 2010). Repetition increases truth in various domains, including consumer advertising (Johar & Roggeveen, 2007), social-political opinion (Arkes et al, 1989), rumors (DiFonzo et al, 2016, health and stereotypes (Oğuz Taşbaş & Unkelbach, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Questioning” the Truth Effect: Processing information in interrogative form reduces (but does not cancel) repetition-induced truth

Mattavelli¹,

Bianchi²,

Motterlini³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People attribute higher truth to statements they have previously been exposed to, as compared to new ones. This “truth effect” is pervasive and resistant to many interventions aimed to reduce it. In two pre-registered experiments, we explored whether processing unknown information in an interrogative form can contrast repetition-induced truth. In Experiment 1 (N=100), participants judged the truth value of both repeated and unrepeated sentences. For half of the participants, sentences appeared in a declarative form; for the other half, sentences appeared in an interrogative form, both at exposure and at judgment. Whereas in the declarative condition participants showed the classic truth effect, the effect was not significant in the interrogative condition. In Experiment 2 (N=325), an additional interrogative condition was introduced whereby sentences were presented to participants as questions at exposure, but not at judgment. Compared to the declarative condition, the truth effect was reduced, but still significant, in the two interrogative conditions. Moreover, comparing the two interrogative conditions showed that the truth effect was smaller when sentences were presented as questions only in the exposure phase. We discuss the potential explanations for the impact of questioning on the truth effect, as well as the implications for debiasing strategies.

show abstract

Repeating stereotypes: Increased belief and subsequent discrimination

Cited by 5 publications

References 64 publications

Repetition increases perceived truth of interpersonal statements from both politically congruent and incongruent sources

Repetition increases perceived truth of interpersonal statements from both politically congruent and incongruent sources

People underestimate the influence of repetition on truth judgments (and more so for themselves than for others)

“Questioning” the Truth Effect: Processing information in interrogative form reduces (but does not cancel) repetition-induced truth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About