Repetition increases perceived truth equally for plausible and implausible statements
Abstract: Repetition increases the likelihood that a statement will be judged as true. This illusory truth effect is well-established; however, it has been argued that repetition will not affect belief in unambiguous statements. When individuals are faced with obviously true or false statements, repetition should have no impact. We report a simulation study and a preregistered experiment that investigate this idea. Contrary to many intuitions, our results suggest that belief in all statements is increased by repetition. The illusory truth effect is largest for ambiguous items, but this is due to the psychometric properties of the task, not an underlying psychological mechanism that blocks the impact of repetition for implausible items. Our results indicate that the illusory truth effect is highly robust and occurs across all levels of plausibility. Therefore, even highly implausible statements will become more plausible with repetition.
March 9, 2019
November 30, 2018
Inducing Self-Explanation: a Meta-Analysis
Kiran Bisra, Qing Liu, John C. Nesbit, Farimah Salimi, & Philip H. Winne
Abstract: Self-explanation is a process by which learners generate inferences about causal connections or conceptual relationships. A meta-analysis was conducted on research that investigated learning outcomes for participants who received self-explanation prompts while studying or solving problems. Our systematic search of relevant bibliographic databases identified 69 effect sizes (from 64 research reports) which met certain inclusion criteria. The overall weighted mean effect size using a random effects model was g = .55.
Read more
Abstract: Self-explanation is a process by which learners generate inferences about causal connections or conceptual relationships. A meta-analysis was conducted on research that investigated learning outcomes for participants who received self-explanation prompts while studying or solving problems. Our systematic search of relevant bibliographic databases identified 69 effect sizes (from 64 research reports) which met certain inclusion criteria. The overall weighted mean effect size using a random effects model was g = .55.
Read more
November 25, 2018
Reducing Violence in Non-controlling Ways: A Change Program Based on Self Determination Theory
This paper presents and examines the first school change program focusing on violence and caring based on self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan,2012). The program aimed at promoting teachers’ capacity to cope with violence and enhance caring without becoming more controlling.Comparisons of the effects of a 22-month-long program in three intervention schools and three control schools indicated that the program (a) reduced violent student behavior and controlling teacher behavior and (b) enhanced caring student behavior and active teacher response to violence. The results suggest that exposure to self-determination theory (SDT) concepts may promote a firm, yet non-controlling, teacher response to violence. More generally, the results highlight the potential for incorporating SDT ideas in violence reduction programs. Read full article here.
July 29, 2018
July 9, 2018
June 28, 2018
June 19, 2018
June 14, 2018
June 6, 2018
June 2, 2018
May 23, 2018
Critique of Pinker's Enlightenment Now
Here is an interesting critique of Steven Pinker's book Enlightenment Now by Jeremy Lent. Lent writes: "I agree with much of what Pinker has to say" but also "I believe it’s crucially important to take Pinker to task for some dangerously erroneous arguments he makes" and: "It’s precisely because of the validity of much of Pinker’s narrative that the flaws in his argument are so dangerous."
Steven Pinker’s Ideas About Progress Are Fatally Flawed. These Eight Graphs Show Why.
It’s time to reclaim the mantle of “Progress” for progressives. By falsely tethering the concept of progress to free market economics and centrist values, Steven Pinker has tried to appropriate a great idea for which he has no rightful claim. In Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress, published earlier this year, Steven Pinker argues that the human race has never had it so good as a result of values he attributes to the European Enlightenment of the 18th century. He berates those who focus on what is wrong with the world’s current condition as pessimists who only help to incite regressive reactionaries. Instead, he glorifies the dominant neoliberal, technocratic approach to solving the world’s problems as the only one that has worked in the past and will continue to lead humanity on its current triumphant path.
>> read full article
Steven Pinker’s Ideas About Progress Are Fatally Flawed. These Eight Graphs Show Why.
It’s time to reclaim the mantle of “Progress” for progressives. By falsely tethering the concept of progress to free market economics and centrist values, Steven Pinker has tried to appropriate a great idea for which he has no rightful claim. In Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress, published earlier this year, Steven Pinker argues that the human race has never had it so good as a result of values he attributes to the European Enlightenment of the 18th century. He berates those who focus on what is wrong with the world’s current condition as pessimists who only help to incite regressive reactionaries. Instead, he glorifies the dominant neoliberal, technocratic approach to solving the world’s problems as the only one that has worked in the past and will continue to lead humanity on its current triumphant path.
>> read full article
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
