Dulcie Irving|Robbie Clark|Stephan Lewandowsky|Peter J. Allen
Correcting statistical misinformation about scientific findings in the media: Causation versus correlation.
University of Bristol|University of Bristol|University of Western Australia|University of Bristol|University of Bristol
although retractions significantly reduce number references people make misinformation retracted information nevertheless persists memory continuing influence reasoning one hundred twentynine lay participants completed adaptation traditional continued influence paradigm set identify whether possible debunk piece common statistical misinformation inappropriate causal inference based correlation hypothesized participants correction condition would make fewer causal inferences misinformation correlational inferences correction nocorrection condition additional secondary hypotheses number references made misinformation correction would moderated level trust science scientists amount television participants watch although secondary hypotheses supported data strongly supported primary hypotheses study provides evidence efficacy corrections misinformation correlational evidence inappropriately reported causal psycinfo database record c 2022 apa rights reserved