Cited by 83Educational Games and GamificationDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

Implicit and explicit training in the mitigation of cognitive bias through the use of a serious game

Open access
Dunbar, Norah E., Miller, Claude H., Adame, Bradley J., Elizondo, Javier, Wilson, Scott N., Lane, Brianna L., Kauffman, Abigail Allums, Bessarabova, Elena +7 more·2014·Computers in Human Behavior

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.053

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Games are uniquely suited to some forms of cognitive training because they give the player freedom to make choices and experience feedback, providing opportunities for experiential learning.

    “As Dunbar et al explain [8], games are uniquely suited to some forms of cognitive training as they give the player freedom to make choices and experience feedback on the effects of those choices; in other words, they provide opportunities for experiential learning [61].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dunbar, N. E., Miller, C. H., Adame, B. J., Elizondo, J., Wilson, S. N., Lane, B. L., Kauffman, A. A., Bessarabova, E., Jensen, M. L., Straub, S. K., Lee, Y.-H., Burgoon, J. K., Valacich, J. J., Jenkins, J., & Zhang, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Oklahoma (US)
  • Arizona State University (US)
  • The University of Texas of the Permian Basin (US)
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • Brigham Young University (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Dunbar, Norah E.
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-08
Volume
37
Pages
307-318
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1966364550
Cited by
83
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4 · 2013: 1
FWCI
14.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • ScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Air Force Research Laboratory
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords
cognitive bias mitigation, serious games, heuristic-systematic model, fundamental attribution error, confirmation bias, Macbeth, explicit instruction, implicit instruction, decision-making, hypothesis generation, evidence analysis, game-based training

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review