The DOI matches its Crossref record; 102 of the 107 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The gateway belief model: A large-scale replication
Open accessOverview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In one experiment, Republicans received a message indicating that a clear majority of fellow Republicans agreed that the climate is changing and are taking action to combat climate change. These individuals — relative to those who did not receive this message — were more likely to report believing in climate change and to have climate-friendly intentions323,324.”
From Cognitive–motivational mechanisms of political polarization in social-communicative contexts (2022) · cites this paper as [323]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, the consensus messages in this study decreased ideological polarization by being more effective among conservatives than among liberals.”
From Factual belief polarization between Democrats and Republicans: source or epiphenomenon of ideological and affective polarization? (2024) · cites this paper as Van der Linden et al., 2019
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“another study, however, found that consensus messages effectively increased people's belief in global warming, as well as their support for climate action (Van der Linden et al., 2019).”
From Factual belief polarization between Democrats and Republicans: source or epiphenomenon of ideological and affective polarization? (2024) · cites this paper as Van der Linden et al., 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations.
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.4.422 · Cited by 11,335
Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical Mediation Analysis in the New Millennium
Hayes, A. F. (2009) · Communication Monographs · doi:10.1080/03637750903310360 · Cited by 9,757
The case for motivated reasoning.
Kunda, Z. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 · Cited by 9,022
Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises
Nickerson, R. S. (1998) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175 · Cited by 7,267
(1999) · Cited by 6,104
Chaiken, S. (1980) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.39.5.752 · Cited by 5,516
Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629 · Cited by 5,137
A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment.
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0046408 · Cited by 4,819
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Panagopoulos, 2016, Consensus cues, issue salience and policy preferences: An experimental investigation, North American Journal of Psychology, 18, 405
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response
Bavel, J. J. V., Baicker, K., Boggio, P. S., Capraro, V., Cichocka, A., Cikara, M., Crockett, M. J., Crum, A. J., Douglas, K. M., Druckman, J. N., et al. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z · Cited by 4,964
Countering Misinformation and Fake News Through Inoculation and Prebunking
Lewandowsky, S., & van der Linden, S. (2021) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/10463283.2021.1876983 · Cited by 773
Bouman, T., Verschoor, M., Albers, C. J., Böhm, G., Fisher, S. D., Poortinga, W., Whitmarsh, L. E., & Steg, L. (2020) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102061 · Cited by 560
Views of health professionals on climate change and health: a multinational survey study
Kotcher, J., Maibach, E. W., Miller, J., Campbell, E., Alqodmani, L., Maiero, M., & Wyns, A. (2021) · The Lancet Planetary Health · doi:10.1016/s2542-5196(21)00053-x · Cited by 569
Self-citationVraga, E. K., & Bode, L. (2020) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2020.1716500 · Cited by 486
Metadata
- Authors
- van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., & Maibach, E.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- George Mason University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Environmental Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-04
- Volume
- 62
- Pages
- 49-58
- ISSN
- 0272-4944 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2914105364
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 107
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 15
- FWCI
- 69.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Journal of Environmental Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
- Apollo
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
- Keywords
- climate change attitudes, belief updating, political ideology, conservatives, replication
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
