Disfluency disrupts the confirmation bias
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Disrupting fluency in information processing or priming subjects for distrust reduces confirmation bias.
“For there is evidence that, for instance, disrupting the fluency in information processing (Hernandez and Preston 2013) or priming subjects for distrust (Mayo et al. 2014) reduces the bias.”
From What Is the Function of Confirmation Bias? (2022) · cites this paper as Hernandez and Preston 2013
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 21 · Cited by 152
- Authors
- Hernandez, I., & Preston, J. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hernandez, Ivan
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-01
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 178-182
- ISSN
- 0022-1031 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2088274580
- Cited by
- 152
- References
- 21
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 3
- FWCI
- 22.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Psychology of Social Influence
- Keywords
- confirmation bias, disfluency, persuasion, attitude change, analytical processing, cognitive load, political ideology, counter-attitudinal information
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
