The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Readers' reliance on source credibility in the service of comprehension.
Abstract
The current project examined the impact of knowledge about the credibility of sources on readers' processing of texts. Participants read texts in which information about characters was provided by either a credible or a noncredible source; this information suggested that the character potentially possessed a particular trait. A subsequent text episode offered the opportunity for participants to apply any inferred trait to their understanding of unfolding story events. In Experiment 1, participants' moment-by-moment reading times indicated strong expectations for characters to behave in trait-consistent ways, with little effect of credibility on those expectations. Experiments 2 and 3 provided participants with additional encouragement to attend to credibility during reading, but these experiments also revealed little influence of credibility. In Experiment 4, in addition to being given added encouragement, participants were explicitly asked to evaluate the likelihood of future text events; under these conditions, expectations for story outcomes were influenced by the credibility of information sources. This influence was mediated by the degree to which participants self-reported relying on credibility during the task. These findings have implications for contemporary accounts of text comprehension, persuasion, and individual differences in credibility assessment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“This aligns with previous cognitive findings that readers often disregard source credibility when simply trying to understand a text (Sparks & Rapp, 2011).”
From Authorship Attribution and Trust in AI-Generated Scientific Texts: An Experimental Study (2026) · cites this paper as Sparks & Rapp, 2011
In the citing paper
“Experiments by Sparks and Rapp (2011) showed minimal effects of source credibility on online processing and comprehension unless readers were prompted to consider it, suggesting that accurate AI text should yield comprehension comparable to human text.”
From Authorship Attribution and Trust in AI-Generated Scientific Texts: An Experimental Study (2026) · cites this paper as Sparks & Rapp, 2011
Citations
Cites
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116 · Cited by 5,359
The Influence of Source Credibility on Communication Effectiveness
Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/266350 · Cited by 3,543
The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades' Evidence
Pornpitakpan, C. (2004) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02547.x · Cited by 2,205 · cited 2×
“…a function of the timing of source information (Homer & Kahle, 1990; Tormala, Brin˜ol, & Petty, 2007), the credibility of previous messages (Tormala & Clarkson, 2007, 2008), and the strength of arguments (Kaufman, Stasson, & Hart, 1999; for reviews, see Petty & Wegener, 1998; Pornpitakpan, 2004).”
Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.2307/747886 · Cited by 518
Cited by
Sorted by citations
How Can Psychological Science Help Counter the Spread of Fake News?
van der Linden, S., Roozenbeek, J., Maertens, R., Basol, M., Kácha, O., Rathje, S., & Traberg, C. S. (2021) · The Spanish Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1017/sjp.2021.23 · Cited by 71
“Indeed, source credibility may matter little when individuals do not pay attention to the source (Albarracín et al., 2017; Sparks & Rapp, 2011), and despite highly credible sources the continued influence of misinformation may persist (Ecker & Antonio, 2020).”
BackgroundAuthorship Attribution and Trust in AI-Generated Scientific Texts: An Experimental Study
Matveev, M., & Matveeva, E. (2026) · Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики · doi:10.17323/1813-8918-2026-2-253-262
Metadata
- Authors
- Sparks, J. R., & Rapp, D. N.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
- Published
- 2011
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 230-247
- ISSN
- 1939-1285
- 0278-7393
- Cited by
- 62
- References
- 4
- Language
- en
- Funders
- Institute of Education Sciences (R305B080027)
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