The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Scientific agreement can neutralize politicization of facts
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, these experiments use thin informational treatments consisting of a single piece of information. Researchers typically present to participants a single fact relevant to a topic (e.g., ref. 4) or one argument either supporting or opposing a policy proposal (e.g., ref. 23).”
From Factual knowledge can reduce attitude polarization (2025) · cites this paper as [4]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Consistent with this view, a growing number of empirical studies have uncovered evidence that people update their political attitudes and beliefs in line with evidence (e.g., refs. 4,13,27–29) and arguments23,30,31 presented to them.”
From Factual knowledge can reduce attitude polarization (2025) · cites this paper as [4]
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
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion
Cialdini, R. B. (1993) · Cited by 2,563
The Polarizing Impact of Science Literacy and Numeracy on Perceived Climate Change Risks
Braman, D., Kahan, D. M., Peters, E. M., Wittlin, M., Slovic, P., Ouellette, L. L., & Mandel, G. N. (2012) · Scholarly Commons - George Washington University Law School (George Washington University) · Cited by 2,421
Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design
Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Kuhn, M. A. (2012) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2011.08.009 · Cited by 1,469
The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion
Bolsen, T., Druckman, J. N., & Cook, F. L. (2014) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-013-9238-0 · Cited by 891
Norm Perception as a Vehicle for Social Change
Tankard, M. E., & Paluck, E. L. (2016) · Social Issues and Policy Review · doi:10.1111/sipr.12022 · Cited by 883
Drummond, C., & Fischhoff, B. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1704882114 · Cited by 607
The Effect of a Supreme Court Decision Regarding Gay Marriage on Social Norms and Personal Attitudes
Tankard, M. E., & Paluck, E. L. (2017) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797617709594 · Cited by 502
Hogan, K. (1996) · Cited by 110
The crisis of politicization within and beyond science
Druckman, J. N. (2017) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0183-5 · Cited by 88
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Nat. Hum. Behav. 1, 0116 (2017).
- Kahan, D. M. et al. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 732–735 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
- McCright, A. & Dunlap, R. Environ. Sci. Policy 50, 26–35 (2008).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–136 of 136
Fasce, A. (2022) · Journal of Social and Political Psychology · doi:10.5964/jspp.8051 · Cited by 10
Fu, H., Li, Y., Wu, Z., Tan, Y., He, W., & Zuo, J. (2025) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-025-05675-1 · Cited by 7
COVID-19 vaccine skeptics are persuaded by pro-vaccine expert consensus messaging.
Białek, M., Meyers, E. A., Arriaga, P., Harateh, D., & Urbanek, A. (2023) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied · doi:10.1037/xap0000467 · Cited by 16
Does Ability Contribute to Partisan Bias?: Evaluating Scientific Research about Political Topics
Bergan, D. E. (2021) · Communication Studies · doi:10.1080/10510974.2021.1876124 · Cited by 6
Partisan winds: Group-level polarization and issue-framing propel attitudes about local wind farms
Marcos, A., Hartmann, P., Bessette, D., & Árvai, J. (2024) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2024.103848 · Cited by 7
Alper, S., Yelbuz, B. E., & Konukoglu, K. (2023) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/jdm.2023.33 · Cited by 5
Spitz, A., Abu-Akel, A. M., & West, R. (2021) · International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/3442381.3450019 · Cited by 6
Reasoning about Climate ChangePreprint
Bagó, B., Rand, D. G., & Pennycook, G. (2020) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-128506/v1 · Cited by 5
Courtney, S. L., & McNeal, K. S. (2023) · Geosphere · doi:10.1130/ges02517.1 · Cited by 4
Enjolras, B. (2024) · Nonprofit Policy Forum · doi:10.1515/npf-2023-0013 · Cited by 4
Political ideology and views toward solar geoengineering in the United States
Magistro, B., Debnath, R., Ebanks, D., Wennberg, P. O., & Alvarez, R. M. (2025) · PLOS Climate · doi:10.1371/journal.pclm.0000643 · Cited by 2
Czarnek, G., & Kossowska, M. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0296066 · Cited by 2
Grosser, M. R., & Hale, R. E. (2021) · Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education · doi:10.1128/jmbe.v22i1.2389 · Cited by 2
The Prevalence and Effects of Scientific Agreement and Disagreement in Media
Chinn, S. (2020) · Deep Blue (University of Michigan) · Cited by 2
Why do we argue about science? Exploring the psychological antecedents of rejection of science
Kerr, J. R. (2020) · Open Access Victoria University of Wellington | Te Herenga Waka (Figshare) · doi:10.26686/wgtn.17142374 · Cited by 2
Perceived Social Consensus Can Reduce Ideological Biases on Climate ChangePreprint
Goldberg, M. H., van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., & Maibach, E. W. (2019) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/vg74q · Cited by 2
Self-citationvan Beynen, J., & Williams, M. N. (2023) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/f3svr · Cited by 2
Chkoniya, V., Reykowska, D., Ohme, R. K., & Côrte-Real, A. (2022) · Smart innovation, systems and technologies · doi:10.1007/978-981-16-9268-0_35 · Cited by 1
Cultural Polarization and Social Groups: The Case of Book Banning
Childress, C., Rawlings, C. M., & Maghbouleh, N. (2025) · International Journal of Politics Culture and Society · doi:10.1007/s10767-025-09545-1 · Cited by 1
Kotz, J., Giese, H., Breunig, C., Sterba, M.-B., Brack, N., Dumont, P., Taflaga, M., Olivera, J., Sheffer, L., Werner, A., et al. (2026) · Communications Sustainability · doi:10.1038/s44458-026-00113-y · Cited by 1
Vaccination intentions during COVID-19 emergency: Correlational research in Italy and SerbiaPreprint
di Napoli, F. (2022) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/y4zer · Cited by 1
Building Better Graphs for Climate Change Communication: Evidence from Eye-Tracking
Courtney, S., & McNeal, K. S. (2018) · AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts
Bringing agency back in: the missing link between identity, knowledge, and mediated discoursePreprint
Tschötschel, R., & Jacovs, T. (2021) · doi:10.31235/osf.io/k87cd
Indictment or Information Can Lie: Post-Truth in Science
Scerri, M., & Grech, V. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-99680-2_3
da Silva, F. A., Meiriño, M. J., Méxas, M. P., & Rampasso, I. S. (2023) · International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies · doi:10.53894/ijirss.v6i3.1513
Establishing Trust in Science Communication
Curtis, C., Gillespie, N. A., & Okimoto, T. G. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-91628-2_5
Yao, S. X., Carnahan, D., & Rhodes, N. D. (2024) · Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy · doi:10.1111/asap.12377 · Cited by 1
Analitičko rasuđivanje i uvjerenja koja proizvode polarizaciju
Maglić, M. (2023) · doi:10.17234/diss.2023.102859 · Cited by 2
Politicisation of Science and Health Topics
Stein, R. A., & Ometa, O. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-49084-2_21
Cormick, C., & Edelsztein, V. C. (2024) · Principia an international journal of epistemology · doi:10.5007/1808-1711.2024.e93904
Mindset, Schism and the Contemporary Transformation of the Anglican Communion
Sandy, G. A. (2025) · Religions · doi:10.3390/rel16010048
Thinking against the Wind: Narratives and Reasoning AbilityPreprint
Jiang, S., Wang, S., & Wei, Q. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5062447
Bayes or Pascal? The computations underlying motivated reasoning
Rigoli, F. (2026) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2026.2615690
Thinking against the wind: Narratives, information, and reasoning ability
Jiang, S., Wang, S., & Wei, Q. (2026) · European Economic Review · doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2026.105267
Helm, R. K., Greenhalgh, T., Williamson, J., & Trofimov, A. (2026) · Journal of Criminal Justice · doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2026.102634 · Cited by 2
Status quo bias drives public support for drug policy in the USA
Hamrak, B., & Simonovits, G. (2026) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-026-02471-y · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Linden, S. V. D., Leiserowitz, A., & Maibach, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Yale University (US)
- George Mason University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Linden, Sander van der
- Venue
- Nature Human Behaviour
- Published
- 2017-12-11
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 2-3
- ISSN
- 2397-3374 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2774167246
- Cited by
- 136
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 39.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Human Behaviour (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
- Apollo
- Funders
- Energy Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Academic Freedom and Politics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Keywords
- politicization of science, scientific consensus, public trust in science, science communication, public perception of scientists, science and politics
- MeSH terms
- Communication, Educational Status, Humans, Politics, Science, Thinking, Consensus, Climate Change
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
