| Title |
Can corrections spread misinformation to new audiences? Testing for the elusive familiarity backfire effect
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, August 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41235-020-00241-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ullrich K. H. Ecker, Stephan Lewandowsky, Matthew Chadwick |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 179 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 47 | 26% |
| Canada | 12 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 11 | 6% |
| Germany | 4 | 2% |
| Australia | 4 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 2% |
| Mexico | 2 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| France | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 89 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 132 | 74% |
| Scientists | 30 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 12 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 97 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Researcher | 8 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 14% |
| Unknown | 31 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 23 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 13% |
| Unknown | 32 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 189. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 December 2023.
All research outputs
#214,759
of 25,744,802 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#17
of 372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,681
of 426,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,744,802 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 372 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 41.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 426,683 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.