Separating fact from fiction in the age of alternate facts is becoming increasingly difficult, and now a new study has helped reveal why.
Research by Dr Eryn Newman of The Australian National University (ANU) has found that when people listen to recordings of a scientist presenting their work, the quality of audio had a significant impact on whether people believed what they were hearing, regardless of who the researcher was or what they were talking about.
Dr Newman, of the ANU Research School of Psychology, said the results showed when it comes to communicating science, style can triumph over substance.
“When people are assessing the credibility of information, most of the time people are making a judgement based on how something feels,” Dr Newman said.
“Our results showed that when the sound quality was poor, the participants thought the researcher wasn’t as intelligent, they didn’t like them as much and found their research less important.“
The study used experiments where people viewed video clips of scientists speaking at conferences. One group of participants heard the recordings in clear high-quality audio, while the other group heard the same recordings with poor-quality audio.
Participants were then asked to evaluate the researchers and their work. Those who listened to the poorer quality audio consistently evaluated the scientists as less intelligent and their research as less important.
In a second experiment, researchers upped the ante and conducted the same experiment using renowned scientists discussing their work on the well-known US Science Friday radio program. This time the recordings included audio of the scientists being introduced with their qualifications and institutional affiliations.
“It made no difference,” she said.
“As soon as we reduced the audio quality, all of a sudden the scientists and their research lost credibility.”
As with the first experiments, participants thought the research was worse, the scientists were less competent and they also reported finding their work less interesting.
Dr Newman said in a time when genuine science is struggling to be heard above fake news and alternate facts, researchers need to consider not only the content of their messages, but features of the delivery.
“Another recent study showed false information travels six times faster than real information on Twitter,” she said.
“Our results show that it’s not just about who you are and what you are saying, it’s about how your work is presented.”
Learn more: What makes someone believe or reject information?
The Latest on: What makes someone believe or reject information?
[google_news title=”” keyword=”What makes someone believe or reject information?” num_posts=”10″ blurb_length=”0″ show_thumb=”left”]
via Google News
The Latest on: What makes someone believe or reject information?
- What Are Squatters Rights? State-by-State Guide to Squatters Rightson April 29, 2024 at 7:44 am
Squatters rights, or adverse possession laws, govern how landlords and property owners can remove trespassers after establishing residency. Squatters' rights ...
- People Who Speak With Confidence Do These 3 Things, According to a Stanford Communications Experton April 29, 2024 at 2:35 am
Even if the thought of speaking up in front of people gives you the heebie-jeebies, there are things you can do to manage that feeling, says Stanford lecturer and communication instructor Matt ...
- You’ll Never Guess What the Right Is Blaming George Soros for Nowon April 26, 2024 at 12:35 pm
The South Dakota governor admits to deliberately killing her 14-month-old pet dog Cricket in her upcoming book No Going Back: The Truth on What’s Wrong with Politics and How We Move America Forward, ...
- Froma Harrop: The people have a right to enjoy their parkson April 25, 2024 at 5:12 am
Public parks belong to the public, right? A billionaire can't cordon off an acre of Golden Gate Park for his private party. But can a poor person -- or anyone ...
- What is the Gambler’s Fallacy? Definition & Exampleson April 24, 2024 at 1:27 pm
Check out this guide to learn all about the gambler's fallacy and other cognitive biases that could affect your betting strategies.
- WHAT OTHERS ARE SAYING: Measles vaccines protect all of uson April 24, 2024 at 8:58 am
Remember, it’s not just about you. Yes, vaccines protect you, but they also protect infants too young to be vaccinated or anyone with weak or failing immune systems, like people with cancer or ...
- AI keeps going wrong. What if it can’t be fixed?on April 22, 2024 at 12:00 pm
Pessimists warn it could wipe out humanity. Optimists hail a medical revolution. But sceptics argue that the technology is simply flawed.
- My View: Everything went back to normal after the eclipse - or did it?on April 21, 2024 at 5:00 pm
It was as if Josh Allen had just leaped a defender to score a touchdown at the Super Bowl. The moment the entire area had been discussing nonstop the past ...
- Charlie Kirk's Views On Women And Childbearing Makes Me Sickon April 20, 2024 at 7:19 pm
Charlie Kirk and I matched up on thoughts of education, but I quickly realized that we're in complete disagreement with everything else.
via Bing News