Learning versus Unlearning: An Experiment on Retractions

Duarte Gonçalves, Jonathan Libgober and Jack Willis

No 29512, NBER Working Papers from National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc

Abstract: Widely discredited ideas nevertheless persist. Why do we fail to “unlearn”? We study the effectiveness of retractions—the revoking of earlier information—in correcting beliefs. Our experimental design identifies belief updating from retractions— unlearning—and compares it to updating from equivalent new information—learning. Subjects do not fully unlearn from retractions and update approximately one-third less from retractions versus new information. Although we document several well-known biases in belief updating, our results require an explanation that treats retractions as intrinsically different. We find evidence for one such mechanism, while ruling out several others: retractions are more complex than direct information.

JEL-codes: D8 D83 D9 D91 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021-11
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-exp
Note: DEV POL
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.nber.org/papers/w29512.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nbr:nberwo:29512

Ordering information: This working paper can be ordered from
http://www.nber.org/papers/w29512

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in NBER Working Papers from National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().