Authority Brings Responsibility: Feedback from Experts Promotes an Overweighting of Health-Related Pseudoscientific Beliefs

Josue Garcia-Arch, Itxaso Barberia, Javier Rodríguez-Ferreiro and Lluís Fuentemilla
Additional contact information
Josue Garcia-Arch: Cognition and Brain Plasticity Group, Bellvitge Institute for Biomedical Research, 08907 Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
Itxaso Barberia: Department of Cognition, Development and Educational Psychology, Institut de Neurociències (INUB), University of Barcelona, 08035 Barcelona, Spain
Javier Rodríguez-Ferreiro: Department of Cognition, Development and Educational Psychology, Institut de Neurociències (INUB), University of Barcelona, 08035 Barcelona, Spain
Lluís Fuentemilla: Cognition and Brain Plasticity Group, Bellvitge Institute for Biomedical Research, 08907 Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 22, 1-11

Abstract: The popularity and spread of health-related pseudoscientific practices is a worldwide problem. Despite being counteracted by competent agents of our societies, their prevalence and spread continue to grow. Current research has focused on identifying which characteristics make us more likely to hold pseudoscientific beliefs. However, how we hold these beliefs despite all the available information against them is a question that remains unanswered. Here, we aimed to assess if the development of health-related pseudoscientific beliefs could be driven by a positive bias in belief updating. Additionally, we aimed to explore whether this bias could be exacerbated, depending on source credibility. In this study, participants (N = 116) underwent a belief updating task where they offered their agreement with various health-related pseudoscientific statements before and after receiving supporting and discrediting feedback from (a) experts (doctors), (b) peers, or (c) a random number generator. Our results suggest that when receiving feedback from experts (but not from peers or random feedback), the participants preferentially integrated supporting information relative to discrediting information about health-related pseudoscience. We discuss the implications of this biased belief updating pattern on health-related pseudoscience research and suggest new strategies for intervention focused on increasing awareness, training, and consensus among healthcare practitioners.

Keywords: pseudoscience; public health; healthcare practices; belief updating; misinformation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/15154/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/15154/ (text/html)

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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:22:p:15154-:d:975260

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().