Retractions: Updating from Complex Information

Duarte Gonçalves, Jonathan Libgober and Jack Willis

The Review of Economic Studies, 2026, vol. 93, issue 1, 476-516

Abstract: We modify a canonical experimental design to identify the effectiveness of retractions. Comparing beliefs after retractions to beliefs (1) without the retracted information and (2) after equivalent new information, we find that retractions result in diminished belief updating in both cases. We propose this reflects updating from retractions being more complex, and our analysis supports this: we find longer response times, lower accuracy, and higher variability. The results—robust across diverse participant groups and design variations—enhance our understanding of belief updating and offer insights into addressing misinformation.

Keywords: Belief updating; Retractions; Information; Complexity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/restud/rdaf032 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:oup:restud:v:93:y:2026:i:1:p:476-516.

Access Statistics for this article

The Review of Economic Studies is currently edited by Thomas Chaney, Xavier d’Haultfoeuille, Andrea Galeotti, Bård Harstad, Nir Jaimovich, Katrine Loken, Elias Papaioannou, Vincent Sterk and Noam Yuchtman

More articles in The Review of Economic Studies from Review of Economic Studies Ltd
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().