Relative source credibility affects the continued influence effect: Evidence of rationality in the CIE

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Social Psychology

Background:

• The Continued Influence Effect (CIE) describes how retracted information continues to affect judgments.
• A rational account suggests CIE occurs when the retractor is less credible than the original informant.
• This study investigates the role of source credibility in the CIE.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine whether the CIE is rational and depends on the relative credibility of information sources.
• To test predictions of a rational account against empirical data.
• To explore alternative explanations for the CIE when rational accounts fall short.

Main Methods:

• Two experiments were conducted with 151 and 146 participants.
• Informant and retractor credibility were independently manipulated using high and low credibility sources.
• Participants evaluated information presented in fictitious news reports, including retractions.

Main Results:

• A significant CIE was observed when the informant was more credible than the retractor.
• No CIE was found when the informant was less credible than the retractor, supporting a rational account.
• An unexpected CIE emerged when informant and retractor credibility were equal, contradicting the rational account.

Conclusions:

• Relative source credibility influences the CIE, aligning with rational accounts in some conditions.
• The CIE when sources are equally credible suggests memory-based errors, necessitating broader theoretical explanations.
• The findings indicate that both rational and error-based mechanisms contribute to the Continued Influence Effect.