Main content

Home

Menu

Loading wiki pages...

View
Wiki Version:
**Title:** Worldview Misattribution Delay Study **Collaborators:** Ruben Laukkonen, Benjamin Kaveladze, John Protzko, Asa Young, Jonathan Schooler. For more information, please contact Ruben Laukkonen: ruben.laukkonen@gmail.com. **Background & Rationale:** In previous studies, we showed that the feeling of "truthiness" resulting from an Aha! experience can be misattributed to the validity of an unrelated claim, see https://osf.io/up98z/ and https://osf.io/7rqfw/. This study will investigate whether this Aha! misattribution is weaker for claims that are not concurrent with the Aha! moment, and are instead presented after a delay. In addition, we update our experimental procedure to avoid the issue of differential dropout across conditions. **Design & Materials:** This experiment is a mixed factorial design with two within participant variables: 2 (problem: solved or unsolved) x 2 (Aha! experience: yes or no), and two between subjects factors: 2 (Anagram: anagram present, anagram absent) X 2 (Delay: delay present, delay absent). The dependent measure of interest is truth judgments on a 12 point scale ranging from 1 (definitely false), to 12 (definitely true). Aha! Moments will be evaluated by asking participants "Did you experience an Aha! moment while unscrambling the word?". All participants are presented with the same 15 worldview propositions, 15 anagrams derived from the propositions (see materials attachment), and 15 hints to help solve the anagrams. Each anagram was developed to be solved by roughly half of participants. **Participants:** 1000 Participants will be recruited using CriticalMix. **Procedure:** All participants are randomly assigned to either the "Anagram no delay", "Anagram delay", "Post-truth anagram", or "Anagrams after truth ratings" condition. In the **Anagram no Delay** condition, there are four phases to a trial: (1) presentation of an incomplete proposition, (2) concurrently, resolving an anagram that completes the proposition (with the help of a hint) within 20 seconds or presentation of the solution after 20 seconds if no response is submitted, (3) truth judgment about the completed proposition, (4) self reported Aha! experience, (5) 10-second waiting period before starting the next trial. In the **Anagram Delay** condition, each trial involves: (1) resolving an anagram with the help of a hint, within 20 seconds or presentation of the solution after 20 seconds if no response is submitted, (2) 10-second waiting "delay" period. (3) making a truth judgment about the completed proposition including the unscrambled word, (4) self reported Aha! experience. In the **Post-Truth Anagram** condition, each trial involves (1) making a truth judgment about a completed proposition, (2) unscrambling the keyword from a *different* claim with a hint (no proposition), (3) self reported Aha! experience, (4) a 10 second waiting period before starting the next trial. In the **Anagrams After Propositions** condition, participants first provide truth ratings for all claims, with a 10 second wait in between each truth rating. Then, each trial involves (1) unscrambling an anagram with the help of a hint, (2) self reported Aha! experience. Here is one illustrative example from the Anagram Condition. Participants are first presented with the incomplete proposition with the last word missing, for example: "People's core qualities are _________.". Below the incomplete proposition participants are presented with an anagram that completes the proposition, in this case they are presented with "diefx". They are also presented with a hint, in this case they see the hint "The house always wins". When the anagram is resolved participants see the complete proposition as: "Reality is only a matter of perspective." If the anagram is not solved within 20 seconds then the solution, "perspective", is presented. Participants then make a truth judgment about the completed proposition. Next, on a new screen, participants report whether they experienced an Aha! moment (yes or no). Finally they wait 10 seconds before beginning the next trial or moving on to the next part of the study if they have completed all 15 trials. At the end of each condition all participants report their demographic information and complete three manipulation checks. Participants are asked if they found the answers to any of the questions online or elsewhere, if they experienced any Aha! moments, and if English is the language they are most comfortable using. Data Collection Done to Date: None Decision Rules: An anagram is classified as solved if a correct solution is entered within the 20 second time limit. A correct solution is coded if the unscrambled word completes the proposition (see materials), and minor misspellings will be accepted. Any participant who fails to complete the full experiment will be removed. **Planned Analyses:** We will run a between-subjects ANOVA comparing average truth judgments across the four conditions. For participants in conditions that include an anagram, we will run mixed effects regression analyses to investigate the effect of solving (solved vs. unsolved) and Aha (present vs. absent) on truth ratings. Any exploratory analyses will be updated at the bottom of this entry. **Hypotheses:** Between-Subjects: Truth ratings are expected to be highest in the Anagram No Delay condition. Within-Subjects: In the Anagram No Delay Condition only, truth ratings will be higher for solved than unsolved anagrams, and truth ratings will be higher for Aha-present than Aha-absent. We expect that in the *Anagram Delay* condition, that solving anagrams and Aha moments will not increase truth judgments, or show a diminished effect size relative to the Anagram No Delay condition. **Aha! Instructions Transcript:** After you decide whether the claim is true, you will be asked whether or not you experienced an "Aha!" moment at any point in the trial. Almost everyone has experienced an Aha! moment in the past. Many people report Aha! moments while having a shower, or just before falling asleep. Try to recall an Aha! experience that you've had, and try to remember how it felt. When completing the task, try to pay attention to when Aha! moments occur while unscrambling the word. When an Aha! moment occurs, it is as if the solution to the problem suddenly pops into your mind, like a lightbulb turning on. You might experience surprise, you might feel relief, and you might feel a light sense of happiness and ease. You can think of this experience as a miniature ‘Eureka moment’. You might even feel an internal sense of “Aha!,” or you might think to yourself, “of course!,” “that was so obvious”. Not experiencing an Aha! moment might feel like nothing much at all. You might simply think about the problem, and then gradually work out the solution.
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
Accept
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.
Accept
×

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.