Table 1 Overview of study characteristics of all experiments.
From: Hostility has a trivial effect on persuasiveness of rebutting science denialism on social media
Experiment | Design | Primary outcomes | Mediators of experimental factors on outcomes | Moderators of effects of experimental factors on outcomes | Sample size and characteristics | Scenario |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 (hostile denier vs. neutral denier; between subjects) × 2 (hostile advocate vs. neutral advocate; between subjects) × 2 (time of measurement: before vs. after the debate; within subjects) mixed design | Attitude towards vaccination against fictitious disease (dysomeria) Intention to get vaccinated against (dysomeria) | Perceived expectancy of denier’s or advocate’s message Perceived competence of denier’s or advocate’s message | Verbal aggressiveness Frequency of social media use | N = 521; U.S. adults; online sample (Prolific); MAge = 34.05, SDAge = 10.46; n = 248 women, n = 269 men, n = 3 non-binary participants; n = 14 high, n = 504 middle education | Social media discussion about vaccination against fictitious disease |
2 | 2 (hostile denier vs. neutral denier; between subjects) × 2 (hostile advocate vs. advocate absent; between subjects) × 2 (time of measurement: before vs. after the debate; within subjects) mixed design | Attitude towards vaccination against (dysomeria) Intention to get vaccinated against (dysomeria) | Perceived competence of denier’s or advocate’s message | Verbal aggressiveness Frequency of social media use | N = 310; U.S. adults; online sample (Prolific); MAge = 34.46, SDAge = 11.25; n = 155 women, n = 147 men, n = 8 non-binary participants; n = 17 high, n = 292 middle education | Social media discussion about vaccination against fictitious disease |
3 | 2 (hostile denier vs. neutral denier; between subjects) × 3 (hostile advocate vs. neutral advocate vs. advocate absent; between subjects) × 2 (time of measurement: before vs. after the debate; within subjects) mixed design | Attitude towards vaccination against (dysomeria) Intention to get vaccinated against (dysomeria) | Perceived competence of denier’s or advocate’s message | Verbal aggressiveness Need for cognition Issue involvement | N = 1200; U.S. adults; online sample (Prolific); MAge = 33, SDAge = 12.17, n = 585 women, n = 585 men, n = 28 non-binary participants; n = 47 high, n = 1141 middle, n = 7 low education | Social media discussion about vaccination against fictitious disease |
4 | 2 (hostile denier vs. neutral denier; between subjects) × 3 (hostile advocate vs. neutral advocate vs. advocate absent; between subjects) × 2 (time of measurement: before vs. after the debate; within subjects) mixed design | Attitude towards GM food in general Intention to buy GM variant of favourable food | Perceived competence of denier’s or advocate’s message | Verbal aggressiveness Need for cognition Issue involvement | N = 1195; U.S. adults; online sample (Prolific); MAge = 33.71, SDAge = 12.12, n = 610 women, n = 558 men, n = 25 non-binary participants; n = 51 high, n = 1131 middle, n = 8 low education | Fictitious social media discussion about GM food |
