As part of the Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE) program, the present study consisted of a two-stage replication test of a central finding by Pennycook et al. (2020), namely that asking people to think about the accuracy of a single headline improves “truth discernment” of intentions to share news headlines about COVID-19. The first stage of the replication test (n = 701) was unsuccessful (p = .67). After collecting a second round of data (additional n = 882, pooled N = 1,583), we found a small but significant interaction between treatment condition and truth discernment (uncorrected p = .017; treatment: d = 0.14, control: d = 0.10). As in the target study, perceived headline accuracy correlated with treatment impact, so that treatment-group participants were less willing to share headlines that were perceived as less accurate. We discuss potential explanations for these findings and an unreported change in the hypothesis (but not the analysis plan) from the preregistration in the original study.

作为开放研究和证据系统化信心 (SCORE) 计划的一部分，本研究包括对 Pennycook 等人的核心发现进行两阶段复制测试。 （2020），即要求人们思考单个标题的准确性可以提高分享有关 COVID-19 的新闻标题的意图的“真相辨别力”。复制测试的第一阶段 ( n = 701) 不成功 ( p = .67)。收集第二轮数据后（额外n = 882，汇总N = 1,583），我们发现治疗条件和真相辨别之间存在微小但显着的交互作用（未校正p = .017；治疗： d = 0.14，对照： d = 0.10 ）。与目标研究一样，感知的标题准确性与治疗影响相关，因此治疗组参与者不太愿意分享被认为不太准确的标题。我们讨论了这些发现的潜在解释，以及原始研究中预先注册的假设（但不是分析计划）的未报告变化。