FLoRA Replication Atlas › Browse

Inconsistent Arguments are Perceived as Better Than Appeals to Authority: An Extension of the Everyday Belief Bias

Calvin Deans-Browne, Alexandra Băitanu, Yuliya Dubinska, Henrik Singmann

2024. DOI 10.31234/osf.io/j2xn3

Has this study been replicated?

This paper is itself a replication attempt. The study it set out to replicate is listed below.

Study replicated

• For everyday arguments prior beliefs play a larger role on perceived argument quality than argument quality itself, Deans-Browne & Singmann (2026). Cognition. View paper

Cite this record

Deans-Browne, C., Băitanu, A., Dubinska, Y., & Singmann, H. (2024). Inconsistent Arguments are Perceived as Better Than Appeals to Authority: An Extension of the Everyday Belief Bias. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/j2xn3

Other studies in the atlas

• For everyday arguments prior beliefs play a larger role on perceived argument quality…
• Replicability and reproducibility of predictive models for diagnosis of depression among…
• Mental contrasting instigates goal pursuit by linking obstacles of reality with…
• Does logic feel good? Testing for intuitive detection of logicality in syllogistic…
• Factor Structure of Ellis' Irrational Beliefs in a Nonclinical College Population
• The Irrational Beliefs Survey, One Factor or Four? A Replication of Mahoney's (1997)…

Failed replications · Successful replications · All browse pages