Not all bullshit pondered is tossed: Reflection decreases receptivity to some types of misleading information but not others

Abstract

Across three studies (N = 659), we present evidence that engaging in explanatory reflection reduces receptivity to pseudo-profound bullshit but not scientific bullshit or fake news. Additionally, ratings for pseudo-profound and scientific bullshit attributed to authoritative sources were significantly inflated compared to bullshit from anonymous sources. These findings provide initial evidence that asking people to reflect on why they find certain statements meaningful (or not) helps reduce receptivity to some types of misinformation but not others. Moreover, the appeal of misleading claims spread by perceived experts may be largely immune to the putative benefits of interventions that rely solely on reflective thinking. Taken together, our results suggest that while encouraging the public to be more reflective can certainly be helpful as a general rule, the effectiveness of this strategy in reducing the persuasiveness of misleading or otherwise epistemically-suspect claims is limited by the type of claims being evaluated.