Limited not lazy: a quasi-experimental secondary analysis of evidence quality evaluations by those who hold implausible beliefs

Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications

Table 3 Post hoc linear mixed-effects models 1 and 2 predicting credibility, value and weight from evidence quality, endorsement status, and the quality by endorsement interaction

	Mean (SD)	b	SE	t	95% CI	Cohen’s d
Model 1: All eligible participants (N = 1747)
Evidence quality	–	30.00	1.56	19.25	26.94, 33.05	1.00
Low	51.6 (34.7)
High	78.9 (21.9)
Endorsement status	–	11.64	2.46	4.73	6.81, 16.46	0.24
Endorser	69.2 (30.8)
Non-endorser	63.2 (32.7)
Quality × Endorsement	–	− 13.67	3.85	3.55	− 21.19, − 6.12	0.18
Low/endorser	60.6 (34.8)
Low/non-endorser	50.2 (34.4)
High/endorser	78.9 (22.1)
High/non-endorser	78.9 (21.8)
Model 2: ‘Endorsers’ any item > 60; ‘Non-Endorsers’ all items < 40
Evidence quality	–	32.66	2.42	13.51	27.95, 37.42	1.02
Low	49.4 (32.1)
High	80.3 (20.4)
Endorsement status	–	10.93	2.69	4.06	5.66, 16.20	0.29
Endorser	67.7 (29.6)
Non-endorser	61.4 (32.0)
Quality × Endorsement	–	− 11.60	4.67	2.48	− 20.73, − 2.43	0.18
Low/Endorser	57.9 (31.8)
Low/Non-endorser	47.0 (31.8)
High/Endorser	81.0 (19.6)
High/Non-endorser	80.1 (20.6)