Recalling fake news during real news corrections can impair or enhance memory updating: the role of recollection-based retrieval

Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications

Table 4 Correction classification-type probabilities: Experiment 2

	Correction Classification Categories Probabilities
	Classified as Correction + Fake News Recalled		Classified as Correction + Fake News Not Recalled		Not Classified as Correction
Phase	Correction [Peers-Believe]	Correction [Peers-Disbelieve]	Correction [Peers-Believe]	Correction [Peers-Disbelieve]	Correction [Peers-Believe]	Correction [Peers-Disbelieve]
Phase 2	.50 [.48, .53]	.51 [.48, .54]	.24 [.20, .27]	.23 [.20, .27]	.26 [.22, .29]	.26 [.23, .30]
Phase 3	.41 [.38, .44]	.41 [.39, .44]	.18 [.15, .21]	.18 [.14, .21]	.42 [.38, .46]	.42 [.38, .46]

95% confidence intervals are displayed in brackets. The classifications above all pertain to Correction headline types. Classified as Correction + Fake News Recalled were instances when headlines were classified as corrections and participants could recall the fake news details. Classified as Correction + Fake News Not Recalled were instances when headlines were classified as corrections, but participants could not recall the fake news details. Not Classified as Correction were instances when headlines were not classified as corrections