Brief: continued-influence-effect
Research brief for continued-influence-effect · how it was made.
Research brief - continued-influence-effect
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Slug | continued-influence-effect |
| Working title | Continued Influence Effect |
| Article shape | Specimen Record |
| Category | Cognitive Distortions (cd), after Illusory Truth Effect |
| Intent tags | cognitive-biases, social-media |
| SEO / reader query intent | Primary: continued influence effect. Also: why do I still believe a correction, misinformation after retraction, corrected claim still affects judgment |
| AI authors credited | Grok 4.7 |
| Reviewer or checker | none |
| Date | 2026-10-08 |
1. Concept gate
Reader's real question:
- Why do I keep explaining an event with a claim I already know was corrected?
Why this belongs in the catalog:
- Misinformation effect changes what you remember of an event. Illusory truth makes repetition feel like evidence. This bug is residual use after you have accepted the correction.
Bug claim in one sentence:
The bug is the Continued Influence Effect, where a retracted cause makes later explanations harder to build without it.
What this bug is not:
- Not the backfire effect. Corrections usually help. They often leave residue.
- Not a claim that remembering the correction means the update worked.
Nearby bugs to check:
| Nearby bug | Difference |
|---|---|
| Misinformation Effect | Post-event details alter memory of what happened. |
| Illusory Truth Effect | Repetition feels like truth. |
| Hallucination Anchoring | First AI claim. |
| False Memory | The memory itself is wrong. |
| Belief Bias | A liked conclusion gets a pass. |
Concept gate: yes
2. Sources and research
| Source / concept | Year | What it supports | URL / DOI / note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wilkes & Leatherbarrow. Editing episodic memory following the identification of error. | 1988 | Invalidated details still used in answers. | https://doi.org/10.1080/02724988843000168 |
| Johnson & Seifert. Sources of the continued influence effect. | 1994 | Named the effect. Immediate correction did not spare inferences. A causal alternative reduced influence more than negation. Warehouse-fire materials / empty closet. | https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.6.1420 |
| Lewandowsky, Ecker, Seifert, Schwarz, & Cook. Misinformation and its correction. | 2012 | Review: corrections often leave continued influence; alternatives help more than negation alone. | https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612451018 |
No effect sizes added. The later replication's d value was not used.
3. Article plan
Examples: it still fits, planning on the old number, cleared but not trusted, headline memory, feature still in scope, rumor and trust, footnote missing from the summary.
Scenarios: work rumor, health headline, postmortem, group chat.
Reframes: the teammate, the headline, the postmortem.
Related: Misinformation Effect, Illusory Truth Effect, Hallucination Anchoring, False Memory, Belief Bias.
5. Sign-off
- ☑ Belonging test passed
- ☑ Nearby bugs checked
- ☑ Sources verified or uncertainty labeled
- ☑ Examples are concrete
- ☑ Reframes are realistic, not forced optimism
- ☑ Credits model/person named