Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:29:48.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reflective liberals and intuitive conservatives: A look at the Cognitive Reflection Test and ideology – ADDENDUM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2023

Kristen D. Deppe ,
Frank J. Gonzalez ,
Jayme L. Neiman ,
Carly Jacobs ,
Jackson Pahlke ,
Kevin B. Smith  and
John R. Hibbing
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Keywords

political attitudesCognitive Reflection Testideologyaddendum
Type
Addendum
Information
Judgment and Decision Making , Volume 18 , 2023 , e9
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Society for Judgment and Decision Making and European Association for Decision Making

This is an archival correction notice, documenting a post-publication correction previously made in September 2015.

Some of the results reported in this article (Deppe et al., Reference Deppe, Gonzalez, Neiman, Jacobs, Pahlke, Smith and Hibbing2015) are based on a subset of the data. Post-publication, a further supplementary file was added containing results using all the data collected.

References

Deppe, K. D., Gonzalez, F. J., Neiman, J. L., Jacobs, C., Pahlke, J., Smith, K. B., & Hibbing, J. R. (2015). Reflective liberals and intuitive conservatives: A look at the Cognitive Reflection Test and ideology. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(4), 314–331. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500005131CrossRefGoogle Scholar