<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:lang="en">
  <teiHeader>
    <fileDesc>
      <titleStmt>
        <title>Fighting COVID-19 Misinformation on Social Media: Experimental Evidence for a Scalable Accuracy-Nudge Intervention</title>
        <author>Gordon Pennycook</author>
        <author>Jonathon McPhetres</author>
        <author>Yunhao Zhang</author>
        <author>Jackson G. Lu</author>
        <author>David G. Rand</author>
      </titleStmt>
      <publicationStmt>
        <p>Tag layer of the DHSS Meta-Tagging Project. The article text is reproduced from the
           staged copy named in sourceDesc and is not altered; the tags are held separately in
           standOff so that overlapping and nested spans are preserved.</p>
      </publicationStmt>
      <sourceDesc>
        <bibl>
          <title>Fighting COVID-19 Misinformation on Social Media: Experimental Evidence for a Scalable Accuracy-Nudge Intervention</title>
          <date>2020</date>
          <publisher>Psychological Science</publisher>
          <idno type="DOI">10.1177/0956797620939054</idno>
          
          <idno type="record">pennycook2020-fighting-covid-19-misinformation-o</idno>
          <note type="staged-file">pennycook2020-fighting-covid-19-misinformation-o.txt, the project's staged copy</note>
          <note type="text-sha1">554be8c08bacd7da264c7c0d3d48f417d49206b9</note>
          <note type="rights">cc-by</note>
        </bibl>
      </sourceDesc>
    </fileDesc>
    <profileDesc>
      <textClass><keywords><term>social-psychology</term></keywords></textClass>
      <particDesc>
        <person xml:id="paper"><p>the paper's own words</p></person>
        <person xml:id="tagger"><p>the tag layer; a sentence written by the tagger about the
          paper, always anchored to a quotation but not itself a quotation</p></person>
      </particDesc>
    </profileDesc>
    <revisionDesc>
      <change when="2026-10-06"
              who="build_paper_edition.py">0 spans located by searching the stored text for the quote's exact words, allowing any whitespace between them</change>
    </revisionDesc>
  </teiHeader>
  <standOff>
    <spanGrp type="tags">
      <span xml:id="t0" type="object_of_study" ana="#object_of_study" resp="#paper">
        <label>why people share false claims they could have identified as false, and whether the gap can be closed by making accuracy salient</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t1" type="research_question" ana="#research_question" resp="#paper">
        <label>whether the inattention account of political fake-news sharing extends to COVID-19 misinformation, where the content is largely apolitical and the stakes are life and death</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t2" type="contribution" ana="#contribution" resp="#paper">
        <label>a measured dissociation between accuracy judgment and sharing intention on the same headlines, and a randomised test showing that one accuracy judgement about an unrelated headline raises sharing discernment 2.8-fold</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t3" type="claim_type" ana="#claim_type" resp="#paper">
        <label>mechanism</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t4" type="phenomenon" ana="#phenomenon" resp="#paper">
        <label>truth discernment that is present when people are asked about accuracy and nearly absent when the same people are asked what they would share</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t5" type="method" ana="#method" resp="#paper">
        <label>behavioural-experiment</label>
        <term>behavioural-experiment</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t6" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the account is not that people want to spread falsehood, nor that they cannot tell the difference. It is that the sharing context puts other things in front of accuracy - social approval, partisan alignment, the fact that news sits between baby photos - so the preference exists and is simply not applied at the moment of decision</label>
        <term>a preference that is never consulted</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t7" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the treatment is one accuracy judgement about a politically neutral headline unrelated to the topic, framed as a pretest. It supplies no information about COVID-19 and no instruction about sharing; what it does is raise the accessibility of the concept of accuracy, and the effect is a change in what the participant attends to rather than in what they know</label>
        <term>a prime that carries no content</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t8" type="mechanisms" ana="#mechanisms[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>if the nudge works by directing attention to accuracy, then its effect on a headline should track how accurate that headline is perceived to be - pushing sharing up for the clearly true and down for the clearly false. Measured across the thirty items using Study 1&#x27;s ratings as the accuracy scale, r(28) = .76</label>
        <term>the item-level signature of an attention effect</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t9" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the evidence is restricted to the United States, and the sample is quota matched rather than probability sampled so it is not nationally representative</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t10" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>one particular set of thirty headlines was used, and misinformation in other forms - e-mails, text posts, memes - is untested</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t11" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>sharing intentions were hypothetical and the induction was performed in a lab context, so extension to naturalistic social media is an inference</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t12" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>accuracy nudges are described by the authors as far from a complete solution</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t13" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[4]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>one false headline turned out on inspection to be misleading or unverified rather than untrue, and was retained after checking that removing it changed nothing</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t14" type="limitations" ana="#limitations[5]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the preregistration specified clustering standard errors on participant only, and the published analysis clusters on participant and headline</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t15" type="transfers" ana="#transfers[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>priming - raising the accessibility of a concept with an unrelated task - carried from cognitive psychology into a platform-deployable intervention against misinformation</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t16" type="transfers" ana="#transfers[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the nudge frame from behavioural economics: change what is salient at the moment of choice rather than what the chooser knows or is allowed to do</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t17" type="controls" ana="#controls[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the accuracy induction disguised as a pretest, using a single politically neutral headline unrelated to the topic of the sharing task</label>
        <note>eliminates: demand characteristics and social desirability as the explanation of the treatment effect - a participant who cannot see what the manipulation is for cannot comply with it · outcome: held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t18" type="controls" ana="#controls[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>apolitical COVID-19 content used in place of the political headlines the prior literature used, with partisanship measured and tested as a moderator</label>
        <note>eliminates: partisan motivation as the thing distracting people from accuracy - the effect survives when the content gives partisanship nothing to work with · outcome: held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t19" type="controls" ana="#controls[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>a post hoc item-level analysis correlating each headline&#x27;s treatment effect against its perceived accuracy from the other study&#x27;s participants</label>
        <note>eliminates: a general suppression of sharing as the explanation - an attention effect must push true headlines UP and false ones down, and the correlation is r(28) = .76 · outcome: held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t20" type="controls" ana="#controls[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>all participants retained in the main analyses regardless of failing the three attention screeners, per the preregistered plan, with the key result reported across levels of attentiveness</label>
        <note>eliminates: the effect being an artefact of who was excluded - dropping inattentive respondents would trade representativeness for a cleaner sample and the authors show the result does not depend on the trade · outcome: held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t21" type="controls" ana="#controls[4]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>one false headline reclassified after data collection as misleading rather than untrue, and the analysis rerun without it</label>
        <note>eliminates: a defective stimulus carrying the result - the item is disclosed, the removal is tested, and it is retained on the strength of the test rather than quietly · outcome: held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t22" type="controls" ana="#controls[5]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>linear probability models used for interpretability, with logistic regression run alongside</label>
        <note>eliminates: the functional form as the source of the result - the readable model and the conventional one are reported to agree · outcome: held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t23" type="controls" ana="#controls[6]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the self-reported sharing measure checked against a headline-level relationship between reported willingness and actual shares on Twitter</label>
        <note>eliminates: a hypothetical intention being read as behaviour with no evidence at all - the link is external and at the level of the item · outcome: partial</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t24" type="controls" ana="#controls[7]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>results also reported excluding the few headlines that were political or that did not contain a clear claim of fact</label>
        <note>eliminates: a handful of atypical items driving the interaction · outcome: held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t25" type="controls" ana="#controls[8]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>a preregistration deviation declared in the paper - the plan specified clustering on participant only - with the preregistered version run</label>
        <note>eliminates: an undisclosed analytic choice; the deviation is named and the preregistered specification is reported not to change the conclusion · outcome: held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t26" type="controls" ana="#controls[9]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>three screener questions embedding a subtle instruction inside a block of text, placed before each of the main tasks</label>
        <note>eliminates: participants who click through without reading - on a task about whether people can tell true headlines from false ones · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t27" type="controls" ana="#controls[10]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>a leave-one-out check on the stimulus set: one false headline judged after the fact to be misleading rather than untrue was removed and the analysis re-run</label>
        <note>eliminates: that the result rests on one badly-classified item - the paper re-ran without it, found no change, and retained it while saying so · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t28" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[0]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>truth discernment</label>
        <term>truth discernment</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t29" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[1]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>inattention</label>
        <term>inattention</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t30" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[2]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>accuracy nudge</label>
        <term>accuracy nudge</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t31" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[3]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>CRT</label>
        <term>CRT</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t32" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[4]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>demand characteristics</label>
        <term>demand characteristics</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t33" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[5]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>sharing intentions</label>
        <term>sharing intentions</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t34" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[6]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>partisanship</label>
        <term>partisanship</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t35" type="concepts" ana="#concepts[7]" resp="#paper" cert="0.95">
        <label>quota sampling</label>
        <term>quota sampling</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t36" type="senses" ana="#senses[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>truth discernment - WHEN THE QUESTION IS ACCURACY: veracity moves the answer at Cohen&#x27;s d = 0.657</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t37" type="senses" ana="#senses[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>truth discernment - WHEN THE QUESTION IS SHARING: d = 0.121 from the same people on the same headlines, and 32.4% more would share a false headline than call it accurate</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t38" type="senses" ana="#senses[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>sharing discernment - IN THE CONTROL CONDITION OF STUDY 2: not significantly different from zero, d = 0.050, p = .24</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t39" type="senses" ana="#senses[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>sharing discernment - AFTER ONE ACCURACY JUDGEMENT ABOUT AN UNRELATED HEADLINE: d = 0.142, p = .003, and 2.8 times the control level</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t40" type="senses" ana="#senses[4]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the sample - AS DESIGNED: quota matched to the US public on age, gender, ethnicity and region</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t41" type="senses" ana="#senses[5]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the sample - AS THE AUTHORS QUALIFY IT: not obtained by probability sampling and therefore not to be treated as nationally representative</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t42" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>extends → the inattention-based account of political fake-news sharing, carried here to COVID-19 misinformation where the content is largely apolitical and the stakes are health</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t43" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>critiques → the view that partisan motivation is what distracts people from accuracy on social media - the effect appears on apolitical content and is not moderated by partisanship</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t44" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>qualifies → its own intervention - accuracy nudges are far from a complete solution, and the sharing measure is hypothetical</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t45" type="claim_relations" ana="#claim_relations[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>confirms → the analytic-cognitive-style literature on truth discernment - CRT scores relate to discernment here in the same pattern previously seen with political headlines</label>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t46" type="concept_edges" ana="#concept_edges[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>partisanship —distinct-from→ inattention</label>
        <term>partisanship</term>
        <term>inattention</term>
        <note>differs in: whether the thing pulling attention from accuracy is political identity or the sharing context itself · the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 0.95 · differs in (stated by the tagger, no quotation): whether the thing pulling attention from accuracy is political identity or the sharing context itself · the relation stated: the effect appears on apolitical COVID-19 content, so partisanship is not the key factor distracting people from accuracy
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span says partisanship is not the key factor; distinct-from is loose.</note>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t47" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>veracity moves accuracy judgments at d = 0.657 and sharing intentions at d = 0.121, from the same people on the same headlines</label>
        <term>veracity moves accuracy judgments at d = 0.657 and sharing intentions at d = 0.121, from the same people on the same headlines</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t48" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>32.4% more people were willing to share a false headline than rated that headline as accurate</label>
        <term>32.4% more people were willing to share a false headline than rated that headline as accurate</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t49" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>Rating the accuracy of a single non-COVID headline raised sharing discernment 2.8-fold.</label>
        <term>Rating the accuracy of a single non-COVID headline raised sharing discernment 2.8-fold.</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t50" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>in the control condition sharing discernment was not significantly different from zero, p = .24</label>
        <term>in the control condition sharing discernment was not significantly different from zero, p = .24</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t51" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[4]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the treatment effect was not moderated by cognitive reflection, science knowledge, partisanship, distance to an epicentre or medical maximising</label>
        <term>the treatment effect was not moderated by cognitive reflection, science knowledge, partisanship, distance to an epicentre or medical maximising</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t52" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[5]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the treatment&#x27;s effect per headline correlates at r(28) = .76 with that headline&#x27;s perceived accuracy, which is the signature an attention account predicts</label>
        <term>the treatment&#x27;s effect per headline correlates at r(28) = .76 with that headline&#x27;s perceived accuracy, which is the signature an attention account predicts</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t53" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.findings[6]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the intervention requires no decision by a platform about what content to censor</label>
        <term>the intervention requires no decision by a platform about what content to censor</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t54" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.definitions[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the difference in accuracy judgments or sharing intentions between true and false headlines - a within-person contrast, so a higher score means greater sensitivity to truth relative to falsity</label>
        <term>truth discernment</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t55" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.quantities[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>more people were willing to share a false headline than rated it accurate - the size of the gap between the two questions</label>
        <term>32.4%</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t56" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.quantities[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>Cohen&#x27;s d for the effect of veracity on accuracy judgments, against 0.121 for sharing intentions</label>
        <term>0.657</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t57" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.quantities[2]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>times higher sharing discernment in the treatment condition than the control, from a single accuracy judgement about an unrelated headline</label>
        <term>2.8</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t58" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.quantities[3]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>the item-level correlation between a headline&#x27;s perceived accuracy and the size of the treatment&#x27;s effect on sharing it</label>
        <term>.76</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t59" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.statistics[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>Cohen</label>
        <term>Cohen</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t60" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.variables[0]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>truth discernment</label>
        <term>truth discernment</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
      <span xml:id="t61" type="content_tags" ana="#content_tags.variables[1]" resp="#tagger" cert="0.95">
        <label>sharing intentions</label>
        <term>sharing intentions</term>
        <note type="quotation-withheld">Quotation withheld because this record is not cleared for redistribution.</note>
      </span>
    </spanGrp>
  </standOff>
  <text>
    <body>
      <p><note type="rights">The full text of this article is not redistributable, so it is
      not included here. The evidence sentences are withheld with it; the tag layer and its
      grounding status remain. The article itself is at https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620939054.</note></p>
    </body>
  </text>
</TEI>
