Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://dx.doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.2691
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.rights.licenseCC-BY-SA 4.0-
dc.contributor.authorRosman, Tom-
dc.contributor.authorMerk, Samuel-
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-14T12:20:24Z-
dc.date.available2020-01-14T12:20:24Z-
dc.date.issued2020-01-14-
dc.identifier.citationRosman, T., & Merk, S. (2020, January 14). Preregistration: Teacher’s reasons for trust and mistrust in scientific evidence: Reflecting a ‘smart but evil’ stereotype? PsychArchives. https://doi.org/10.23668/PSYCHARCHIVES.2691en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/2305-
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.2691-
dc.description.abstractSeveral studies show that teachers tend to prefer experiential knowledge sources over scientific evidence (Cramer, 2012, 2013; Merk, Rosman, Rueß, Syring, & Schneider, 2017; Zeuch & Souvignier, 2016), making them more prone to believe in misconceptions, such as, for example, on the effects of grade retention on academic achievement. This is particularly worrying considering recent research which suggests that educational scientists might be seen as ‘smart but evil’. In fact, in two experimental studies, Merk and Rosman (2019) showed that teacher education students view educational researchers’ expertise as significantly higher than their integrity and benevolence – at least in contrast to their views on practitioners. The present research builds on this ‘smart but evil’ assumption and connects it with the question on why teachers trust or mistrust educational research. In line with the work by Merk and Rosman (2019), we will investigate three potential reasons for trust and mistrust in scientific sources (adapted from the 2018 Wissenschaftsbarometer): (1) the perceived competence of educational researchers (e.g., one might mistrust researchers due to a belief that they frequently make mistakes), (2) their perceived integrity (e.g., mistrust might be rooted in the belief that researchers are somehow biased), and (3) their perceived benevolence (e.g., one might believe that researchers are only interested in their careers). Since trust and mistrust are often seen as two different concepts (e.g., Saunders & Thornhill, 2004), these three potential reasons will be assessed twice – once with regard to trust and once with regard to mistrust. The present document specifies the confirmatory hypotheses, the study design, as well as the analysis plan of the research.en
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.publisherPsychArchivesen
dc.rightsopenAccessen
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/-
dc.subject.ddc150-
dc.titlePreregistration: Teacher’s reasons for trust and mistrust in scientific evidence: Reflecting a ‘smart but evil’ stereotype?en
dc.typestudyProtocolen
dc.description.pubstatusotheren
wgl.wglcontributorZPIDger
wgl.wglsubjectPsychologieger
wgl.wglsubjectErziehung, Schul- und Bildungswesenger
zpid.tags.visiblepreregistrationen
Appears in Collections:Study Protocols

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Preregistration_Teachers_Reasons_for_Trust_Rosman_Merk.pdf856,95 kBAdobe PDF Preview PDF Download


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons