Extraction report — Grindrod et al. (2019)

schema_version: '1.1'
paper:
  paper_id: grindrodetalndthirdpersonknowledge
  citation: 'Grindrod, J., Andow, J., & Hansen, N. (2019). Third-Person Knowledge Ascriptions: A Crucial Experiment for Contextualism.
    Mind & Language, 34(2), 158-182.'
  short_label: Grindrod et al. (2019)
  doi: 10.1111/mila.12196
  published: 'Yes'
  year: 2019
  language: English
  language_other: null
  research_objective: Test whether shifting the context of *third-person* knowledge ascriptions (low vs high context, varying
    stakes/error-possibility cues for the ascriber) changes truth-value judgments for positive vs negative knowledge attributions
    across two knowledge scenarios (Neighbor, Sunshine) and a follow-up Revised Neighbor scenario.
  data_availability:
    data_available_online: null
    url: null
    notes: null
  notes: Published in Mind & Language, 34(2), 158-182 (2019); public records also list online publication on July 5, 2018.
    The pipeline-extracted header line 'Published on February 10, 2010' is erroneous and ignored.
studies:
- study_id: 1
  label: 'Experiment 1: Third-person knowledge ascriptions (Neighbor + Sunshine)'
  objective: Evaluate whether context (Low vs High) interacts with sentence polarity (positive vs negative knowledge ascription)
    for third-person knowledge attributions in two knowledge scenarios (Neighbor, Sunshine), using a block design enabling
    both within-subject analyses (all responses) and between-subject emulation (first-block responses).
  sample:
    n_final: 431
    recruitment: mTurk
    recruitment_other: null
    compensation: money
    compensation_other: $0.30
    characteristics: Amazon Mechanical Turk participants; location restricted to United States; approval rate >=95%; >=50
      HITs approved; attention-check failures excluded.
    mean_age: 35.94
    mean_age_prov:
      page: null
      quote: The mean age of participants was 35.94.
      tei_id: null
      table_ref: null
    provenance:
      page: null
      quote: In total, 557 participants were recruited using Amazon MTurk... The survey remained open until 431 of participants
        completed the survey... Those who completed the survey were paid $.30.
      tei_id: null
      table_ref: null
  design: null
  design_other: 'Mixed: within-subjects (all 16 stories) plus between-subjects emulation using first-block responses via the
    Hansen & Chemla (2013) block design.'
  manipulated_factors:
  - Polarity (positive vs negative knowledge ascription sentence)
  - Scenario type (Neighbor vs Sunshine)
  - Context (Low vs High; higher stakes + explicit error-possibility cues for the ascriber)
  paradigm: Agreement that a sentence is true
  paradigm_other: null
  scale:
    label: other
    points: null
    anchors: 0 (False) to 100 (True) sliding scale
    direction: Higher numbers indicate judging the target sentence as more true.
    provenance:
      page: null
      quote: Participants... judg[ed] whether the claim... were true or false using a sliding scale from 0 (False) to 100
        (True).
      tei_id: null
      table_ref: null
  measures:
    knowledge_question_text: Judge whether the claim made by the bolded target sentence is true or false (0–100 sliding scale).
    knowledge_question_first: null
    additional_question_text: null
  scenarios: []
  effects:
  - effect_id: s1_e1
    subgroup: Knowledge-Neighbor (positive; first-block)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a positive third-person knowledge attribution in the Neighbor
      scenario (first-block between-subjects emulation): Low vs High context.'
    design: Between-Subjects
    design_other: Uses first-block (between-subjects emulation) group statistics from Table 7.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: First Person
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: null
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and her partner Alfie are in a long-running dispute with their neighbor because the neighbor keeps
            knocking over Kristin and Alfie's garbage can...
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette is about a neighbor/garbage-can dispute (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos); coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: But the garbage can could have been knocked over by someone else. Are you sure your neighbor did it?
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions introduce explicit doubt/counterconsiderations.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: As part of a kidnapping investigation... it's really important for our investigation that we are clear on
            this.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascriber is explicitly presented as aware of the high-stakes consequences in the high-context version.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee’s evidence is direct repeated observation (first-person).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin knows that he knocked it over.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge attribution ('Kristin knows...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Source reliability is not meaningfully manipulated/coded as High/Medium/Low; set to null.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Context manipulation bundles higher stakes for the ascriber plus explicit error-possibility cues.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, positive sentence (first-block)
      n: 105
      mean: 71.9
      sd: 33.69
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 15
        quote: 'Knowledge-Neighbor, Pos: Low N=105, Mean=71.90, SD=33.69.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p15_t3.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, positive sentence (first-block)
      n: 107
      mean: 36.83
      sd: 38.49
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 15
        quote: 'Knowledge-Neighbor, Pos: High N=107, Mean=36.83, SD=38.49.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p15_t3.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: 0.968984964360932
      v: 0.021105155966708
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed from Table 7 group stats in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd (method=between_groups).
    quality_flags: []
    notes: null
  - effect_id: s1_e2
    subgroup: Knowledge-Neighbor (negative; first-block)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a negative third-person knowledge attribution in the Neighbor
      scenario (first-block between-subjects emulation): Low vs High context.'
    design: Between-Subjects
    design_other: Uses first-block (between-subjects emulation) group statistics from Table 7.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: First Person
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: null
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and her partner Alfie are in a long-running dispute with their neighbor because the neighbor keeps
            knocking over Kristin and Alfie's garbage can...
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette is about a neighbor/garbage-can dispute (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos); coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: But the garbage can could have been knocked over by someone else. Are you sure your neighbor did it?
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions introduce explicit doubt/counterconsiderations.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: As part of a kidnapping investigation... it's really important for our investigation that we are clear on
            this.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascriber is explicitly presented as aware of the high-stakes consequences in the high-context version.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee’s evidence is direct repeated observation (first-person).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin doesn't know that he knocked it over.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge denial about Kristin ('Kristin doesn't know...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Source reliability is not meaningfully manipulated/coded as High/Medium/Low; set to null.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Context manipulation bundles higher stakes for the ascriber plus explicit error-possibility cues.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, negative sentence (first-block)
      n: 121
      mean: 48.36
      sd: 41.17
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 15
        quote: 'Knowledge-Neighbor, Neg: Low N=121, Mean=48.36, SD=41.17.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p15_t3.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, negative sentence (first-block)
      n: 98
      mean: 78.73
      sd: 31.29
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 15
        quote: 'Knowledge-Neighbor, Neg: High N=98, Mean=78.73, SD=31.29.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p15_t3.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: -0.819031051268486
      v: 0.020014193896354
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed from Table 7 group stats in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd (method=between_groups).
    quality_flags: []
    notes: null
  - effect_id: s1_e3
    subgroup: Knowledge-Sunshine (positive; first-block)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a positive third-person knowledge attribution in the Sunshine
      scenario (first-block between-subjects emulation): Low vs High context.'
    design: Between-Subjects
    design_other: Uses first-block (between-subjects emulation) group statistics from Table 7.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: External
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: Low
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Later, Bob meets his friend Rocco... a big outdoor charity fundraiser for the local children's hospital...
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette concerns a weather forecast/sunshine prediction tied to a fundraiser (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos);
          coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: The website he looked at isn't always right about the weather.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions explicitly introduce doubt about the evidence source.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: If he doesn't raise a million dollars at the fundraiser, the hospital will have to close down.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-stakes consequences are explicitly described as part of the situation at the time of the ascription.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Terence checked the weather online and it said it is going to be sunny.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee’s evidence is an online forecast/website (external source).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Terence knows that it's going to be sunny tomorrow.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge attribution about Terence ('Terence knows...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: The website he looked at isn't always right about the weather.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The evidence source is explicitly characterized as not always right; coded Low per coding guide.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Context manipulation bundles higher stakes for the ascriber plus explicit error-possibility cues.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, positive sentence (first-block)
      n: 121
      mean: 72.67
      sd: 34.15
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 15
        quote: 'Knowledge-Sunshine, Pos: Low N=121, Mean=72.67, SD=34.15.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p15_t3.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, positive sentence (first-block)
      n: 98
      mean: 63.23
      sd: 35.56
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 15
        quote: 'Knowledge-Sunshine, Pos: High N=98, Mean=63.23, SD=35.56.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p15_t3.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: 0.271363082187571
      v: 0.018638217074769
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed from Table 7 group stats in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd (method=between_groups).
    quality_flags: []
    notes: null
  - effect_id: s1_e4
    subgroup: Knowledge-Sunshine (negative; first-block)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a negative third-person knowledge attribution in the Sunshine
      scenario (first-block between-subjects emulation): Low vs High context.'
    design: Between-Subjects
    design_other: Uses first-block (between-subjects emulation) group statistics from Table 7.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: External
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: Low
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Later, Bob meets his friend Rocco... a big outdoor charity fundraiser for the local children's hospital...
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette concerns a weather forecast/sunshine prediction tied to a fundraiser (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos);
          coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: The website he looked at isn't always right about the weather.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions explicitly introduce doubt about the evidence source.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: If he doesn't raise a million dollars at the fundraiser, the hospital will have to close down.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-stakes consequences are explicitly described as part of the situation at the time of the ascription.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Terence checked the weather online and it said it is going to be sunny.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee’s evidence is an online forecast/website (external source).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Terence doesn't know that it's going to be sunny tomorrow.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge denial about Terence ('Terence doesn't know...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: The website he looked at isn't always right about the weather.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The evidence source is explicitly characterized as not always right; coded Low per coding guide.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Context manipulation bundles higher stakes for the ascriber plus explicit error-possibility cues.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, negative sentence (first-block)
      n: 105
      mean: 43.27
      sd: 40.94
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 15
        quote: 'Knowledge-Sunshine, Neg: Low N=105, Mean=43.27, SD=40.94.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p15_t3.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, negative sentence (first-block)
      n: 107
      mean: 54.86
      sd: 36.82
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 15
        quote: 'Knowledge-Sunshine, Neg: High N=107, Mean=54.86, SD=36.82.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p15_t3.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: -0.297829073010157
      v: 0.019080799527595
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed from Table 7 group stats in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd (method=between_groups).
    quality_flags: []
    notes: null
  - effect_id: s1_e5
    subgroup: Knowledge-Neighbor (positive; all responses)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a positive third-person knowledge attribution in the Neighbor
      scenario (all responses within-subject): Low vs High context.'
    design: Within-Subjects
    design_other: Uses Table 6 all-response means/SDs plus paired-samples t test from the within-subject analysis.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: First Person
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: null
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and her partner Alfie are in a long-running dispute with their neighbor because the neighbor keeps
            knocking over Kristin and Alfie's garbage can...
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette is about a neighbor/garbage-can dispute (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos); coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: But the garbage can could have been knocked over by someone else. Are you sure your neighbor did it?
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions introduce explicit doubt/counterconsiderations.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: As part of a kidnapping investigation... it's really important for our investigation that we are clear on
            this.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascriber is explicitly presented as aware of the high-stakes consequences in the high-context version.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee's evidence is direct repeated observation (first-person).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin knows that he knocked it over.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge attribution ('Kristin knows...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Source reliability is not meaningfully manipulated/coded as High/Medium/Low; set to null.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Within-subject all-response contrast; same participants rated both low- and high-context variants.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, positive sentence (all responses)
      n: 431
      mean: 54.38
      sd: 39.9
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 12
        quote: 'Table 6, Knowledge-Neighbor Positive: Low Mean=54.38, SD=39.90.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p12_t2.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, positive sentence (all responses)
      n: 431
      mean: 37.45
      sd: 38.22
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 12
        quote: 'Table 6, Knowledge-Neighbor Positive: High Mean=37.45, SD=38.22.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p12_t2.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: 0.433335546696026
      v: 0.002166032865867
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd using within_smcrp_t (paired t used to recover within-person r); supplemental
        within-subject all-response effect retained alongside the primary first-block between-subject effect.
    quality_flags: []
    notes: Supplemental within-subject all-response analysis.
  - effect_id: s1_e6
    subgroup: Knowledge-Neighbor (negative; all responses)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a negative third-person knowledge attribution in the Neighbor
      scenario (all responses within-subject): Low vs High context.'
    design: Within-Subjects
    design_other: Uses Table 6 all-response means/SDs plus paired-samples t test from the within-subject analysis.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: First Person
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: null
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and her partner Alfie are in a long-running dispute with their neighbor because the neighbor keeps
            knocking over Kristin and Alfie's garbage can...
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette is about a neighbor/garbage-can dispute (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos); coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: But the garbage can could have been knocked over by someone else. Are you sure your neighbor did it?
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions introduce explicit doubt/counterconsiderations.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: As part of a kidnapping investigation... it's really important for our investigation that we are clear on
            this.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascriber is explicitly presented as aware of the high-stakes consequences in the high-context version.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee's evidence is direct repeated observation (first-person).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin doesn't know that he knocked it over.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge denial about Kristin ('Kristin doesn't know...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Source reliability is not meaningfully manipulated/coded as High/Medium/Low; set to null.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Within-subject all-response contrast; same participants rated both low- and high-context variants.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, negative sentence (all responses)
      n: 431
      mean: 61.75
      sd: 38.97
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 12
        quote: 'Table 6, Knowledge-Neighbor Negative: Low Mean=61.75, SD=38.97.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p12_t2.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, negative sentence (all responses)
      n: 431
      mean: 72.23
      sd: 35.91
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 12
        quote: 'Table 6, Knowledge-Neighbor Negative: High Mean=72.23, SD=35.91.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p12_t2.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: -0.279681096460002
      v: 0.002060151214684
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd using within_smcrp_t (paired t used to recover within-person r); supplemental
        within-subject all-response effect retained alongside the primary first-block between-subject effect.
    quality_flags: []
    notes: Supplemental within-subject all-response analysis.
  - effect_id: s1_e7
    subgroup: Knowledge-Sunshine (positive; all responses)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a positive third-person knowledge attribution in the Sunshine
      scenario (all responses within-subject): Low vs High context.'
    design: Within-Subjects
    design_other: Uses Table 6 all-response means/SDs plus paired-samples t test from the within-subject analysis.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: External
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: Low
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Later, Bob meets his friend Rocco... a big outdoor charity fundraiser for the local children's hospital...
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette concerns a weather forecast/sunshine prediction tied to a fundraiser (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos);
          coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: The website he looked at isn't always right about the weather.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions explicitly introduce doubt about the evidence source.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: If he doesn't raise a million dollars at the fundraiser, the hospital will have to close down.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-stakes consequences are explicitly described as part of the situation at the time of the ascription.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Terence checked the weather online and it said it is going to be sunny.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee's evidence is an online forecast/website (external source).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Terence knows that it's going to be sunny tomorrow.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge attribution about Terence ('Terence knows...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: The website he looked at isn't always right about the weather.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The evidence source is explicitly characterized as not always right; coded Low per coding guide.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Within-subject all-response contrast; same participants rated both low- and high-context variants.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, positive sentence (all responses)
      n: 431
      mean: 65.42
      sd: 35.64
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 12
        quote: 'Table 6, Knowledge-Sunshine Positive: Low Mean=65.42, SD=35.64.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p12_t2.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, positive sentence (all responses)
      n: 431
      mean: 54.37
      sd: 37.31
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 12
        quote: 'Table 6, Knowledge-Sunshine Positive: High Mean=54.37, SD=37.31.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p12_t2.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: 0.302867873807517
      v: 0.002892628746778
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd using within_smcrp_t (paired t used to recover within-person r); supplemental
        within-subject all-response effect retained alongside the primary first-block between-subject effect.
    quality_flags: []
    notes: Supplemental within-subject all-response analysis.
  - effect_id: s1_e8
    subgroup: Knowledge-Sunshine (negative; all responses)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a negative third-person knowledge attribution in the Sunshine
      scenario (all responses within-subject): Low vs High context.'
    design: Within-Subjects
    design_other: Uses Table 6 all-response means/SDs plus paired-samples t test from the within-subject analysis.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: External
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: Low
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Later, Bob meets his friend Rocco... a big outdoor charity fundraiser for the local children's hospital...
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette concerns a weather forecast/sunshine prediction tied to a fundraiser (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos);
          coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: The website he looked at isn't always right about the weather.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions explicitly introduce doubt about the evidence source.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: If he doesn't raise a million dollars at the fundraiser, the hospital will have to close down.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-stakes consequences are explicitly described as part of the situation at the time of the ascription.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Terence checked the weather online and it said it is going to be sunny.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee's evidence is an online forecast/website (external source).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Terence doesn't know that it's going to be sunny tomorrow.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge denial about Terence ('Terence doesn't know...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: The website he looked at isn't always right about the weather.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The evidence source is explicitly characterized as not always right; coded Low per coding guide.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Within-subject all-response contrast; same participants rated both low- and high-context variants.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, negative sentence (all responses)
      n: 431
      mean: 47.61
      sd: 39.98
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 12
        quote: 'Table 6, Knowledge-Sunshine Negative: Low Mean=47.61, SD=39.98.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p12_t2.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, negative sentence (all responses)
      n: 431
      mean: 57.34
      sd: 37.31
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 12
        quote: 'Table 6, Knowledge-Sunshine Negative: High Mean=57.34, SD=37.31.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p12_t2.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: -0.251628915397032
      v: 0.001740597883355
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd using within_smcrp_t (paired t used to recover within-person r); supplemental
        within-subject all-response effect retained alongside the primary first-block between-subject effect.
    quality_flags: []
    notes: Supplemental within-subject all-response analysis.
  notes: null
- study_id: 2
  label: 'Experiment 2: Revised Neighbor'
  objective: Follow-up experiment removing a potential confound in the original Neighbor scenario; test whether context (Low
    vs High) and polarity (positive vs negative) interact for third-person knowledge attributions in the revised Neighbor
    vignette.
  sample:
    n_final: 402
    recruitment: mTurk
    recruitment_other: null
    compensation: money
    compensation_other: $0.30
    characteristics: Amazon Mechanical Turk participants; location restricted to United States; approval rate >=95%; >=50
      HITs approved; attention-check failures excluded.
    mean_age: 35.87
    mean_age_prov:
      page: null
      quote: The mean age of participants was 35.87.
      tei_id: null
      table_ref: null
    provenance:
      page: null
      quote: We recruited 596 participants on Amazon's Mechanical Turk... paid $.30... The survey remained open until 402
        participants completed the survey...
      tei_id: null
      table_ref: null
  design: null
  design_other: 'Mixed: within-subjects (all Neighbor variants) plus between-subjects emulation using the first scenario/first-block
    presentation.'
  manipulated_factors:
  - Polarity (positive vs negative knowledge ascription sentence)
  - Context (Low vs High; higher stakes + explicit error-possibility cues for the ascriber)
  paradigm: Agreement that a sentence is true
  paradigm_other: null
  scale:
    label: other
    points: null
    anchors: 0 (False) to 100 (True) sliding scale
    direction: Higher numbers indicate judging the target sentence as more true.
    provenance:
      page: null
      quote: Experiment 2 used... the same continuous scale truth-value judgment task.
      tei_id: null
      table_ref: null
  measures:
    knowledge_question_text: Judge whether the claim made by the bolded target sentence is true or false (0–100 sliding scale).
    knowledge_question_first: null
    additional_question_text: null
  scenarios: []
  effects:
  - effect_id: s2_e1
    subgroup: Revised Neighbor (positive; when presented first)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a positive third-person knowledge attribution in the revised
      Neighbor scenario (between-subjects emulation): Low vs High context, when presented first.'
    design: Between-Subjects
    design_other: Uses Table 8 ''When presented first'' group statistics.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: First Person
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: null
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: After Kristin goes to work Alfie gets a visit from the police... Does Kristin know that your neighbor knocked
            over the garbage can?
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette is about a neighbor/garbage-can dispute in a police investigation context (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos);
          coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: the garbage can could have been knocked over by a gust of wind or a raccoon
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions introduce explicit counterconsiderations/possibilities of error.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: it's really important for our investigation that we are clear on this.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascriber is explicitly presented as aware of the high-stakes consequences in the high-context version.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee’s evidence is direct repeated observation (first-person).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin knows that he knocked it over.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge attribution ('Kristin knows...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Source reliability is not meaningfully manipulated/coded as High/Medium/Low; set to null.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Context manipulation bundles higher stakes for the ascriber plus explicit error-possibility cues.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, positive sentence (when presented first)
      n: 107
      mean: 49.77
      sd: 42.48
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 19
        quote: 'Low, Positive: When presented first N=107, Mean=49.77, SD=42.48.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p19_t4.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, positive sentence (when presented first)
      n: 96
      mean: 41.66
      sd: 40.22
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 19
        quote: 'High, Positive: When presented first N=96, Mean=41.66, SD=40.22.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p19_t4.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: 0.195765059327109
      v: 0.019857794289173
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed from Table 8 ('When presented first') group stats in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd (method=between_groups).
    quality_flags: []
    notes: null
  - effect_id: s2_e2
    subgroup: Revised Neighbor (negative; when presented first)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a negative third-person knowledge attribution in the revised
      Neighbor scenario (between-subjects emulation): Low vs High context, when presented first.'
    design: Between-Subjects
    design_other: Uses Table 8 ''When presented first'' group statistics.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: First Person
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: null
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: After Kristin goes to work Alfie gets a visit from the police... Does Kristin know that your neighbor knocked
            over the garbage can?
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette is about a neighbor/garbage-can dispute in a police investigation context (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos);
          coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: the garbage can could have been knocked over by a gust of wind or a raccoon
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions introduce explicit counterconsiderations/possibilities of error.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: it's really important for our investigation that we are clear on this.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascriber is explicitly presented as aware of the high-stakes consequences in the high-context version.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee’s evidence is direct repeated observation (first-person).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin doesn't know that he knocked it over.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge denial about Kristin ('Kristin doesn't know...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Source reliability is not meaningfully manipulated/coded as High/Medium/Low; set to null.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Context manipulation bundles higher stakes for the ascriber plus explicit error-possibility cues.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, negative sentence (when presented first)
      n: 102
      mean: 52.91
      sd: 41.29
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 19
        quote: 'Low, Negative: When presented first N=102, Mean=52.91, SD=41.29.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p19_t4.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, negative sentence (when presented first)
      n: 97
      mean: 75.07
      sd: 31.3
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 19
        quote: 'High, Negative: When presented first N=97, Mean=75.07, SD=31.30.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p19_t4.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: -0.602788532858641
      v: 0.021035418232204
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed from Table 8 ('When presented first') group stats in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd (method=between_groups).
    quality_flags: []
    notes: null
  - effect_id: s2_e3
    subgroup: Revised Neighbor (positive; all responses)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a positive third-person knowledge attribution in the revised
      Neighbor scenario (all responses within-subject): Low vs High context.'
    design: Within-Subjects
    design_other: Uses Table 8 overall means/SDs plus paired-samples t test from the within-subject analysis.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: First Person
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: null
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: After Kristin goes to work Alfie gets a visit from the police... Does Kristin know that your neighbor knocked
            over the garbage can?
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette is about a neighbor/garbage-can dispute in a police investigation context (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos);
          coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: the garbage can could have been knocked over by a gust of wind or a raccoon
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions introduce explicit counterconsiderations/possibilities of error.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: it's really important for our investigation that we are clear on this.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascriber is explicitly presented as aware of the high-stakes consequences in the high-context version.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee's evidence is direct repeated observation (first-person).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin knows that he knocked it over.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge attribution ('Kristin knows...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Source reliability is not meaningfully manipulated/coded as High/Medium/Low; set to null.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Within-subject all-response contrast; same participants rated both low- and high-context variants.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, positive sentence (all responses)
      n: 402
      mean: 59.95
      sd: 40.1
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 19
        quote: 'Table 8 Overall, Positive: Low Mean=59.95, SD=40.10.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p19_t4.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, positive sentence (all responses)
      n: 402
      mean: 50.88
      sd: 41.71
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 19
        quote: 'Table 8 Overall, Positive: High Mean=50.88, SD=41.71.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p19_t4.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: 0.22169035910049
      v: 0.00153970173449
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd using within_smcrp_t (paired t used to recover within-person r); supplemental
        within-subject all-response effect retained alongside the primary first-block between-subject effect.
    quality_flags: []
    notes: Supplemental within-subject all-response analysis.
  - effect_id: s2_e4
    subgroup: Revised Neighbor (negative; all responses)
    subgroup_desc: 'Context effect on truth-value judgments for a negative third-person knowledge attribution in the revised
      Neighbor scenario (all responses within-subject): Low vs High context.'
    design: Within-Subjects
    design_other: Uses Table 8 overall means/SDs plus paired-samples t test from the within-subject analysis.
    moderators:
      scenario: other
      skeptical_pressure: 'Yes'
      awareness: 'Yes'
      evidence: First Person
      attribution_person: Other
      evidence_reliability: null
    moderators_coding:
      scenario:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: After Kristin goes to work Alfie gets a visit from the police... Does Kristin know that your neighbor knocked
            over the garbage can?
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The vignette is about a neighbor/garbage-can dispute in a police investigation context (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos);
          coded other.
      skeptical_pressure:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: the garbage can could have been knocked over by a gust of wind or a raccoon
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: High-context versions introduce explicit counterconsiderations/possibilities of error.
      awareness:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: it's really important for our investigation that we are clear on this.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascriber is explicitly presented as aware of the high-stakes consequences in the high-context version.
      evidence:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: The ascribee's evidence is direct repeated observation (first-person).
      attribution_person:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin doesn't know that he knocked it over.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Participants judge a third-person knowledge denial about Kristin ('Kristin doesn't know...').
      evidence_reliability:
        provenance:
          page: null
          quote: Kristin and Alfie have seen him do it many times.
          tei_id: null
          table_ref: null
        reason: Source reliability is not meaningfully manipulated/coded as High/Medium/Low; set to null.
    contrast:
      group_high: High
      group_low: Low
      sign_convention: d = mean(low) - mean(high)
      other_notes: Within-subject all-response contrast; same participants rated both low- and high-context variants.
    groups:
    - group_id: Low
      label: Low context, negative sentence (all responses)
      n: 402
      mean: 58.03
      sd: 40.33
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 19
        quote: 'Table 8 Overall, Negative: Low Mean=58.03, SD=40.33.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p19_t4.csv
    - group_id: High
      label: High context, negative sentence (all responses)
      n: 402
      mean: 64.33
      sd: 39.42
      se: null
      provenance:
        page: 19
        quote: 'Table 8 Overall, Negative: High Mean=64.33, SD=39.42.'
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: camelot_stream_p19_t4.csv
    effect_size:
      metric: SMD
      d: -0.157983445773274
      v: 0.001805428011897
      computed_from: groups
      needs_review: false
      notes: Computed in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd using within_smcrp_t (paired t used to recover within-person r); supplemental
        within-subject all-response effect retained alongside the primary first-block between-subject effect.
    quality_flags: []
    notes: Supplemental within-subject all-response analysis.
  notes: null