Extraction report — Turri et al. 2016

schema_version: "1.1"

paper:
  paper_id: turrietalndactionabilityjudgmentscause
  citation: "Turri, J., Buckwalter, W., & Rose, D. (2016). Actionability Judgments Cause Knowledge Judgments. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy, 5(3), 212–222."
  short_label: "Turri et al. 2016"
  doi: "10.1002/tht3.213"
  published: "Yes"
  year: 2016
  language: "English"
  language_other: null
  research_objective: "Test whether actionability judgments cause knowledge judgments (or vice versa) using causal modeling across two experiments manipulating practical stakes."
  data_availability:
    data_available_online: null
    url: null
    notes: null
  notes: null

studies:
  - study_id: 1
    label: "Experiment 1"
    objective: "Test the relationship between stakes, actionability judgments, and knowledge judgments in an intelligence-analyst vignette (Low vs High stakes; multiple dependent measures including knowledge)."
    sample:
      n_final: 200
      recruitment: "mTurk"
      recruitment_other: null
      compensation: "money"
      compensation_other: "$0.40 for approximately 2–3 minutes."
      characteristics: "Aged 18–68 years (mean age = 31); 94% reported English as a native language; 80 females."
      mean_age: 31
      mean_age_prov:
        page: null
        quote: "Two hundred participants (aged 18-68 years, mean age = 31 years; 94% reporting English as a native language; 80 females) were tested."
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: null
      provenance:
        page: null
        quote: "Two hundred participants (aged 18-68 years, mean age = 31 years; 94% reporting English as a native language; 80 females) were tested. Participants were recruited and tested online using Amazon Mechanical Turk and Qualtrics and compensated $0.40 for approximately 2-3 minutes of their time."
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: null
    design: "Between-Subjects"
    design_other: null
    manipulated_factors: []
    paradigm: "Agreement with knowledge claim"
    paradigm_other: null
    scale:
      label: "Likert 7-point"
      points: 7
      anchors: "\"strongly disagree\" … \"strongly agree\""
      direction: "Higher numbers indicate stronger agreement with the statement."
      provenance:
        page: null
        quote: "Responses were collected on a standard 7-point Likert scale anchored with \"strongly disagree,\" \"disagree,\" \"somewhat disagree,\" \"neutral,\" \"somewhat agree,\" \"agree,\" and \"strongly agree,\" left-to-right on the participant's screen. Responses were coded 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree)."
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: null
    measures:
      knowledge_question_text: "Jennifer knows that Ivan no longer [jogs regularly/is a threat]."
      knowledge_question_first: null
      additional_question_text: null
    scenarios: []
    effects:
      - effect_id: s1_e1
        subgroup: "Experiment 1 — Knowledge judgment"
        subgroup_desc: "Agreement with third-person knowledge attribution (Jennifer knows …)"
        design: "Between-Subjects"
        design_other: null
        moderators:
          scenario: other
          skeptical_pressure: "No"
          awareness: "Yes"
          evidence: "External"
          attribution_person: "Other"
          evidence_reliability: null
        moderators_coding:
          scenario:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Jennifer is an intelligence analyst developing a file on Ivan, an elusive foreign operative."
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: null
            reason: "The vignette is about an intelligence report on a foreign operative (not bank/peanuts/bridge/typos)."
          skeptical_pressure:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Jennifer has a source who tells her that Ivan stopped [his low-carb diet/selling arms to terrorists] and is no longer [jogging regularly/a threat]."
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: null
            reason: "No explicit doubt/counterconsideration is introduced; the protagonist receives testimony from a source."
          awareness:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "If Ivan still [jogs regularly/is a threat], there will be serious consequences."
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: null
            reason: "The stakes (serious consequences) are explicitly described in the scenario presented to participants."
          evidence:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Jennifer has a source who tells her that Ivan stopped [his low-carb diet/selling arms to terrorists] and is no longer [jogging regularly/a threat]."
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: null
            reason: "The evidence basis is testimony from another person (a source), i.e., external evidence."
          attribution_person:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Jennifer knows that Ivan no longer [jogs regularly/is a threat]."
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: null
            reason: "Participants rate agreement with a third-person attribution ('Jennifer knows …'), not a self-ascription."
          evidence_reliability:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Jennifer has a source who tells her that Ivan stopped [his low-carb diet/selling arms to terrorists] and is no longer [jogging regularly/a threat]."
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: null
            reason: "The source’s reliability is not specified/manipulated, so evidence_reliability is coded as null."
        contrast:
          group_high: high
          group_low: low
          sign_convention: "d = mean(low) - mean(high)"
          other_notes: "7-point agreement rating; higher = more agreement with knowledge statement."
        groups:
          - group_id: low
            label: "Low stakes"
            n: null
            mean: 4.53
            sd: 1.73
            se: null
            provenance:
              page: 5
              quote: "Knowledge,4.53 (1.73),3.49 (1.65),4.36,198.0,<.001,1.04,0.62,0.57 1.51"
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: "tabula_stream_p5_t1.csv"
          - group_id: high
            label: "High stakes"
            n: null
            mean: 3.49
            sd: 1.65
            se: null
            provenance:
              page: 5
              quote: "Knowledge,4.53 (1.73),3.49 (1.65),4.36,198.0,<.001,1.04,0.62,0.57 1.51"
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: "tabula_stream_p5_t1.csv"
        reported_test:
          test: "t"
          t: 4.36
          f: null
          chi2: null
          z: null
          df1: 198
          df2: null
          p: null
          reported_d: 0.62
          reported_r: null
          notes: "Independent samples t-test; table reports d."
          provenance:
            page: 5
            quote: "Knowledge,4.53 (1.73),3.49 (1.65),4.36,198.0,<.001,1.04,0.62,0.57 1.51"
            tei_id: null
            table_ref: "tabula_stream_p5_t1.csv"
        effect_size:
          metric: SMD
          d: 0.620000000000
          v: 0.021192068909
          computed_from: reported_d
          needs_review: false
          notes: "d from Table 1; v computed from reported d + t(df) in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd (method=between_reported_d_t_df)."
        quality_flags: []
        notes: null

  - study_id: 2
    label: "Experiment 2"
    objective: "Replicate the causal-modeling approach in a coffee-menu vignette with a Low vs High stakes manipulation; dependent measures include actionability and knowledge judgments."
    sample:
      n_final: 205
      recruitment: "mTurk"
      recruitment_other: null
      compensation: "money"
      compensation_other: null
      characteristics: "Aged 18–72 years (mean age = 32); 96% reported English as a native language; 101 females."
      mean_age: 32
      mean_age_prov:
        page: null
        quote: "Two hundred and five participants (aged 18-72 years, mean age = 32 years; 96% reporting English as a native language; 101 females) were tested."
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: null
      provenance:
        page: null
        quote: "Two hundred and five participants (aged 18-72 years, mean age = 32 years; 96% reporting English as a native language; 101 females) were tested."
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: null
    design: "Between-Subjects"
    design_other: null
    manipulated_factors: []
    paradigm: "Agreement with knowledge claim"
    paradigm_other: null
    scale:
      label: "Likert 7-point"
      points: 7
      anchors: "\"strongly disagree\" … \"strongly agree\""
      direction: "Higher numbers indicate stronger agreement with the statement."
      provenance:
        page: null
        quote: "Responses were collected on a standard 7-point Likert scale anchored with \"strongly disagree,\" \"disagree,\" \"somewhat disagree,\" \"neutral,\" \"somewhat agree,\" \"agree,\" and \"strongly agree,\" left-to-right on the participant's screen. Responses were coded 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree)."
        tei_id: null
        table_ref: null
    measures:
      knowledge_question_text: "Christina knows that the coffee [is from northern Colombia/contains pine nuts]."
      knowledge_question_first: null
      additional_question_text: null
    scenarios: []
    effects:
      - effect_id: s2_e1
        subgroup: "Experiment 2 — Knowledge judgment"
        subgroup_desc: "Agreement with third-person knowledge attribution (Christina knows …)"
        design: "Between-Subjects"
        design_other: null
        moderators:
          scenario: peanuts
          skeptical_pressure: "No"
          awareness: "Yes"
          evidence: "First Person"
          attribution_person: "Other"
          evidence_reliability: null
        moderators_coding:
          scenario:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Christina knows that the coffee [is from northern Colombia/contains pine nuts]."
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: null
            reason: "The vignette concerns whether food contains nuts (pine nuts), matching the peanuts/allergy scenario family."
          skeptical_pressure:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Christina observes that the latest shipment of coffee [is from northern Colombia/contains trace amounts of pine nuts]."
              tei_id: "tab_2"
              table_ref: null
            reason: "No explicit counterconsideration or doubt is introduced; the protagonist observes the relevant fact."
          awareness:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "If the coffee [is from northern Colombia/contains pine nuts], there could be serious consequences."
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: null
            reason: "The stakes (serious consequences) are explicitly described in the scenario presented to participants."
          evidence:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Christina observes that the latest shipment of coffee [is from northern Colombia/contains trace amounts of pine nuts]."
              tei_id: "tab_2"
              table_ref: null
            reason: "The evidence is based on the protagonist’s own observation (first-person evidence)."
          attribution_person:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Christina knows that the coffee [is from northern Colombia/contains pine nuts]."
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: null
            reason: "Participants rate agreement with a third-person attribution ('Christina knows …'), not a self-ascription."
          evidence_reliability:
            provenance:
              page: null
              quote: "Christina observes that the latest shipment of coffee [is from northern Colombia/contains trace amounts of pine nuts]."
              tei_id: "tab_2"
              table_ref: null
            reason: "The paper does not specify/manipulate source reliability, so evidence_reliability is coded as null."
        contrast:
          group_high: high
          group_low: low
          sign_convention: "d = mean(low) - mean(high)"
          other_notes: "7-point agreement rating; higher = more agreement with knowledge statement."
        groups:
          - group_id: low
            label: "Low stakes"
            n: null
            mean: 6.13
            sd: 1.11
            se: null
            provenance:
              page: 7
              quote: "Knowledge,6.13 (1.11),6.19 (1.13),−0.38,203.0,.702,−0.06,0.05,−0.37 0.25"
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: "tabula_stream_p7_t2.csv"
          - group_id: high
            label: "High stakes"
            n: null
            mean: 6.19
            sd: 1.13
            se: null
            provenance:
              page: 7
              quote: "Knowledge,6.13 (1.11),6.19 (1.13),−0.38,203.0,.702,−0.06,0.05,−0.37 0.25"
              tei_id: null
              table_ref: "tabula_stream_p7_t2.csv"
        reported_test:
          test: "t"
          t: -0.38
          f: null
          chi2: null
          z: null
          df1: 203
          df2: null
          p: 0.702
          reported_d: 0.05
          reported_r: null
          notes: "Independent samples t-test; table reports |d|, so sign is inferred from group means (mean_low < mean_high)."
          provenance:
            page: 7
            quote: "Knowledge,6.13 (1.11),6.19 (1.13),−0.38,203.0,.702,−0.06,0.05,−0.37 0.25"
            tei_id: null
            table_ref: "tabula_stream_p7_t2.csv"
        effect_size:
          metric: SMD
          d: -0.050000000000
          v: 0.017319177026
          computed_from: reported_d
          needs_review: false
          notes: "d from Table 2 (signed using mean_low-mean_high); v computed from reported d + t(df) in analysis/effect_sizes.qmd (method=between_reported_d_t_df)."
        quality_flags: []
        notes: null