{
  "embedded": {
    "dir": "papers/turrindepistemiccontextualismidle/out/images/embedded",
    "num_pages": 30,
    "count": 0,
    "pages": [],
    "images": []
  },
  "rendered_pages": {
    "dir": "papers/turrindepistemiccontextualismidle/out/images/pages",
    "count": 0,
    "pages": [],
    "images": []
  },
  "figures": {
    "count": 6,
    "with_page": 0,
    "pages": [],
    "items": [
      {
        "id": "fig_0",
        "label": null,
        "head": "4",
        "caption": "Cohen's d is a standard measure of the size of a mean difference and is calculated by dividing the absolute mean difference by the (pooled) standard deviation. I follow Ellis's (2010) guidelines on interpreting effect sizes for d: d > 0.20 is very small; 0.20 > d > 0.50 is small; 0.50 > d > 0.80 is medium; 0.80 > d is large. \"Agree\" (= 6) in the Low condition and \"Somewhat agree\" (= 5) in the High condition. Assignment to condition affected whether participants agreed that the bank is open tomorrow, that Keith believes that the bank is open tomorrow, that Keith has good evidence that the bank is open tomorrow, and that Keith should come back tomorrow morning instead. Table 1A. Experiment 1: Mean response (standard deviation in parentheses) to the statements in the Low and High conditions along with the results from independent samples t-tests. d = Cohen's d; MD = mean difference; CI = confidence interval.",
        "page": null,
        "score": 0
      },
      {
        "id": "fig_1",
        "label": null,
        "head": null,
        "caption": "experimental design and procedures were exactly the same as for Experiment 1. The basic story featured a man, Stewart, considering taking a flight to Chicago. In each case, he needs a direct flight. In the low stakes version, it is not too important whether the flight is direct: instead of arriving earlier and attending a basketball game, Stewart will arrive later and attend a hockey game. In the high stakes version, it is very important whether the flight is direct: Stewart is transporting a liver for transplantation, and a non-direct flight will cause it to spoil. Here is the text for the stories: (Low/High) Stewart and his wife Jill are organ couriers. It's Saturday morning and they are currently [beginning their vacation/transporting a liver]. If they can get a direct flight to Chicago, then they will [go to Chicago to attend a basketball game/deliver the organ to a patient in Chicago]. But it must be a direct flight: if they encounter a layover, then [it will be too late to attend the basketball game, and they will switch their plans and attend a hockey game in Chicago/the organ will spoil before arriving, and they must board a train to Cincinnati and deliver it to a patient there] instead. ¶ As they check the airline's website, they see that it lists a direct flight to Chicago. Stewart says, \"I'll buy tickets and then we'll head straight to the airport.\" ¶ Jill responds [calmly/anxiously], \"This is really [not/very] important, [but/and] sometimes the online booking information is inaccurate. Do you know that the flight is direct to Chicago?\" ¶ Stewart answers, \"It was two Saturdays ago that I flew this airline to Chicago, and the flight was direct. So, [yes, I do/no, I don't] know that the flight is direct.\"",
        "page": null,
        "score": 0
      },
      {
        "id": "fig_2",
        "label": null,
        "head": null,
        "caption": "Procedure. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two conditions, Yes and No, in a between-subjects design. The procedures and questions were exactly the same as in Experiment 1. But this time the stories for the two conditions differed only in whether Keith attributes or denies knowledge to himself. Here is the text for the stories:(Yes/No) Keith and his wife Jane are driving home from work on Friday afternoon. 6",
        "page": null,
        "score": 0
      },
      {
        "id": "fig_3",
        "label": null,
        "head": null,
        "caption": "Deferral might be related to what researchers have called the \"attributer effect,\" whereby people more readily agree with first-person knowledge attributions than third-person knowledge attributions(Feltz & Zarpentine 2010, p. 689).They just received a check from a client, which Keith plans to deposit in their bank account. As they drive past the bank, they see that the lines inside are very long. Keith says, \"I hate waiting in line. I'll just come back tomorrow morning instead.\" ¶ Jane asks, \"Do you know that our bank is open tomorrow?\" ¶ Keith answers, \"It was two Saturdays ago that I went to our bank, and it was open. So, [yes, I do/no, I don't] know that our bank is open tomorrow.\"ResultsParticipants again answered the comprehension questions correctly 97% of the time.7 In line with the deferral hypothesis, participants in each condition tended to agree with the self-regarding knowledge statement: one sample t-tests, Yes, t(97) = 3.44, p < .001, MD = 0.58 [0.25, 0.92], d = 0.37 (small effect size), test proportion = 4; No, t(100) = 2.74, p = .007, MD = 0.49 [0.13, 0.84], d = 0.28 (small effect size). (See Table",
        "page": null,
        "score": 0
      },
      {
        "id": "fig_4",
        "label": null,
        "head": "(",
        "caption": "Yes/No) It's Saturday, and Stewart and his wife Jill are considering whether to fly to Chicago. They want a direct flight. As they check the airline's website, they see that it lists a direct flight to Chicago. Stewart says, \"I'll buy tickets and then we'll head straight to the airport.\" ¶ Jill asks, \"Do you know that the flight is direct to Chicago?\" ¶ Stewart answers, \"It was two Saturdays ago that I flew this airline to Chicago, and the flight was direct. So, [yes, I do/no, I don't] know that the flight is direct.\"",
        "page": null,
        "score": 0
      },
      {
        "id": "fig_5",
        "label": null,
        "head": null,
        "caption": ") = -2.24, p = .026, MD = -0.39[-0.74, -0.05], d = 0.32. Participant gender and assignment to condition interacted to produce a medium unpredicted effect on response to the truth statement. Men and women rated the truth statement similarly in the High condition, but men rated it lower in the Low condition, M = 4.85/5.58, t(100) = -2.76, p = .007, MD = -0.72 [-1.24, -0.20], d = 0.55. Participant age and assignment to condition interacted to produce an unpredicted small effect on response to the seriousness statement. Older and younger participants rated the seriousness of the situation similarly in the Low condition, but older participants rated the seriousness higher in the High condition: older/younger (median split = 27 years), M = 5.52/6.02, SD = 1.35/0.96, t(92) = -2.16, p = .034, MD = -0.50 [-0.96, -0.04], d = 0.43.",
        "page": null,
        "score": 0
      }
    ],
    "rendered": {
      "dir": "papers/turrindepistemiccontextualismidle/out/images/figures",
      "count": 0,
      "pages": [],
      "images": []
    }
  }
}