[en] Communicating the scientific consensus that human-caused climate change is real increases climate change beliefs, worry and support for public action in the United States. In this preregistered experiment, we tested two scientific consensus messages, a classic message on the reality of human-caused climate change and an updated message additionally emphasizing scientific agreement that climate change is a crisis. Across online convenience samples from 27 countries (n = 10,527), the classic message substantially reduces misperceptions (d = 0.47, 95% CI (0.41, 0.52)) and slightly increases climate change beliefs (from d = 0.06, 95% CI (0.01, 0.11) to d = 0.10, 95% CI (0.04, 0.15)) and worry (d = 0.05, 95% CI (-0.01, 0.10)) but not support for public action directly. The updated message is equally effective but provides no added value. Both messages are more effective for audiences with lower message familiarity and higher misperceptions, including those with lower trust in climate scientists and right-leaning ideologies. Overall, scientific consensus messaging is an effective, non-polarizing tool for changing misperceptions, beliefs and worry across different audiences.
Disciplines :
Social, industrial & organizational psychology
Author, co-author :
Većkalov, Bojana ✱; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Geiger, Sandra J ✱; Environmental Psychology, Department of Cognition, Emotion and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. sandra.geiger@univie.ac.at
Bartoš, František ; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ; Institute of Computer Science of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic
White, Mathew P ; Cognitive Science Hub, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Rutjens, Bastiaan T ; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
van Harreveld, Frenk; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ; National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
Stablum, Federica ; University of Trento, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, Trento, Italy
Akın, Berkan; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ; University of Mannheim, Department of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, Mannheim, Germany
Aldoh, Alaa ; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Bai, Jinhao ; Liberal Arts Program, Faculty of Humanities, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
Berglund, Frida ; Department of Psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden ; Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
Bratina Zimic, Aleša ; Department of Medicine and Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
Broyles, Margaret ; Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research, Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Catania, Andrea ; Department of Psychology, University of Malta, Msida, Malta
Chen, Airu ; Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Chorzępa, Magdalena; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Farahat, Eman ; Department of Psychology, Behavioural and Economic Science, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
Götz, Jakob ; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ; Motivation Psychology, Department of Occupational, Economic and Social Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
Hoter-Ishay, Bat ; Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
JORDAN, Gesine ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences (FHSE) > Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Sciences (DBCS) > Cognitive Science and Assessment ; University of Luxembourg
Joustra, Siri ; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
Klingebiel, Jonas ; School of General Studies, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Krajnc, Živa ; Department of Psychology, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia ; Department of Psychology, University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia
Krug, Antonia; Institute of Psychology, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
Andersen, Thomas Lind ; Child and Adolescent Mental Health Center, Copenhagen University Hospital-Mental Health Services CPH, Copenhagen, Denmark
Löloff, Johanna ; Department of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
Natarajan, Divya; Department of Cognitive Science, Barnard College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Newman-Oktan, Sasha ; Program in Cognitive Science, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Niehoff, Elena ; Environmental Policy Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands
Paerels, Celeste; Department of Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Papirmeister, Rachel ; Department of Cognitive Science, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Peregrina, Steven; Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Pohl, Felicia ; Faculty of Psychology, Warsaw International Studies in Psychology, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
Remsö, Amanda ; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Education, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden
Roh, Abigail ; Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Rusyidi, Binahayati ; Social Welfare Department & Center for CSR, Social Entrepreneurship & Community Empowerment, FISIP, Universitas Padjadjaran, Jatinangor-Sumedang, Indonesia
Schmidt, Justus ; University of Mannheim, Department of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, Mannheim, Germany
Shavgulidze, Mariam ; Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
Vellinho Nardin, Valentina ; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
Wang, Ruixiang; Columbia College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Warner, Kelly; Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Wattier, Miranda ; Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Wong, Chloe Y; Barnard College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
Younssi, Mariem ; LAPCOS, Université Côte d'Azur, Nice, France
Ruggeri, Kai ✱; Department of Health Policy and Management, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. dar56@cam.ac.uk ; Policy Research Group, Centre for Business Research, Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. dar56@cam.ac.uk
van der Linden, Sander ✱; Department of Psychology, School of the Biological Sciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic: e-INFRA CZ project Social Psychology Program, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam National Science Foundation Columbia University’s Office for Undergraduate Globe Education
Funding text :
We would like to thank the Junior Researcher Programme, the Global Behavioral Science (GLOBES) coordinators from Undergraduate Global Engagement at Columbia University and the Centre for Business Research in the Judge Business School as well as Corpus Christi College at the University of Cambridge. We also thank the Rationale Altruisten Mannheim e.V. and the University of Luxembourg. We would like to thank C. Akil and D. M\u0131sra G\u00FCrol for assistance in instrument adaptation, A. Heske and S. H\u00F6rberg for developing the filler task and for helping to implement the pilot study in Qualtrics, as well as A. van Stekelenburg and E. Maibach for useful feedback on an earlier draft of this manuscript. Computational resources were provided by the e-INFRA CZ project (ID:90140, F.B.), supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic. This project received funding from an internal small expenses budget from the Social Psychology Program, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam (B.R.); Columbia University\u2019s Office for Undergraduate Globe Education (K.R.); and the National Science Foundation, Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences (no. 2218595, K.R.). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.
M. Lynas B.Z. Houlton S. Perry Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature Environ. Res. Lett. 2021 16 114005 10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966
J. Cook et al. Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature Environ. Res. Lett. 2013 8 024024 10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024
J.L. Powell Climate scientists virtually unanimous: anthropogenic global warming is true Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 2015 35 121 124 10.1177/0270467616634958
P.J. Egan M. Mullin Climate change: US public opinion Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2017 20 209 227 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051215-022857
Duffy, B., Malcolm, F., May, G., Hewlett, K Haggar, T. Public Perceptions of Climate Change (Policy Institute, 2022); https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/peritia-climate-change%E2%80%8B.pdf
M.J. Hornsey E.A. Harris P.G. Bain K.S. Fielding Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change Nat. Clim. Change 2016 6 622 626 10.1038/nclimate2943
T. Bouman et al. When worry about climate change leads to climate action: How values, worry and personal responsibility relate to various climate actions Glob. Environ. Change 2020 62 102061 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102061
A.M. McCright R.E. Dunlap C. Xiao Perceived scientific agreement and support for government action on climate change in the USA Clim. Change 2013 119 511 518 10.1007/s10584-013-0704-9
J.C. Tom Social origins of scientific deviance: examining creationism and global warming skepticism Sociol. Perspect. 2018 61 341 360 10.1177/0731121417710459
D. Ding E.W. Maibach X. Zhao C. Roser-Renouf A. Leiserowitz Support for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement Nat. Clim. Change 2011 1 462 466 10.1038/nclimate1295
M.J. Hornsey S. Lewandowsky A toolkit for understanding and addressing climate scepticism Nat. Hum. Behav. 2022 6 1454 1464 36385174 7615336 10.1038/s41562-022-01463-y
T. Bolsen J.N. Druckman Do partisanship and politicization undermine the impact of a scientific consensus message about climate change? Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 2018 21 389 402 10.1177/1368430217737855
P.R. Brewer J. McKnight ‘A statistically representative climate change debate’: satirical television news, scientific consensus and public perceptions of global warming Atl. J. Commun. 2017 25 166 180 10.1080/15456870.2017.1324453
K. Kobayashi The impact of perceived scientific and social consensus on scientific beliefs Sci. Commun. 2018 40 63 88 10.1177/1075547017748948
M.H. Goldberg S. van der Linden M.T. Ballew S.A. Rosenthal A. Leiserowitz The role of anchoring in judgments about expert consensus J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2019 49 192 200 10.1111/jasp.12576
J.R. Kerr M.S. Wilson Changes in perceived scientific consensus shift beliefs about climate change and GM food safety PLoS ONE 2018 13 e0200295 29979762 6034897 10.1371/journal.pone.0200295
M.H. Goldberg et al. The experience of consensus: video as an effective medium to communicate scientific agreement on climate change Sci. Commun. 2019 41 659 673 10.1177/1075547019874361
T. Deryugina O. Shurchkov The effect of information provision on public consensus about climate change PLoS ONE 2016 11 e0151469 27064486 4827814 10.1371/journal.pone.0151469
T.A. Myers E. Maibach E. Peters A. Leiserowitz Simple messages help set the record straight about scientific agreement on human-caused climate change: the results of two experiments PLoS ONE 2015 10 e0120985 25812121 4374663 10.1371/journal.pone.0120985
J.B. Rode S. Iqbal B.J. Butler P.H. Ditto Using a news article to convey climate science consensus information Sci. Commun. 2021 43 651 673 10.1177/10755470211027235
M.N. Williams C.M.C. Bond A preregistered replication of ‘Inoculating the public against misinformation about climate change’ J. Environ. Psychol. 2020 70 101456 10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101456
S. van der Linden A. Leiserowitz S. Rosenthal E. Maibach Inoculating the public against misinformation about climate change Glob. Chall. 2017 1 1600008 31565263 6607159 10.1002/gch2.201600008
S. van der Linden A. Leiserowitz E. Maibach The gateway belief model: a large-scale replication J. Environ. Psychol. 2019 62 49 58 10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.01.009
S.L. van der Linden A.A. Leiserowitz G.D. Feinberg E.W. Maibach The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: experimental evidence PLoS ONE 2015 10 e0118489 25714347 4340922 10.1371/journal.pone.0118489
A. van Stekelenburg G. Schaap H. Veling J. van’t Riet M. Buijzen Scientific-consensus communication about contested science: a preregistered meta-analysis Psychol. Sci. 2022 33 1989 2008 36242521 10.1177/09567976221083219
J.B. Rode et al. Influencing climate change attitudes in the United States: a systematic review and meta-analysis J. Environ. Psychol. 2021 76 101623 10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101623
R. Tschötschel A. Schuck A. Schwinges A. Wonneberger Climate change policy support, intended behaviour change and their drivers largely unaffected by consensus messages in Germany J. Environ. Psychol. 2021 76 101655 10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101655
K. Tam A.K.-Y. Leung S. Clayton Research on climate change in social psychology publications: a systematic review Asian J. Soc. Psychol. 2021 24 117 143 10.1111/ajsp.12477
R. Maertens F. Anseel S. Van Der Linden Combatting climate change misinformation: evidence for longevity of inoculation and consensus messaging effects J. Environ. Psychol. 2020 70 101455 10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101455
R. Bayes T. Bolsen J.N. Druckman A research agenda for climate change communication and public opinion: the role of scientific consensus messaging and beyond Environ. Commun. 2023 17 16 34 10.1080/17524032.2020.1805343
S. van der Linden The Gateway Belief Model (GBM): a review and research agenda for communicating the scientific consensus on climate change Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2021 42 7 12 33609913 10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.01.005
Eichhorn, J., Molthof, L. & Nicke, S. From Climate Change Awareness to Climate Crisis Action: Public Perceptions in Europe and the United States (Open Society Foundations, 2020); https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/publications/from-climate-change-awareness-to-climate-crisis-action
IPCC. Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (eds Pörtner, H.-O., et al.) 3–33 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022).
J. Tollefson Top climate scientists are sceptical that nations will rein in global warming Nature 2021 599 22 24 1:CAS:528:DC%2BB3MXitlyksb3F 34725476 10.1038/d41586-021-02990-w
A. Sabherwal A.R. Pearson G. Sparkman Anger consensus messaging can enhance expectations for collective action and support for climate mitigation J. Environ. Psychol. 2021 76 101640 10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101640
Hofstede, G. Dimensionalizing cultures: the Hofstede model in context. Online Read. Psychol. Cult. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1014 (2011).
P. Slovic S. Lichtenstein Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 1971 6 649 744 10.1016/0030-5073(71)90033-X
E. Diamond T. Bernauer F. Mayer Does providing scientific information affect climate change and GMO policy preferences of the mass public? Insights from survey experiments in Germany and the United States Environ. Polit. 2020 29 1199 1218 10.1080/09644016.2020.1740547
J.G. Bullock Partisan bias and the Bayesian ideal in the study of public opinion J. Polit. 2009 71 1109 1124 10.1017/S0022381609090914
Goldberg, M., Linden, S., van der, Ballew, M. T., Rosenthal, S. A. & Leiserowitz, A. Convenient but biased? The reliability of convenience samples in research about attitudes toward climate change. Preprint at OSFhttps://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/2h7as (2019).
D.M. Kahan H. Jenkins‐Smith D. Braman Cultural cognition of scientific consensus J. Risk Res. 2011 14 147 174 10.1080/13669877.2010.511246
P.S. Hart E.C. Nisbet Boomerang effects in science communication: how motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies Commun. Res. 2012 39 701 723 10.1177/0093650211416646
J. Cook S. Lewandowsky Rational irrationality: modeling climate change belief polarization using Bayesian networks Top. Cogn. Sci. 2016 8 160 179 26749179 10.1111/tops.12186
S. Chinn D.S. Lane P.S. Hart In consensus we trust? Persuasive effects of scientific consensus communication Public Underst. Sci. 2018 27 807 823 30058947 10.1177/0963662518791094
G. Dixon A. Hubner Neutralizing the effect of political worldviews by communicating scientific agreement: a thought-listing study Sci. Commun. 2018 40 393 415 10.1177/1075547018769907
Rode, J. B., Dent, A. L Ditto, P. H. Climate change consensus messages may cause reactance in conservatives, but there is no meta-analytic evidence that they backfire. Environ. Commun. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2022.2101501 (2022).
D.K. Sherman J.A. Updegraff M.S. Handy K. Eom H.S. Kim Beliefs and social norms as precursors of environmental support: the joint influence of collectivism and socioeconomic status Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2022 48 463 477 33855914 10.1177/01461672211007252
C. Pornpitakpan J.N.P. Francis The effect of cultural differences, source expertise and argument strength on persuasion: an experiment with Canadians and Thais J. Int. Consum. Mark. 2000 13 77 101 10.1300/J046v13n01_06
J.M. Jung J.J. Kellaris Responsiveness to authority appeals among young French and American consumers J. Bus. Res. 2006 59 735 744 10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.01.011
R. Sun J. Meng Looking at young millennials’ risk perception and purchase intention toward GM foods: exploring the role of source credibility and risk attitude Health Mark. Q. 2022 39 263 279 35343385 10.1080/07359683.2022.2053805
M. Hinne Q.F. Gronau D. van den Bergh E.-J. Wagenmakers A conceptual introduction to Bayesian model averaging Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 2020 3 200 215 10.1177/2515245919898657
J.A. Hoeting D. Madigan A.E. Raftery C.T. Volinsky Bayesian model averaging: a tutorial Stat. Sci. 1999 14 382 401
T.M. Liddell J.K. Kruschke Analyzing ordinal data with metric models: what could possibly go wrong? J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2018 79 328 348 10.1016/j.jesp.2018.08.009
M. Schnuerch J.M. Haaf A. Sarafoglou J.N. Rouder Meaningful comparisons with ordinal-scale items Collabra Psychol. 2022 8 38594 10.1525/collabra.38594
W. Vanpaemel Prior sensitivity in theory testing: an apologia for the Bayes factor J. Math. Psychol. 2010 54 491 498 10.1016/j.jmp.2010.07.003
B. Zhang et al. Experimental effects of climate messages vary geographically Nat. Clim. Change 2018 8 370 374 10.1038/s41558-018-0122-0
M. Aklin J. Urpelainen Perceptions of scientific dissent undermine public support for environmental policy Environ. Sci. Policy 2014 38 173 177 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.10.006
Orchinik, R., Dubey, R., Gershman, S. J., Powell, D. & Bhui, R. Learning from and about climate scientists. Preprint at PsyArXivhttps://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ezua5 (2023).
M.H. Goldberg A. Gustafson S. van der Linden S.A. Rosenthal A. Leiserowitz Communicating the scientific consensus on climate change: diverse audiences and effects over time Environ. Behav. 2022 54 1133 1165 10.1177/00139165221129539
Van Beynen, J. & Williams, M. N. Communicating the scientific consensus on climate change: a preregistered test of the Gateway Belief Model with a one-week time delay. Preprint at PsyArXivhttps://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/f3svr (2023).
K. Treen KMd’I H.T.P. Williams S.J. O’Neill Online misinformation about climate change WIREs Clim. Change 2020 11 e665 10.1002/wcc.665
J. Painter et al. Climate delay discourses present in global mainstream television coverage of the IPCC’s 2021 report Commun. Earth Environ. 2023 4 118 10.1038/s43247-023-00760-2
D.C. Funder D.J. Ozer Evaluating effect size in psychological research: sense and nonsense. Adv Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 2019 2 156 168
F. Anvari et al. Not all effects are indispensable: psychological science requires verifiable lines of reasoning for whether an effect matters Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2023 18 503 507 35994751 10.1177/17456916221091565
J. Mellon C. Prosser Twitter and Facebook are not representative of the general population: political attitudes and demographics of British social media users Res. Polit. 2017 4 205316801772000 10.1177/2053168017720008
D. Marengo C. Sindermann J.D. Elhai C. Montag One social media company to rule them all: associations between use of Facebook-owned social media platforms, sociodemographic characteristics and the big five personality traits Front. Psychol. 2020 11 936 32547442 7273309 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00936
W. Poortinga L. Whitmarsh L. Steg G. Böhm S. Fisher Climate change perceptions and their individual-level determinants: a cross-European analysis Glob. Environ. Change 2019 55 25 35 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.01.007
R. Bertoldo et al. Scientific truth or debate: on the link between perceived scientific consensus and belief in anthropogenic climate change Public Underst. Sci. 2019 28 778 796 31359837 10.1177/0963662519865448
A. Coppock Generalizing from survey experiments conducted on Mechanical Turk: a replication approach Polit. Sci. Res. Methods 2019 7 613 628 10.1017/psrm.2018.10
K.J. Mullinix T.J. Leeper J.N. Druckman J. Freese The generalizability of survey experiments J. Exp. Polit. Sci. 2015 2 109 138 10.1017/XPS.2015.19
N. Said L.T. Frauhammer M. Huff Pre-registered replication of the Gateway Belief Model—results from a representative German sample J. Environ. Psychol. 2022 84 101910 10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101910
A.M. Van Valkengoed L. Steg Meta-analyses of factors motivating climate change adaptation behaviour Nat. Clim. Change 2019 9 158 163 10.1038/s41558-018-0371-y
W.N. Adger S. Huq K. Brown D. Conway M. Hulme Adaptation to climate change in the developing world Prog. Dev. Stud. 2003 3 179 195 10.1191/1464993403ps060oa
K. Ruggeri et al. The general fault in our fault lines Nat. Hum. Behav. 2021 5 1369 1380 33888880 10.1038/s41562-021-01092-x
K. Ruggeri et al. The globalizability of temporal discounting Nat. Hum. Behav. 2022 6 1386 1397 35817934 9584811 10.1038/s41562-022-01392-w
Maibach, E. et al. A National Survey of Republicans and Republican-Leaning Independents on Energy and Climate Change (Center for Climate Change Communication, 2013); https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/2013_04_A-National-Survey-of-Republicans-and-Republican-%C2%AD%E2%80%90Leaning-Independents-on-Energy.pdf
Forscher, P. S. et al. PSACR: The Psychological Science Accelerator’s COVID-19 Rapid-Response Project. Preprint at PsyArXivhttps://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/x976j (2020).
H. Jeffreys Some tests of significance, treated by the theory of probability Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc. 1935 31 203 222 10.1017/S030500410001330X
J.N. Rouder R.D. Morey Teaching Bayes’ theorem: strength of evidence as predictive accuracy Am. Stat. 2019 73 186 190 10.1080/00031305.2017.1341334
A. Etz E.-J.J.B.S. Wagenmakers Haldane’s contribution to the Bayes factor hypothesis test Stat. Sci. 2017 32 313 329 10.1214/16-STS599
Morey, R. D., Rouder, J. N., Jamil, T. & Morey, M. R. D. Package ‘bayesfactor’. (2015).
B. Carpenter et al. Stan: a probabilistic programming language J. Stat. Softw. 2017 76 1 32 36568334 9788645 10.18637/jss.v076.i01
Stan Development Team. RStan: the R interface to Stan. (2020).
Q.F. Gronau H. Singmann E.-J. Wagenmakers bridgesampling: an R package for estimating normalizing constants J. Stat. Softw. 2020 92 1 29 10.18637/jss.v092.i10
Lee, M. D. & Wagenmakers, E.-J. Bayesian Cognitive Modeling: A Practical Course (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).
Jeffreys, H. Theory of Probability (Oxford Univ. Press, 1939).
