Testing the persuasiveness of conspiracy theories: a comparison of narrative and argumentative strategies.

Adornetti I, Altavilla D, Chiera A, Deriu V, Gerna A, Picca L, Ferretti F

DOI: 10.1007/s10339-025-01282-9
Published: 2025 Nov
Container: Cognitive processing
Publisher: Not recorded
Open access: unknown

Credibility signals

limited evidence Score 43/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

cautionDOI registered: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
cautionDOI resolves: No matching Crossref record was present in this response. Source: Crossref; license: CC0 metadata
not scoredDirectory of Open Access Journals: No matching DOAJ record was present in this response. No allow-list match; this is not evidence of low credibility. Source: DOAJ; license: CC0
not scoredMEDLINE indexed: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredOpenAlex core source: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredKnown publisher allow-list: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredROR affiliation: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredRetraction Watch retraction: No retraction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch expression of concern: No expression of concern notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch correction: No correction notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredRetraction Watch reinstatement: No reinstatement notice matched this DOI in the deployed snapshot. No matching event found; coverage may be incomplete. Source: Retraction Watch; license: CC BY 4.0
not scoredOpen access status: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication license: Not checked or no result supplied; no credibility inference made. Source: No authority result supplied; license: Unknown
not scoredPublication version: A publication version was supplied but is not scored. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer
cautionMetadata completeness: 5 of 6 scored descriptive metadata groups are present; missing fields increase uncertainty. Source: Normalized work metadata; license: Caller-provided; provenance license not supplied to scorer

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1007/s10339-025-01282-9,
  title = {Testing the persuasiveness of conspiracy theories: a comparison of narrative and argumentative strategies.},
  author = {Adornetti I and Altavilla D and Chiera A and Deriu V and Gerna A and Picca L and Ferretti F},
  year = {2025},
  journal = {Cognitive processing},
  doi = {10.1007/s10339-025-01282-9},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-025-01282-9}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Testing the persuasiveness of conspiracy theories: a comparison of narrative and argumentative strategies.
AU  - Adornetti I
AU  - Altavilla D
AU  - Chiera A
AU  - Deriu V
AU  - Gerna A
AU  - Picca L
AU  - Ferretti F
PY  - 2025
JO  - Cognitive processing
DO  - 10.1007/s10339-025-01282-9
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-025-01282-9
ER  -

APA

I, A., D, A., A, C., V, D., A, G., L, P., & F, F. (2025). Testing the persuasiveness of conspiracy theories: a comparison of narrative and argumentative strategies.. Cognitive processing. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-025-01282-9

Source records

pubmed · retrieved 2026-09-25T14:35:20.089Z