Topic
False accusation
About: False accusation is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 892 publications have been published within this topic receiving 12391 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
1 / 2
Papers
Book•
1 Jan 1986
TL;DR: The Secret Trauma remains the definitive argument for the overwhelming prevalence of incestuous abuse as discussed by the authors, based on findings about San Francisco, the book makes a persuasive case for an epidemic of abuse on a national scale.
Abstract: This landmark book, based on a scientifically sound, large-scale study, presents convincing evidence that both the incidence and the consequences of incest have been grossly underestimated.. The Secret Trauma remains the definitive argument for the overwhelming prevalence of incestuous abuse. Based on findings about San Francisco, the book makes a persuasive case for an epidemic of abuse on a national scale. In a new introduction to the revised edition, Russell takes on the most important issue to arise in the field since the book was originally published in 1986: the serious backlash that followed the outpouring of reports by victims/survivors, and the controversy over false accusations and false memories. } The Secret Trauma remains the definitive argument for the overwhelming prevalence of incestuous abuse. Based on findings about San Francisco, the book makes a persuasive case for an epidemic of abuse on a national scale. In her nuanced and sophisticated analysis, Russell carefully explores the complex variables of incestuous abuse: the changing incidence of abuse over time, the severity of th abuse, the victims age, factors of class, race, and ethnicity, and long term effects on victims.In a new introduction to the revised edition, Russell takes on the most important issue to arise in the field since the book was originally published in 1986: the serious backlash that followed the outpouring of reports by victims/survivors, and the controversy over false accusations and false memories. }
1,107 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that greenwashing epistemologically is constituted in the eye of the beholder, depending on an external accusation and propose a new typology of case-based greenwashing (greenwashing, false greenwashing, potential greenwashing and no greenwashing) and the effects of these types on corporate legitimacy.
Abstract: Is greenwashing a concept describing companies using misleading communication or is it co-constructed in the eye of the beholder? By discussing the literature, we find that existing definitions of greenwashing overemphasize the strategic intention to mislead and do not incorporate unjust allegations. Then, by combining signaling theory with legitimacy theory, we frame the communication process of the greenwashing accusation and the emergence of a negative narrative caused by the accusation and its effect on legitimacy. Hence, in this paper we argue that greenwashing epistemologically is constituted in the eye of the beholder, depending on an external accusation. Following this view, the greenwashing accusation is understood as a distortion factor altering the signal reliability of green messages. Based on our conceptual analysis, we provide a conceptual framework introducing a new typology of case-based greenwashing (greenwashing, false greenwashing, potential greenwashing and no greenwashing) and the effects of these types on corporate legitimacy. Finally, we propose a revised definition of greenwashing as co-creation of an external accusation toward an organization with regard to presenting a misleading green message. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment
435 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: The authors found that repeated identifying a claim as false helped older adults remember it as false in the short term, but paradoxically made them more likely to recall it as true after a three-day delay.
Abstract: Telling people that a consumer claim is false can make them misremember it as true. In two experiments older adults were especially susceptible to this "illusion of truth" effect. Repeatedly identifying a claim as false helped older adults remember it as false in the short term, but paradoxically made them more likely to remember it as true after a three-day delay. This unintended effect of repetition comes from increased familiarity with the claim itself, but decreased recollection of the claim's original context. Findings provide insight into susceptibility over time to memory distortions and exploitation via repetition of claims in media and advertising.
385 citations
TL;DR: This article found that repeated identifying a claim as false helped older adults remember it as false in the short term but paradoxically made them more likely to recall it as true after a 3 day delay.
Abstract: Telling people that a consumer claim is false can make them misremember it as true. In two experiments, older adults were especially susceptible to this “illusion of truth” effect. Repeatedly identifying a claim as false helped older adults remember it as false in the short term but paradoxically made them more likely to remember it as true after a 3 day delay. This unintended effect of repetition comes from increased familiarity with the claim itself but decreased recollection of the claim’s original context. Findings provide insight into susceptibility over time to memory distortions and exploitation via repetition of claims in media and advertising.
280 citations
1 Aug 2017
TL;DR: In the U.S., the election year made fact-checking a part of household terminology and during the first presidential debate on September 26, 2016, NPR.org's live fact-checked website drew 7.4 million page views and delivered its biggest traffic day ever.
Abstract: Our society is struggling with an unprecedented amount of falsehoods, hyperboles, and half-truths. Politicians and organizations repeatedly make the same false claims. Fake news floods the cyberspace and even allegedly influenced the 2016 election. In fighting false information, the number of active fact-checking organizations has grown from 44 in 2014 to 114 in early 2017. 1 Fact-checkers vet claims by investigating relevant data and documents and publish their verdicts. For instance, PolitiFact.com, one of the earliest and most popular fact-checking projects, gives factual claims truthfulness ratings such as True, Mostly True, Half true, Mostly False, False, and even "Pants on Fire". In the U.S., the election year made fact-checking a part of household terminology. For example, during the first presidential debate on September 26, 2016, NPR.org's live fact-checking website drew 7.4 million page views and delivered its biggest traffic day ever.
262 citations
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 43 |
| 2024 | 69 |
| 2023 | 152 |
| 2022 | 195 |
| 2021 | 46 |
| 2020 | 60 |