Non-experts tend to overlook their evaluative limitations when encountering scientific information that is easy to comprehend on a surface level – at least when they do not possess any prior beliefs about the issue at hand. We conducted an experiment that examined whether text easiness also influences non-experts’ evaluation of scientific claims if they possess previous beliefs about the claim’s validity. In a 2x2 repeated measures design, 43 undergraduate students who strongly believed that climate change is anthropogenic read brief argumentative texts that supported a claim either consistent or inconsistent with their beliefs and that were either easy or difficult to understand. Before and after reading, they indicated their agreement with the text’s major claim, perceived credibility of the text’s author, and the extent that they would rely on their own claim evaluation. In a free writing task, they also provided the reasons for their claim judgment. Results suggest that the previously observed influence of text easiness on non-experts’ reliance on their own evaluative capabilities translates to situations in which they hold prior beliefs about the text claim – but only when the claim is consistent with their beliefs. Apparently, both text difficulty and belief inconsistency remind non-experts of their own evaluative limitations. The file Scharrer et al 2021 Easiness Prior Beliefs DATA contains the data of the experiment; the variables are described in the codebook Scharrer et al 2021 Easiness Prior Beliefs CODEBOOK.

Dataset for: Scharrer, L., Bromme, R., & Stadtler, M. (2021). Information Easiness Affects Non-experts' Evaluation of Scientific Claims About Which They Hold Prior Beliefs. Frontiers in psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.678313