Epistemically unwarranted beliefs scale, development and evidence of validity in the Chilean population
Rodrigo Ferrer-Urbina, Herman Elgueta, Marcos Carmona-Halty, Geraldy Sepúlveda-Paez, Karina Alarcón-Castillo, Fernando Blanco, Fernando Blanco, Fernando Blanco

TL;DR
This study created a short, valid scale to measure beliefs in paranormal, pseudoscientific, and conspiracy ideas in the Chilean population.
Contribution
A new brief scale for measuring epistemically unwarranted beliefs with strong validity evidence in a Latin American context.
Findings
The EUBS consists of 9 items grouped into three factors with strong internal consistency.
The scale showed gender invariance and validity through its relation with cognitive reflection and sociodemographic variables.
The scale is not influenced by local factors and can be used across different populations.
Abstract
The study of epistemically unwarranted beliefs (EUB) (i.e., paranormal, pseudoscientific and conspiracy beliefs) has become relevant due to the negative effects they have produced on people’s health, as evidenced in the covid-19 pandemic. However, there is no instrument with appropriate and updated validity evidence for its evaluation in Latin American people. Because of this, the present study aims to develop a brief scale to analyze general epistemically unwarranted beliefs that do not depend on local factors. A total of 634 adults from five Chilean cities participated in the study of whom 93.8% (n = 575) were university students. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed that the final structure of the Epistemically Unwarranted Beliefs Scale (EUBS) considers 9 items with three related factors. In addition, results showed good internal consistency (CFI > .95; TLI > .95;…
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMisinformation and Its Impacts · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
