Skip to main content

CORRECTION article

Front. Psychiatry, 08 March 2021
Sec. Schizophrenia
Volume 12 - 2021 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.664972

Corrigendum: Thinking Preferences and Conspiracy Belief: Intuitive Thinking and the Jumping to Conclusions-Bias as a Basis for the Belief in Conspiracy Theories

This article is a correction to:

  1. Thinking Preferences and Conspiracy Belief: Intuitive Thinking and the Jumping to Conclusions-Bias as a Basis for the Belief in Conspiracy Theories

    1. Read original article
\nNico PytlikNico Pytlik1Daniel SollDaniel Soll1Stephanie Mehl, Stephanie Mehl1,2*
  • 1Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy & Center for Mind, Brain and Behavior (CMBB), Philipps-University, Marburg, Germany
  • 2Department of Health and Social Work, Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

A Corrigendum on
Thinking Preferences and Conspiracy Belief: Intuitive Thinking and the Jumping to Conclusions-Bias as a Basis for the Belief in Conspiracy Theories

by Pytlik, N., Soll, D., and Mehl, S. (2020). Front. Psychiatry 11:568942. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.568942

In the original article, there was a mistake in Table 1 and Table 2 as published. In the first row of Table 1 (Conspiracy belief), results were switched for the JTC yes column and JTC no column. The correct data for Conspiracy belief under the JTC yes column is “M = 2.99 (SD =.81)” and under the JTC no column the correct data is “M = 2.58 (SD =.74)”. The corrected Table 1 appears below.

TABLE 1
www.frontiersin.org

Table 1. Comparison of Participants Regarding Cognitive Measures (CB, Thinking Styles) and JTC Measures.

TABLE 2
www.frontiersin.org

Table 2. Associations between Conspiracy Beliefs, Thinking Styles and the JTC-bias.

Additionally, in the third row of Table 2 (Need for Cognition Score), the algebraic sign of the data of column 4, JTC draws to decision, is wrong. The correct data for the Need for Cognition Score under the JTC draws to decision column is “r = 0.146”. The corrected Table 2 appears below.

The authors apologize for these errors and state that they do not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

Keywords: conspiracy theories, paranoia, jumping to conclusions, delusions, intuitive thinking, analytical thinking

Citation: Pytlik N, Soll D and Mehl S (2021) Corrigendum: Thinking Preferences and Conspiracy Belief: Intuitive Thinking and the Jumping to Conclusions-Bias as a Basis for the Belief in Conspiracy Theories. Front. Psychiatry 12:664972. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.664972

Received: 06 February 2021; Accepted: 08 February 2021;
Published: 08 March 2021.

Approved by:

Frontiers Editorial Office, Frontiers Media SA, Switzerland

Copyright © 2021 Pytlik, Soll and Mehl. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Stephanie Mehl, stephanie.mehl@staff.uni-marburg.de

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.