The Cognitive Architecture of Convergent Denialism: A Psychosocial Analysis of Identity-Protective Cognition and the Flat Earth Phenomenon

The persistent adherence to fringe beliefs and the rejection of established scientific consensus among otherwise intelligent and functional individuals present a significant paradox for contemporary social psychology and cognitive science. Traditional models of belief formation often assume a deficit in information or a failure of logical processing as the primary drivers of erroneous conclusions. However, empirical evidence increasingly suggests that the acceptance of counter-factual narratives—such as the belief in a flat Earth—is not merely a consequence of scientific illiteracy but is deeply rooted in the complex interplay of identity-protective cognition, motivated reasoning, and a profound fracture in epistemic trust.1 For many individuals, the "importance" of a subject is directly proportional to its integration into their personal or cultural identity; when a proposition carries significant weight for an individual’s social standing or moral framework, the cognitive apparatus shifts its primary objective from truth-seeking to identity defense.3

This phenomenon is particularly salient in the case of modern flat-earthism, where the rejection of the globe is often less about geography than about the assertion of autonomy against perceived institutional hegemony.5 Intelligent individuals, far from being immune to these dynamics, often possess superior cognitive resources that they repurpose to insulate their beliefs from external correction. Through mechanisms such as sophisticated motivated reasoning and the "intelligence trap," the very analytical skills that should facilitate scientific understanding are instead used to construct elaborate rationalizations for fringe cosmologies.7 This report examines the psychological, neurological, and sociological drivers that allow such beliefs to take root in the minds of the educated and the skeptical, exploring the transition from empirical inquiry to identity-driven denialism.

The Sovereignty of Identity in Belief Formation

The fundamental premise of identity-protective cognition, as developed by social scientist Dan Kahan, is that individuals process information not to find the truth, but to protect their status within a cultural or affinity group.1 Humans are fundamentally social creatures whose survival and well-being have historically depended on maintaining strong bonds with their community. When an individual is presented with facts that contradict the shared beliefs of their group, they face an existential choice: accept the truth and risk social ostracization, or reject the truth and remain in good standing with their peers.1

For the individual, the core common beliefs of their group are an essential aspect of their identity that must be defended at all costs.1 In this context, "culture" refers to the set of beliefs, opinions, and representations that shape how an individual perceives the world and society.1 Propositions that impugn the character or competence of an identity-group, or that contradict the group's shared commitments, jeopardize the individual member's well-being.3 Consequently, individuals experience psychic pressure to resist such propositions, leading to a species of motivated reasoning where mental operations—including sensory perception and logical computation—are directed toward an end goal extrinsic to the formation of accurate beliefs.3

Dimensions of Cultural Worldviews

Kahan’s theory posits that these affinity groups are often organized along two cross-cutting dimensions of cultural values: hierarchy/egalitarianism and individualism/communitarianism.3 These worldviews act as pre-filters for risk perception and factual assessment. An individual’s position on these dimensions systematically shapes the way they assess information, leading to the phenomenon of "cultural cognition".3

When a scientific fact becomes "polluted" by social or political meaning—as is the case with climate change or the shape of the Earth—individuals will predictably align their beliefs with those of their cultural peers.1 This is not an act of irrationality in the traditional sense; rather, it is "too rational".9 For the average person, the cost of being wrong about the Earth's shape is negligible, but the cost of being alienated from their social network is devastating.9

Naïve Realism and Cognitive Illiberalism

This identity-driven processing is compounded by "naïve realism," an asymmetry in the ability of individuals to perceive the impact of motivated reasoning on themselves versus others.3 People tend to attribute the beliefs of their opponents to bias while remaining "psychologically naïve" about the contribution their own group commitments make to their perceptions.3 This creates a state of "cognitive illiberalism," where individuals view dissenting views not just as incorrect, but as evidence of corruption, stupidity, or malevolence on the part of the dissenter.3 This binary worldview is central to the flat Earth movement, which frames the globe as a "lie" perpetrated by an evil elite, thereby turning a matter of physics into a moral and spiritual struggle.5

The Neural Architecture of the Sacred

The intensity with which individuals defend fringe beliefs can be traced to the sacralization of certain values. Research indicates that when a moral community deems a value "sacred," members will strenuously resist any compromise or material incentive to abandon it.4 These sacred values are not processed through the brain's standard cost-benefit systems but are instead governed by rule-bound, duty-oriented networks.12

Neuroimaging and Rule-Based Processing

Functional neuroimaging (fMRI) studies conducted by researchers such as Gregory Berns have revealed that the processing of sacred values involves distinct cognitive pathways.12 When individuals are asked to contemplate values they refuse to "sell out" or disavow, there is heightened activation in the left temporoparietal junction (TPJ) and the left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (vlPFC).12

The TPJ is implicated in evaluating rights and wrongs and in social reasoning related to others' intentions, while the vlPFC is associated with semantic rule retrieval.12 Crucially, these values do not activate the brain's reward centers, such as the nucleus accumbens, which are typically engaged during cost-benefit trade-offs.12 This suggests that for the "true believer," a challenge to their worldview is not an invitation to reconsider the evidence but is perceived as a violation of a fundamental moral rule.12

When these sacred values are violated, the amygdala—a region associated with primitive emotional reactions—becomes highly active, inducing feelings of moral outrage.12 This neurological response explains why presenting evidence to a flat-earther often results in defensive aggression rather than curiosity. The "globe" is not just a model; it is an symbol of a "satanic" or "deceptive" system that threatens their moral universe.5

Predictive Coding and Meaning-Making

The "predictive coding" theory in neuroscience posits that the brain does not merely record sensory input but actively constructs reality based on a combination of that input and prior beliefs.15 In uncertain or threatening environments, the brain's drive to create meaning is heightened, leading to the perception of "illusory patterns".11 For individuals experiencing anxiety or a lack of control, conspiracy theories offer a simple, structured explanation for random or complex events.11 The feeling of having "exposed" a powerful enemy provides psychological compensation for feelings of powerlessness.16

The Intelligence Trap: The Paradox of Smart Denialism

A common misconception is that intelligence serves as a buffer against irrationality. In reality, high cognitive ability can actually amplify the propensity for fringe beliefs through a phenomenon known as the "intelligence trap".7 Smart people are not only just as prone to making mistakes as others, but they are often more susceptible to them because they have the mental tools to build increasingly sophisticated reasons to support their biases.7

Dysrationalia and the Bias Blind Spot

"Dysrationalia" is the term psychologists use to describe the inability to think and behave rationally despite having a high IQ.7 This occurs because IQ tests measure cognitive capacity—memory, spatial reasoning, and verbal skills—but they do not measure the "intellectual virtues" required for accurate perception, such as intellectual humility, cognitive reflection, or openness to feedback.7

Intelligent people often suffer from a "bias blind spot," where they are acutely aware of the cognitive flaws in others but are blind to their own.7 This is often compounded by "earned dogmatism," where experts who have worked hard to achieve their status believe they are beyond being wrong, leading to a state of intellectual hubris.7

Sophisticated Motivated Reasoning

When an intelligent person becomes emotionally or socially attached to a fringe theory, they use their "System 2" reasoning to justify it.9 This is not the passive acceptance of misinformation, but an active, enthusiastic process of "discovering" truths that others have missed.20 For example, a flat-earther with a background in engineering may use their knowledge of physics to create complex, albeit flawed, models of how a "dome" or "ice wall" could function, thereby convincing themselves and others that their belief is the result of rigorous, independent research.20

The "intelligence trap" explains why no amount of evidence is sufficient once a person is convinced of a narrative. They will use their reasoning skills to find ingenious explanations for why satellite photos are "CGI" or why the Coriolis effect is a "hoax".7 In this way, intelligence does not protect against the "rabbit hole"; it merely sharpens the tools used to dig deeper into it.19

The Epistemic Breach: Mistrust as a Cognitive Foundation

The adoption of fringe beliefs is rarely a sudden event; it is almost always preceded by a collapse in "epistemic trust"—the trust in information communicated by others.2 In a complex world, we must rely on experts for almost everything we know. We "believe that" the Earth is a globe because we trust the institutions that provide the evidence.25 When that trust is severed, individuals enter an "epistemic vacuum," where they become vulnerable to alternative narratives that promise a "purer" form of truth.2

Institutional Betrayal and Cultural Residue

Distrust in institutions is often not irrational; it is a response to perceived or actual breaches of trust, such as political propaganda, corporate greed, or historical atrocities.2 Psychologists use the term "institutional betrayal" to describe the emotional injury that occurs when an organization entrusted with care—such as a public health agency or a government—causes harm instead.6

Historical events like the Tuskegee syphilis experiment or the opioid crisis leave a "cultural residue" of distrust that is carried forward through generations.6 For an individual who feels betrayed by the "system," the scientific consensus is no longer seen as an objective reality but as a "facade" intended to control the masses.5 This creates a state of "benevolent control fatigue," where citizens become weary of being told what is "for their own good" by institutions they suspect are self-interested.6

Epistemic Mistrust and Narcissism

Research indicates that the link between individual narcissism and conspiratorial thinking is mediated by epistemic mistrust and rigidity.26 For narcissistic individuals, mistrust functions as a defensive strategy to shield their self-image from external challenge.26 By rejecting "authoritative" information, they can position themselves as part of an enlightened few who possess "secret knowledge".11

Individuals with high "conspiracy mentality" often overestimate their own knowledge—a phenomenon called the "illusion of explanatory depth".16 They succumb to the belief that they can explain complex phenomena that they do not understand at all, using intuitive rather than analytical thought.16

Case Study: Modern Flat-Earthism as a Gnoseological Narrative

Flat-earthism serves as a perfect case study for the convergence of these psychological factors. It is not a belief born of simple ignorance; it is an alternative worldview that combines "Cartesian doubt" with a "redpilling" narrative of spiritual and intellectual awakening.5

The History of Zetetic Skepticism

The modern flat Earth movement dates back to Samuel Rowbotham and his "Bedford Level Experiment" in 1838.23 Rowbotham used a telescope eight inches above the water to watch a boat with a flag row six miles away. He reported that the vessel remained in view the entire time, concluding that the water surface was flat.23 Although he failed to account for atmospheric refraction—the bending of light that allows objects to be seen "around" the curve—his work laid the foundation for "Zetetic" astronomy.23

Rowbotham and his followers, such as Lady Elizabeth Blount, used pseudoscience to win public debates with scientists.23 They argued that the Bible and our senses both supported a flat Earth and that scientific models were "human conjecture".23 This 19th-century movement was not just about physics; it was a power struggle between epistemic authorities, with flat-earthism serving as a tool for anti-clerical or anti-modernist narratives.5

The Modern "Redpilling" Process

In the digital age, the conversion to flat-earthism is often described as an "epiphany" or a "gnosis"—a salvific knowledge that reveals the truth behind the deception.5 This process is fueled by YouTube and social media, which create "echo chambers" where group norms are reinforced and dissent is minimized.10

Modern flat-earthers, like YouTuber Dino Tinelli or author Albino Galuppini, frame their belief as an "awakening" that allows them to counter "mind control" and "indoctrination".5 They see themselves as "seekers of real truth" who have seen through the "facade" put in front of them by "gatekeepers of knowledge" like NASA or the U.S. government.10

The Logic Gating of Persuasion: The "Aha!" Moment

A critical element in the persuasion of intelligent people into fringe beliefs is the "hunger for insight".20 People seek out activities that provide rewarding feedback, such as puzzles or games. Conspiracy theories are structured as "puzzles" that invite individuals to "do their research" and decode cryptic messages (e.g., "Q drops").20

The Power of Self-Discovery

Research shows that when individuals find evidence themselves—rather than being given it—they become far more confident in their understanding.20 For example, in experiments where participants must unscramble a jumbled sentence (e.g., "ithlium is the lightest of all metals"), they rate the statement as more accurate than those who are simply given the plain text.20

This "aha!" feeling provides a sense of discovery that is more persuasive than any lecture.20 At flat Earth conferences, speakers lay out "strange" observations—like a horizon that appears flat—and then, with a flourish, "connect" them to a shadowy cabal.20 For the attendee, this connection feels like a personal insight, which triggers a deeper acceptance of the idea. This "intellectual playfulness" is what draws smart, curious people into the community; they don't "fall" for theories, they "discover" them.20

Affect Addiction and Narrative Fluency

Social media platforms have turned users into "affect addicts," constantly seeking the next hit of anger, fear, or emotional validation.31 Misinformation is designed as a "fluent story"—it is easy to process and highly emotional. Scientific debunking, by contrast, is often "earnest," overcomplicated, and "disfluent," which makes it less attractive to the human brain.8

When a person feels a strong emotional response (like outrage at being "lied to"), they are more likely to experience "disfluency" toward opposing facts.35 In this state, they will selectively credit evidence that supports their group identity and dismiss anything that causes psychic distress.3

The Philosophical Roots: Cartesian Doubt and Pseudo-Skepticism

Intelligent flat-earthers often view themselves as modern-day Galileos, approaching reality from a position of "Cartesian doubt".31 This philosophical method, popularized by René Descartes, involves doubting everything outside the self until an undeniable truth is found.31

Scientific Skepticism vs. Denialism

However, there is a fundamental distinction between "scientific skepticism" and "denialism".25 Scientific skepticism teaches that evidence is worthy of belief when observations are repeated under controlled conditions. Denialism, on the other hand, teaches that evidence can be rejected out of hand as a matter of principle if it comes from a mistrusted source.25

Flat-earthers conflate these two. They use the language of skepticism—"question everything," "don't be a sheep"—to justify a denialist stance that is actually immune to evidence.25 This "pseudo-skepticism" is a form of "cognitive illiberalism" where the individual's "right" to their opinion is used to negate the validity of objective fact.3

Social Motives: The Need for Uniqueness and Community

The final pillar of fringe belief is the social benefit derived from the movement. People are drawn to conspiracy theories when their "deprived motivational needs" are met by the group.28 These needs include the desire to understand, to feel safe, and to feel superior to others.17

The Need for Uniqueness and Superiority

Research has found a strong relationship between "conspiracy thinking" and the "need for uniqueness".16 Individuals who feel insignificant in a globalized world can achieve a sense of "dignity" and "relative superiority" by believing they possess "special knowledge" that the masses lack.11 This is a form of "individual narcissism" where the self-perception is overestimated to compensate for feelings of inferiority.16

Collective Narcissism and Echo Chambers

"Collective narcissism"—the belief in a group's greatness combined with the feeling that others do not appreciate it—is a strong predictor of belief in conspiracies.17 Flat Earth communities provide a "knowledge community" where group norms and shared values provide validation and a sense of belonging.5 In these communities, the "truth" is less important than the "solidarity" found in fighting against a common enemy (e.g., NASA "actors").10

For the intelligent person who feels alienated from mainstream society, these fringe groups offer a "home" where their intellect is valued and their skepticism is seen as a sign of enlightenment rather than madness.10

Conclusions and Strategies for Mitigation

The persuasion of an intelligent, skeptical person into a belief in a flat Earth is not a failure of education, but a successful operation of identity-protective cognition and sophisticated motivated reasoning.1 When a topic becomes "important"—meaning it is tied to an individual's sense of self, moral framework, or social community—reasoning becomes a tool for defense rather than a mechanism for truth-seeking.3

Why "Just the Facts" Fails

Because these beliefs are processed as "sacred values" in rule-bound neural systems, providing more facts often backfires.12 Presenting evidence of the globe to a flat-earther is perceived as a "moral violation," which triggers the amygdala and induces outrage.12 Furthermore, debunking often repeats the "myth" first, which can inadvertently reinforce the misinformation in the mind of the reader.8

Trust as the Primary Intervention

The only effective way to counter fringe beliefs among the intelligent is to address the underlying "epistemic breach".2 Since the belief is rooted in a lack of trust in society and its leaders, the solution lies in rebuilding that trust through "perspective-getting" rather than "perspective-taking".20

Experts suggest the following strategies for professional communicators and peers:

1. Cultivate Intellectual Humility: Encouraging an awareness of one's own limitations and a willingness to update beliefs based on evidence is more effective than teaching specific scientific facts.40
2. Focus on Shared Wonder: Instead of debating geometry, engage the individual in shared "awe" and "curiosity" about the universe. Building bridges based on wonder can defuse the tension and allow trust to take root.39
3. Lead with the Truth: Avoid repeating the myth. Use "fluent," simple, and direct stories that focus on the positive benefits of established science.8
4. Promote Cognitive Reflection: Encourage "System 2" thinking—the deliberate, analytical reflection on one's own biases—to help individuals "suspend" their reactive intuitions.35
5. Address Social Needs: Recognize that people often turn to these theories to fulfill "deprived motivational needs." Providing alternative, healthier ways to feel unique or part of a superior community can reduce the allure of fringe groups.28

Ultimately, the belief in a flat Earth is a "psychological act of self-restoration" for those who feel lost in a world of managing institutions and perceived betrayals.6 Understanding the complex cognitive and neural mechanisms behind this phenomenon allows for a more compassionate and effective approach to maintaining a shared, evidence-based reality. For the intelligent skeptic, the "truth" is a matter of belonging as much as it is a matter of data; until the "importance" of the identity is decoupled from the falsehood, the belief will remain impenetrable to logic.

Works cited

1. False ideas, fake information, and the logic of identity-protective reasoning, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.fondationdescartes.org/en/2020/06/les-idees-fausses-les-fausses-informations-et-la-logique-du-raisonnement-pour-proteger-son-identite/
2. (PDF) Mistrust and misinformation: A two-component, socio-epistemic model of belief in conspiracy theories - ResearchGate, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346190197_Mistrust_and_misinformation_A_two-component_socio-epistemic_model_of_belief_in_conspiracy_theories
3. Motivated reasoning & its cognates - Cultural Cognition of Health, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2013/5/15/motivated-reasoning-its-cognates.html
4. Why True Believers Make the Ultimate Sacrifice: Sacred Values, Moral Convictions, or Identity Fusion? - Frontiers, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.779120/full
5. The “Global” Deception: Flat-Earth Conspiracy Theory between ..., accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.mdpi.com/2313-5778/8/2/32
6. Why People Distrust Public Health: The Psychology of Institutional Skepticism - RJ Starr, accessed January 30, 2026, https://profrjstarr.com/essays/why-people-distrust-public-health-the-psychology-of-institutional-skepticism
7. The Intelligence Trap: Why Smart People Make Dumb Mistakes - Goodreads, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/41817546-the-intelligence-trap
8. Book Summary: The Intelligence Trap - Dennis Mancl's, accessed January 30, 2026, https://manclswx.com/projects/books/intelligence_trap_book.html
9. Identity | Dan Kahan - informalscience.org, accessed January 30, 2026, https://informalscience.org/identity/dan-kahan/
10. Sociological Psychological Flat Earth Beliefs - Consensus, accessed January 30, 2026, https://consensus.app/search/sociological-psychological-flat-earth-beliefs/xPfbAjrpQICoCDt66r39LQ/
11. Conspiracy theory - Wikipedia, accessed January 30, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory
12. The price of your soul: How your brain decides whether to 'sell out' - Emory University, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.emory.edu/EMORY_REPORT/stories/2012/01/esc_brain_decides_sell_out.html
13. Sacred Values and the Radicalized Brain | Psychology Today, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-gods-we-trust/201902/sacred-values-and-the-radicalized-brain
14. The Neural Basis of Religious Cognition, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.cognitiveneuroscienceofreligion.org/s/the-neural-basis-of-religious-cognition.pdf
15. The Neuroscience of the Sacred: Exploring the Mechanisms Behind Religious Experience | by Boris (Bruce) Kriger | GLOBAL SCIENCE NEWS | Medium, accessed January 30, 2026, https://medium.com/global-science-news/the-neuroscience-of-the-sacred-exploring-the-mechanisms-behind-religious-experience-fc56e1742f4a
16. (PDF) On the motives of belief in conspiracy theories - ResearchGate, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376697022_On_the_motives_of_belief_in_conspiracy_theories
17. The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories - PMC - NIH, accessed January 30, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5724570/
18. The Intelligence Trap Summary of Key Ideas and Review | David Robson - Blinkist, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.blinkist.com/en/books/the-intelligence-trap-en
19. Bugonia and the Intelligence Trap : r/TrueFilm - Reddit, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueFilm/comments/1phuzxt/bugonia_and_the_intelligence_trap/
20. The surprising role of deep thinking in conspiracy theories | Psyche ..., accessed January 30, 2026, https://psyche.co/ideas/the-surprising-role-of-deep-thinking-in-conspiracy-theories
21. Meet the flat-Earthers of the modern era - Popular Science, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.popsci.com/flat-earth-people/
22. Unearthing Flat Earth - Kalamazoo Valley Community College, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.kvcc.edu/programs/english_humanities_liberal_arts/essays/2324/eng099/SahlgrenQuinn.php
23. Modern flat Earth beliefs - Wikipedia, accessed January 30, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_flat_Earth_beliefs
24. Epistemic trust: a comprehensive review of empirical insights and implications for developmental psychopathology - PubMed Central, accessed January 30, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10772859/
25. Flat Earthers: Belief, Skepticism, and Denialism | Psychology Today, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psych-unseen/201702/flat-earthers-belief-skepticism-and-denialism
26. Epistemic Mistrust and Rigidity mediate the effect of Individual Narcissism on Conspiracy Mentality - medRxiv, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.10.05.25337380v1.full-text
27. On the Allure of Secret Knowledge - Lyceum Institute, accessed January 30, 2026, https://lyceum.institute/news-and-announcements/2024/10/29/on-the-allure-of-secret-knowledge/
28. Why some people are willing to believe conspiracy theories, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2023/06/why-people-believe-conspiracy-theories
29. “Trust me, do not trust anyone”: how epistemic mistrust and credulity are associated with conspiracy mentality - PubMed Central, accessed January 30, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10782893/
30. Too humble for words - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed January 30, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10541816/
31. Why do some people believe the Earth is flat? | Pursuit by the University of Melbourne, accessed January 30, 2026, https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/why-do-some-people-believe-the-earth-is-flat
32. Processual "Redpilling" as a Socio-Technical Effect of Disinformation - International Journal of Communication, accessed January 30, 2026, https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/21934/5027
33. Bedford Level experiment - Wikipedia, accessed January 30, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_Level_experiment
34. The Black Swan: Evidence the Earth Is Flat? | Answers in Genesis, accessed January 30, 2026, https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/danny-faulkner/2021/02/05/black-swan-evidence-earth-flat/
35. Become Aware of Your Own Biases - MediaSmarts, accessed January 30, 2026, https://mediasmarts.ca/digital-media-literacy/digital-issues/finding-and-verifying-information/ethics-sharing-information-online/become-aware-your-own-biases
36. Skepticism is crucial to both philosophy & practical life, but deciding when to exercise it (& to what degree) is a serious problem. - Reddit, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/60u3qn/skepticism_is_crucial_to_both_philosophy/
37. The Ethics of Belief, Cognition, and Climate Change Pseudoskepticism: Implications for Public Discourse - ResearchGate, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291517097_The_Ethics_of_Belief_Cognition_and_Climate_Change_Pseudoskepticism_Implications_for_Public_Discourse
38. On the Fringe: Where Science Meets Pseudoscience by Michael D. Gordin - Journal of Scientific Exploration, accessed January 30, 2026, https://journalofscientificexploration.org/index.php/jse/article/view/2449/1669
39. How to Debate a Flat-Earther - Universe Today, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.universetoday.com/articles/how-to-debate-a-flat-earther
40. Intellectual humility is associated with greater misinformation discernment and metacognitive insight but not response bias - Advances.in, accessed January 30, 2026, https://advances.in/psychology/10.56296/aip00025/
41. Thinking with humility: Investigating the role of intellectual humility in critical reasoning performance - ResearchGate, accessed January 30, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391803020_Thinking_with_humility_Investigating_the_role_of_intellectual_humility_in_critical_reasoning_performance
42. Expanding Awareness of the Science of Intellectual Humility: Introduction to Intellectual Humility Research - Greater Good Science Center, accessed January 30, 2026, https://ggsc.berkeley.edu/what_we_do/major_initiatives/intellectual_humility/introduction_intellectual_humility_research