Explore the vast range of titles available.

Catherine of Siena (1347-1380) contributed important wisdom to Christian spirituality on discernment, yet her own discernment regarding her engagement in papal politics has not been studied. From the perspective of Christian spirituality studies, this article examines the critical text of her letters in relationship with historical events to offer a description of the instances where Catherine's discernment differed from that of others committed to a spiritual journey and to seeking the good of the church. Catherine's view of God's will regarding the papal interdict of Florence controverted that of several ecclesial leaders more likely to be right. Catherine's advocacy for the crusade differed from the advice Birgitta of Sweden gave Gregory XI, advice corroborated by history. Two of Catherine's spiritual mentors made decisions they discerned to be right regarding missions on which they were sent by the pope, whereas Catherine reproached them for these choices. Furthermore, Catherine was certain that the election of Urban VI had been blessed by God, whereas another saint considered Clement VII to be the true pope. The above analysis is followed by an examination of influences on Catherine's experience of seeking and implementing God's will, seeking to account for the divergence between her discernment and that of others. In conclusion, while Catherine was confident in her union with God and, therefore, God's guidance, she was also influenced by her unbending beliefs about truth and by the manner these beliefs were conditioned by her personality and sociocultural context. Contribution This article contributes to scholarship in Christian spirituality on the spirituality of Catherine of Siena and on discernment, studying Catherine of Siena's discernment regarding papal politics where she differed from others whose discernment can be interpreted as more likely to be congruent with God's will. The reasons for her controversial discernment are explored.

Coincident with the global rise in concern about the spread of misinformation on social media, there has been influx of behavioral research on so-called “fake news” (fabricated or false news headlines that are presented as if legitimate) and other forms of misinformation. These studies often present participants with news content that varies on relevant dimensions (e.g., true v. false, politically consistent v. inconsistent, etc.) and ask participants to make judgments (e.g., accuracy) or choices (e.g., whether they would share it on social media). This guide is intended to help researchers navigate the unique challenges that come with this type of research. Principle among these issues is that the nature of news content that is being spread on social media (whether it is false, misleading, or true) is a moving target that reflects current affairs in the context of interest. Steps are required if one wishes to present stimuli that allow generalization from the study to the real-world phenomenon of online misinformation. Furthermore, the selection of content to include can be highly consequential for the study’s outcome, and researcher biases can easily result in biases in a stimulus set. As such, we advocate for pretesting materials and, to this end, report our own pretest of 224 recent true and false news headlines, both relating to U.S. political issues and the COVID-19 pandemic. These headlines may be of use in the short term, but, more importantly, the pretest is intended to serve as an example of best practices in a quickly evolving area of research.

In contemporary discourse, Matthew 7:1 (‘Judge not, that you be not judged’) is frequently misused to justify absolute tolerance and moral relativism, thereby undermining the biblical call for moral discernment. This article contends that Matthew 7:1–6 does not prohibit judgement altogether but rather warns against hypocritical and self-righteous judgement, while affirming the necessity of righteous and humble discernment. The argument unfolds in three main components: (1) a close exegetical analysis of the Greek text, paying attention to its literary and rhetorical features; (2) a theological reflection rooted in Reformed tradition and informed by canonical and intertextual insights; and (3) a practical-pastoral engagement with contemporary cultural and ecclesial misappropriations of the text. By tracing intertextual connections with Old Testament wisdom literature (e.g. Pr 1:7; 9:8; 26:4–5), the article demonstrates that Jesus’s call for discernment is deeply rooted in the biblical tradition that affirms moral evaluation tempered by humility and wisdom. Ultimately, the article argues that Matthew 7:1–6 envisions a redemptive form of judgement – grounded in personal repentance and theological wisdom – that enables the church to engage the world with compassionate, courageous, and gospel-shaped ethical witness.ContributionThis article contributes to Reformed scholarship by reframing Matthew 7:1–6 as a theological model of restorative discernment. It advances the discussion by integrating rigorous exegesis, canonical and intertextual analysis, and theological synthesis, while addressing contemporary misappropriations of the text. In doing so, it equips the church to embody a cross-shaped ethic of truth and mercy in both its communal and public witness.

The prevalence of misinformation poses a substantial threat to individuals' daily lives, necessitating the deployment of effective remedial approaches. One promising strategy is psychological inoculation, which pre-emptively immunizes individuals against misinformation attacks. However, uncertainties remain regarding the extent to which psychological inoculation effectively enhances the capacity to differentiate between misinformation and real information. To reduce the potential risk of misinformation about digital health, this study aims to examine the effectiveness of psychological inoculation in countering misinformation with a focus on several factors, including misinformation credibility assessment, real information credibility assessment, credibility discernment, misinformation sharing intention, real information sharing intention, and sharing discernment. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a meta-analysis by searching 4 databases (Web of Science, APA PsycINFO, Proquest, and PubMed) for empirical studies based on inoculation theory and outcome measure-related misinformation published in the English language. Moderator analyses were used to examine the differences in intervention strategy, intervention type, theme, measurement time, team, and intervention design. Based on 42 independent studies with 42,530 subjects, we found that psychological inoculation effectively reduces misinformation credibility assessment (d=-0.36, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.23; P<.001) and improves real information credibility assessment (d=0.20, 95% CI 0.06-0.33; P=.005) and real information sharing intention (d=0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.16; P=.003). However, psychological inoculation does not significantly influence misinformation sharing intention (d=-0.35, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.09; P=.12). Additionally, we find that psychological inoculation effectively enhances credibility discernment (d=0.20, 95% CI 0.13-0.28; P<.001) and sharing discernment (d=0.18, 95% CI 0.12-0.24; P<.001). Regarding health misinformation, psychological inoculation effectively decreases misinformation credibility assessment and misinformation sharing intention. The results of the moderator analyses showed that content-based, passive inoculation was more effective in increasing credibility and sharing intention. The theme of climate change demonstrates a stronger effect on real information credibility. Comparing intervention types showed that pre-post interventions are more effective for misinformation credibility assessment, while post-only interventions are better for credibility discernment. This study indicated that psychological inoculation enhanced individuals' ability to discern real information from misinformation and share real information. Incorporating psychological inoculation to cultivate an informed public is crucial for societal resilience against misinformation threats in an age of information proliferation. As a scalable and cost-effective intervention strategy, institutions can apply psychological inoculation to mitigate potential misinformation crises.

Abstract There are communities in which hearing voices frequently is common and expected, and in which participants are not expected to have a need for care. This paper compares the ideas and practices of these communities. We observe that these communities utilize cultural models to identify and to explain voice-like events—and that there are some common features to these models across communities. All communities teach participants to “discern,” or identify accurately, the legitimate voice of the spirit or being who speaks. We also observe that there are roughly two methods taught to participants to enable them to experience spirits (or other invisible beings): trained attention to inner experience, and repeated speech to the invisible other. We also observe that all of these communities model a learning process in which the ability to hear spirit (or invisible others) becomes more skilled with practice, and in which what they hear becomes clearer over time. Practice—including the practice of discernment—is presumed to change experience. We also note that despite these shared cultural ideas and practices, there is considerable individual variation in experience—some of which may reflect psychotic process, and some perhaps not. We suggest that voice-like events in this context may be shaped by cognitive expectation and trained practice as well as an experiential pathway. We also suggest that researchers could explore these common features both as a way to help those struggling with psychosis, and to consider the possibility that expectations and practice may affect the voice-hearing experience.

This paper attempts to deal with an essential dimension of the process of discernment as Francis develops it, namely, the narrative. The paper treats the imaginative discernment exemplified in his use of storytelling, metaphors, and symbols to open a creative forum for discerning sacred truths in our personal lives. To justify the appropriateness of Francis’s use of imagination in discernment, the first part of the paper analyzes Ignatius’s use of the imagination, especially in the Rules for Discernment of Spirits. The second and lengthier part of the paper turns to Pope Francis’s skilled narrative use of metaphors and symbols. He adopts the Ignatian imaginative style with metaphors that appeal to contemporary seekers. The various metaphorical twists that he incorporates into this experience have a privileged place in his spiritual pedagogy of accompanying, discerning, and walking together with people during difficult times. The metaphorical style of Ignatius and Francis allows for a comprehensive understanding of the role that imagination can play in the discernment of spirits. Besides enriching our understanding of discernment, this style can facilitate a Christian spirituality that enhances the search for and discovery of meaning within our contemporary lives.

This study investigates the relationship between digital literacy and misinformation resistance among Nigerian social media users, examining both information discernment capability and misinformation resilience behaviour as distinct outcomes. Through a quantitative survey of 306 active social media users in Nigeria, the research employs PLS-SEM to analyse the direct and mediated relationships between these variables. The study demonstrates strong positive relationships between digital literacy and fact-checking behaviour (β = 0.681, p < 0.001), and between fact-checking behaviour and both information discernment capability (β = 0.609, p < 0.001) and misinformation resilience behaviour (β = 0.428, p < 0.001). These results suggest that the development of practical verification skills, rather than general digital competencies alone, is crucial for effective misinformation resistance. The findings contribute to our understanding of how digital literacy influences misinformation resistance in developing nations and provide practical implications for digital literacy education programs and social media platform policies.

Through the years, people of faith and their congregations have encountered social issues without easy answers. From racism, women’s rights, and poverty to the current divisions over abortion and human sexuality, the church has wrestled with difficult subjects impacting policy and practice. In the United States of America (USA/US), the question of LGBTQ+ inclusion in churches is an increasingly frequent conversation, point of decision, and sometimes point of division in congregations. As these challenging social issues in a politically polarized USA culture impact the church, there is also a focus in the literature on methods for civil conversation. This article reports on models for conversations that provide guidance for congregations engaging in difficult conversations including that of LGBTQ+ inclusion. In this article, congregations and others are provided with resources and models for discernment. Models covered include those developed by individual Christian leaders, those developed in congregational processes, and those developed for public and educational discourse.

Gamified inoculation interventions such as the Bad News game are a widely adopted approach to mitigating the influence of misinformation. While Bad News has been predominately studied with participants from Western, Educated, Industrialized, and Rich Democracies (WEIRD), one recent study (Iyengar et al., Applied Cognitive Psychology, 37:290–303, 2023 ) assessed its efficacy in an Indian sample. In that study, participants rated the reliability of a series of Indian news headlines in a pre-test, played Bad News, and completed a post-test with a different set of headlines. Participants showed better discrimination of true and fake headlines in the post-test than the pre-test. This finding contrasts with a meta-analysis showing that Bad News primarily produces a conservative response bias rather than improving discrimination (Modirrousta-Galian and Higham, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 152:2411–2437, 2023 ). The current preregistered study used the same design as Iyengar et al., although participants of Indian nationality ( N  = 150) were recruited via Prolific and the allocation of news headlines to the pre-test and post-test was counterbalanced. When both counterbalancing conditions were included, no significant differences in discrimination or response bias appeared between the pre-test and post-test. When only the counterbalancing condition matching Iyengar et al.’s experiment was examined, no significant effect on discrimination was observed, but a conservative response bias shift was seen in the post-test. This finding suggests that the Bad News game may be less effective for improving discrimination than previously thought – an important consideration given its popularity as an intervention to combat misinformation.