In two experiments, previous students in the Individual Differences and Evolutionary Psychology lab investigated the extent to which individuals’ reactions to scholarly information critical of psychiatric medication prescribing in the U.S. is (1) related to individuals’ own personal use of psychiatric medication and (2) influenced by the purported lived experience and expertise of the messenger providing the information. Over the fall semester, Felicia and I met regularly to analyze the data for these two experiments, create tables that summarize the descriptive and inferential statistical output of those analyses, and design clear visual displays of the primary findings. Viewing the results of the two studies side by side, we found that participants in both studies were more receptive to the information when the messenger was described as an expert (a doctor), and participants who used psychiatric medications wanted to censor the information more than did participants who did not have personal experience with psychiatric medications. Our data are relevant to concerns about free inquiry in the academy and public understanding of science.
