General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy don't Covid patients want to take the shot?
From Maarten Van Doorn's subscription email.
Facts don't change minds? Identity-protective cognition and belief polarization almost never happen, so they do
Falsifiable Friday #4
Maarten van Doorn
Jul 30
Comment
Share
Happy Friday! 😉
✝ According to Dan Kahans influential theory of cultural or identity-protective cognition, public disagreement over key societal risks (e.g., climate change, nuclear power) arises not because people fail to understand the science or lack relevant information, but rather as a result of the fact that people endorse whichever position reinforces their connection to others with whom they share important ties.
🤼 This is generally referred to as a specific form of motivated reasoning, namely, identity-protective cognition. Because espousing beliefs that are not congruent with the dominant sentiment in ones group could threaten ones position or status within the group, people are motivated to protect their cultural identities.
🧏?♂️This means theres no point in conveying unwelcome facts and evidence. Because people will probably not use their brains to figure out which beliefs are best supported by the evidence. But to figure out how to best justify assessments of the evidence that fit with dominant position within their cultural group. Studies, experts, and so on, that do not agree with this position X are dismissed on the grounds that, since they conclude not-X, they cannot be genuine experts and sound studies.
➡⬅ Because we weigh the evidence so differently, were stuck in our opposing camps and dont converge by considering the same information. So exposing the public to information about the scientific consensus will only further attitude polarization by reinforcing peoples cultural predispositions to selectively attend to evidence.
🦯 The idea that such identity-protective cognition causes groups to drift further apart and away from the truth is popular these days. The New York Times, for example, has claimed that Americans deep bias against the political party they oppose is so strong that it acts as a kind of partisan prism for facts, refracting a different reality to Republicans than to Democrats. The common suggestion being that theres no point in bothering with facts anyway because people will just dismiss them if theyre inconvenient.
✍ In this week research-packed piece, I show that Kahans work doesnt support the popular notion that people are often not sensitive to evidence as a result of motivated reasoning so fact wont change peoples minds anyway. This is the exception, not the rule. New experiments show that the specific conditions under which motivated reasoning and belief polarization occur are much more constrained than often assumed.
Go to the essay
https://maartenvandoorn.substack.com/p/contra-kahan-on-motivated-reasoning
Comment
Share
Youre on the free list for Maarten van Doorn's Newsletter. For the full experience, become a paying subscriber.
Subscribe
© 2021 Maarten van Doorn Unsubscribe
Dorsing 24, 6581 RV Malden, The Netherlands
Publish on Substack
7wo7rees
(5,128 posts)Last edited Sat Jul 31, 2021, 03:52 PM - Edit history (1)
GulfCoast66
(11,949 posts)Its easier to fool a man than convince him hes been fooled.
Rather or not he said this is debatable. But its true and is like something he would have said.
PoindexterOglethorpe
(25,752 posts)People are idiots.