Showing posts with label motivated reasoning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label motivated reasoning. Show all posts

Thursday, April 21, 2011

How denial gets between science and politics

I read this article the other day which made me think a bit about Tim's previous post on polarization. It's a bit of a long read for an article, but it deals with the psychology behind the interesting phenomenon of denial of fact, even under overwhelming evidence supporting said fact—also known as "motivated reasoning" or confirmation bias. This is a counter-intuitive, yet very familiar aspect of human nature.

It's a good read, for me it was most interesting for some ideas that touches on briefly, which is what made me think of Tim's post. First it touches on the widely held perception that the country is becoming more partisan, or polarized. Given that this is an easy scapegoat for anyone wanting to decry American politics, I'm a little skeptical about how much truth there is to this, although the last few years have seemed awfully polarized, It's not getting any better at any rate. The strange part is that this might be happening because of the democratization of information and the media, not just in spite of it. As Mooney writes:
Okay, so people gravitate toward information that confirms what they believe, and they select sources that deliver it. Same as it ever was, right? Maybe, but the problem is arguably growing more acute, given the way we now consume information—through the Facebook links of friends, or tweets that lack nuance or context, or "narrowcast" and often highly ideological media that have relatively small, like-minded audiences. Those basic human survival skills of ours, says Michigan's Arthur Lupia, are "not well-adapted to our information age."
Of course it get's worse. He also cites a study that shows that people tend to judge the trustworthiness of a source of information based on whether their findings agreed with their own values, rather than the source's expertise. So people can essentially write off any information that contradicts their worldview.