What Comes First? Fact or Belief?

Credit: Facts vs. Myths
Source:  Pursuing Points


The myth of the objective observer takes another hit.

As much as anyone wants to believe they are objectively seeking facts before expressing an opinion, the human brain doesn't work that way.  Genetically speaking even the best of us are more receptive to "facts" that bolster our preconceived opinions.

This is why the scientific method is so important.  It doesn't rely on my opinion or your opinion.  It depends on the results of like experiments generating like results - whether we accept the results or not.

And this explains why presenting facts, no matter how scrupulously developed and supported, go right over the heads of so many people.  It's not fact or truth that matters to our brain, it's what we believe.

There must be a survival advantage to being, quite frankly, pig-headed.

Makes things a bit clearer but still frustrating.
*  *  *  *  *


If you believe it, it's truer
People reflexively accept information as
accurate if it aligns with their worldview

A new study illuminates how rapid, involuntary mental processes kick in when responding to statements that correspond with an already held viewpoint, according to a study by researchers at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) and The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

The research, published in Social Psychological and Personality Science, shows how people's tendency to remain entrenched in their worldviews is supported by their automatic cognitive "reflexes."

The team led by Dr. Michael Gilead, head of the Social Cognitive Neuroscience Laboratory at BGU, found that study participants verified the grammatical accuracy of statements about political topics, personal tastes and social issues much more quickly when they matched their opinion.

In a series of experiments, the researchers asked participants to respond to various opinion statements, such as "The internet has made people more isolated" or "The internet has made people more sociable," and indicate as quickly as possible if the grammar of the sentence was correct or not. Later, they were asked if they agreed with each statement. Participants identified statements to be grammatically correct more quickly when they agreed with them, which revealed a rapid, involuntary effect of agreement on cognitive processing.

According to Dr. Gilead, "In order to make informed decisions, people need to be able to consider the merits and weaknesses of different opinions and adapt to new information. This involuntary, 'reflex-like' tendency to consider things we already believe in as being true, might dampen our ability to think things through in a rational way. Future studies could explore how other factors, such as acute stress or liberal or conservative viewpoints, affect this tendency to accept or reject opinions in a 'knee-jerk' manner."

Dr. Gilead collaborated on this research with Moran Sela, a doctoral student in the Department of Psychology at The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and Dr. Anat Maril, a professor in The Hebrew University's Department of Cognitive Science.

Story Source:  Materials provided by American Associates, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. Michael Gilead, Moran Sela, Anat Maril. That’s My Truth: Evidence for Involuntary Opinion Confirmation. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2018.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Workout supplements: An emerging eating disorder in men?

Using Artificial Intelligence to Predict Violence. . . or to Control It?

Remember faces but not names? You got it wrong.

The Downside of Being 'Class Clown'

M.I.T. Research Explains How Will Rogers Observation Works