www culturalcognition net Is Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Rational

What am I talking about? . . . I. “Modeling” motivated reasoning II. The

Bayesian Information Processing New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X

Confirmation Bias New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood

Motivated Reasoning New Evidence Extrinsic Goal/Interest Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds

Spurious Motivated confirmation Reasoning bias New Evidence Extrinsic Goal/Interest Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual

Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Ideological Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior

Spurious Motivated confirmation Reasoning bias Ideological Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual

What am I talking about? . . . II. “Modeling” motivated reasoning The Cultural

Cultural Motivated Cognition Reasoning of Risk New Evidence Extrinsic Goal/Interest Revised Factual Belief Prior

Cultural Motivated Cognition Reasoning of Risk Cultural Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior

Mary Douglas’s Group-grid worldview scheme Risk Perception Key Low Risk High Risk Hierarchy Environment:

Cultural Cognition of Risk Cultural Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief

Mechanisms of cultural cognition § § § Culturally biased search & assimilation Cultural credibility

Perceive Benefits > Risks 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% * Change across conditions significant

Perceive Benefits > Risks Information effect: familiarity Information effect: culture

High Risk Moderate Risk Slight Risk Almost No Risk n = 1, 820 to

Increase in Predicted Likelihood of Self. Reported Familiarity with Nanotechnology 25% 20% 19. 5%

Cultural Cognition of Risk New Evidence Cultural Worldview Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief

Spurious confirmation bias Cultural Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior

Polarization z_Study dismiss 2 more polarization less polarization anti-pollution Kahan, Jenkins-Smith, Tarantola, Silva &

Kahan, D. M. , Peters, E. , Wittlin, M. , Slovic, P. , Ouellette,

Two Hypotheses 1. Public Irrationality Thesis (PIT) • • “science illiteracy” “bounded rationality” 2.

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or

Cultural Cognition of Risk New Evidence Cultural Worldview System 1 and System 2 Revised

Cultural Cognition Cultural Predisposition New Evidence System 1 and System 2 Revised Factual Belief

Study design Sample 1, 800 adults drawn from nationally representative on-line panel Measures §

Likelihood of Score Finding # 1. Political differences in CRT are trivial Democrat Republican

Psychologists believe the questions you have just answered measure how reflective and open-minded someone

1. Control condition Psychologists believe the questions you have just answered measure how reflective

Ideologically Motivated Reasoning New Evidence Ideological Predisposition Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior

Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Other side’s New CRT score Evidence Ideological Predisposition Revised: other side

Finding # 2. Ideologically biased assimilation of “validity of CRT” “nonskeptic is biased” control

Finding # 3. Ideologically biased assimilation increases with CRT Note. N = 1750. Derived

Is Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Rational? And Do Only Conservatives Engage In It? ! vs.

Is Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Rational? And Do Only Conservatives Engage In It? !

Did protestors cross the line between “speech” and “intimidation”? source: Dan M. Kahan, David

Experimental Conditions Abortion Clinic Condition Recruitment Center Condition source: Dan M. Kahan, David A.

Pct. Agree Protestors blocked Screamed in face Pedestrians just not want to listen Police

Cultural Cognition Cat Scan Experiment Go to www. culturalcognition. net!

Slides: 86

Download presentation

www. culturalcognition. net Is Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Rational? And Do Only Conservatives Engage In It? !

What am I talking about? . . . I. “Modeling” motivated reasoning II. The Cultural cognition of risk (& other things) III. Ideology, cognitive reflection & motivated reasoning

Bayesian Information Processing New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Confirmation Bias New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Motivated Reasoning New Evidence Extrinsic Goal/Interest Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Spurious Motivated confirmation Reasoning bias New Evidence Extrinsic Goal/Interest Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Motivated Reasoning New Evidence Extrinsic Goal/Interest Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Ideological Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Spurious Motivated confirmation Reasoning bias Ideological Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

What am I talking about? . . . II. “Modeling” motivated reasoning The Cultural cognition of risk (& other things) III. Ideology, cognitive reflection & motivated reasoning

Cultural Motivated Cognition Reasoning of Risk New Evidence Extrinsic Goal/Interest Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Cultural Motivated Cognition Reasoning of Risk Cultural Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Mary Douglas’s Group-grid worldview scheme Risk Perception Key Low Risk High Risk Hierarchy Environment: climate, nuclear hierarchical individualists Guns/Gun Control HPV Vaccination Gays military/gay parenting hierarchical communitarians Abortion procedure compulsory psychiatric treatment Individualism Gays military/gay parenting Abortion procedure egalitarian individualists compulsory psychiatric treatment Communitarianism Environment: climate, nuclear Guns/Gun Control egalitarian communitarians HPV Vaccination Egalitarianism

Cultural Cognition of Risk Cultural Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Identity Protective Cognition 38

Mechanisms of cultural cognition § § § Culturally biased search & assimilation Cultural credibility heuristic Cultural availability effect Identity-affirmation Culturally motivated “system 2” reasoning

Perceive Benefits > Risks 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% * Change across conditions significant at p < 0. 05 Source: Kahan , Braman, Slovic, Gastil & Cohen Cultural Cognition of Nanotechnology Risks and Benefits, Nature Nanotechnology, 4(2), 87 -91 (2009)

Perceive Benefits > Risks Information effect: familiarity Information effect: culture

High Risk Moderate Risk Slight Risk Almost No Risk n = 1, 820 to 1, 830. Risk variables are 4 -pt measures of “risk to people in American Society” posed by indicated risk. Differences between group means all significant at p ≤. 01.

Perceive Benefits > Risks Information effect: familiarity Information effect: culture

Increase in Predicted Likelihood of Self. Reported Familiarity with Nanotechnology 25% 20% 19. 5% Hierarch 15% 10% 5. 8% 5% 3. 6% 2. 2% 0. 9% Egalitarian 0% -0. 5% -0. 9% -1. 4% -2. 6% -5% 1 st Communitarian 20 th 40 th 60 th 80 th Percentile Figure S 1 Source: Kahan , Braman, Slovic, Gastil & Cohen Cultural Cognition of Nanotechnology Risks and Benefits, Nature Nanotechnology, 4(2), 87 -91 (2009) 99 th Individualistic

Cultural Cognition of Risk New Evidence Cultural Worldview Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Cultural Cognition of Risk Cultural Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Spurious confirmation bias Cultural Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Cultural Cognition of Risk Cultural Predisposition New Evidence Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Control Condition

Anti-pollution Condition

Geoengineering Condition

Polarization z_Study dismiss 2 more polarization less polarization anti-pollution Kahan, Jenkins-Smith, Tarantola, Silva & Braman, Geoengineering and the Science Communication Environment, CCP Working Paper No. 92 (Jan. 9, 2012), available at http: //papers. ssrn. com/sol 3/papers. cfm? abstract_id=1981907

Kahan, D. M. , Peters, E. , Wittlin, M. , Slovic, P. , Ouellette, L. L. , Braman, D. & Mandel, G. The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change 2, 732 -735 (2012).

Two Hypotheses 1. Public Irrationality Thesis (PIT) • • “science illiteracy” “bounded rationality” 2. Cultural cognition thesis (CCT)

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity? ” perceived risk (z-score) Greater Lesser

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity? ” PIT prediction: Science Illiteracy & Bounded Rationality Greater perceived risk (z-score) High Sci. litearcy/System 2 (“slow”) Low Sci. litearcy/System 1 (“fast”) Lesser

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity? ” perceived risk (z-score) Greater Risk Lesser Risk PIT prediction actual variance low high Science literacy actual variance low high Numeracy

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity? ” Cultural variance conditional on sci. literacy/numeracy? Cultural Variance perceived risk (z-score) Greater Lesser Egalitarian Communitarian Low Sci lit/numeracy High Sci lit/numeracy Hierarchical Individualist

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity? ” PIT prediction: Culture as heuristic substitute perceived risk (z-score) Greater Lesser Egalitarian Communitarian Low Sci lit/numeracy High Sci lit/numeracy Hierarchical Individualist

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity? ” Actual interaction of culture & sci-lit/num. . . perceived risk (z-score) Greater Lesser High Sci lit/numeracy Egal Comm Low Sci/lit numeracy Egal Comm Low Sci lit/numeracy Low Sci lit/num. Hierarc Individ High Sci lit/numeracy Hierarch Individ

“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity? ” POLARIZATION INCREASES as scil-lit/numeracy increases perceived risk (z-score) Greater Lesser High Sci lit/numeracy Egal Comm Low Sci/lit numeracy Egal Comm Low Sci lit/numeracy Low Sci lit/num. Hierarc Individ High Sci lit/numeracy Hierarch Individ

Cultural Cognition of Risk New Evidence Cultural Worldview System 1 and System 2 Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

What am I talking about? . . . I. “Modeling” motivated reasoning II. The Cultural cognition of risk (& other things) III. Ideology, cognitive reflection & motivated reasoning

“Asymmetry thesis”

Cultural Cognition Cultural Predisposition New Evidence System 1 and System 2 Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Identity Protective Cognition 38

Identity Protective Cognition

Likelihood of Score Finding # 1. Political differences in CRT are trivial Democrat Republican CRT Score N = 1600. Derived from ordered logit regression. Outcome variable is CRT score. Predictor is 7 -point partisan self-identification measure. Predictor value set at 2 for “Democrat” and 6 for “Republican. ” CIs are 0. 95 level of confidence.

CRT Score Likelihood of Score

Psychologists believe the questions you have just answered measure how reflective and open-minded someone is. How strongly do you agree or disagree with this statement? [strongly disagree, moderately disagree, slightly agree, moderately disagree, strongly disagree] “I think the word-problem test I just took supplies good evidence of how reflective and open-minded someone is. ”

1. Control condition Psychologists believe the questions you have just answered measure how reflective and open-minded someone is. . 2. Skeptic-is-biased condition. . . In one recent study, a researcher found that people who accept evidence of climate change tend to get more answers correct than those who reject evidence of climate change. If the test is a valid way to measure open-mindedness, that finding would imply that those who believe climate change is happening are more open-minded than those who are skeptical that climate change is happening. . 3. Nonskeptic-is-biased condition. . . In one recent study, a researcher found that people who reject evidence of climate change tend to get more answers correct than those who accept evidence of climate change. If the test is a valid way to measure open-mindedness, that finding would imply that those who are skeptical that climate change is happening are more open-minded than those who believe climate change is happening. .

“Asymmetry thesis”

Ideologically Motivated Reasoning New Evidence Ideological Predisposition Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Other side’s New CRT score Evidence Ideological Predisposition Revised: other side displays IMR Prior: other side displays IMR prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Ideologically Motivated Reasoning New Evidence Ideological Predisposition Revised Factual Belief Prior Factual Belief prior odds X likelihood ratio = posterior odds

Study design Sample 1, 800 adults drawn from nationally representative on-line panel Measures § § § Political ideology & party affiliation Cognitive reflection test (CRT) Perceived validity of CRT Experimental Manipulation control vs. “skeptic-is-biased” & “nonskeptic-is-biased” Kahan, Ideology, Motivated Reasoning, and Cognitive Reflection, CCP Working Paper No. 107 (Nov. 19, 2012), available at http: //papers. ssrn. com/sol 3/papers. cfm? abstract_id=2182588

Finding # 2. Ideologically biased assimilation of “validity of CRT” “nonskeptic is biased” control “skeptic is biased” Fitted ordered-logit regression analysis values. Y-axis reflects predicted probability of agreeing either “slightly, ” “moderately, ” or “strongly” with CRT_valid.

Finding # 3. Ideologically biased assimilation increases with CRT Note. N = 1750. Derived from ordered logit regression. Point estimates of predicted likelihood of agreeing (slightly, moderately or strongly) that CRT test is valid. CIs are 0. 95 level of confidence.

Is Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Rational? And Do Only Conservatives Engage In It? ! vs.

Is Ideologically Motivated Reasoning Rational? And Do Only Conservatives Engage In It? !

Did protestors cross the line between “speech” and “intimidation”? source: Dan M. Kahan, David A. Hoffman, Donald Braman, Danieli Evans & Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, They Saw a Protest : Cognitive Illiberalism and the Speech-Conduct Distinction, 64 Stan. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2012)

Experimental Conditions Abortion Clinic Condition Recruitment Center Condition source: Dan M. Kahan, David A. Hoffman, Donald Braman, Danieli Evans & Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, They Saw a Protest : Cognitive Illiberalism and the Speech-Conduct Distinction, 64 Stan. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2011)

Pct. Agree Protestors blocked Screamed in face Pedestrians just not want to listen Police just annoyed

Cultural Cognition Cat Scan Experiment Go to www. culturalcognition. net!