In 2013, researchers conducted a fascinating study involving a math test given to over 1,100 American adults. The test aimed to assess how well participants could analyze data. It included two nearly identical questions, both based on the same complex data set, each with one correct answer. The first question was about the link between rashes and a new skin cream, while the second dealt with the connection between crime rates and gun control laws.
Interestingly, participants with strong math skills were more likely to get the first question right. However, when it came to the second question, math skills weren’t the best predictor of success. Instead, political beliefs played a significant role. Participants whose political views matched the correct interpretation of the data were more likely to answer correctly. Even the most mathematically skilled participants were 45% more likely to get the second question wrong if the correct answer conflicted with their political beliefs.
This raises an intriguing question: why does politics lead to such irrational errors? Can political identity really affect how we process information? The answer lies in a cognitive phenomenon known as partisanship. While often linked to politics, partisanship broadly refers to a strong preference or bias toward a particular group or idea. Our political, ethnic, religious, and national identities are all forms of partisanship.
Identifying with social groups is a natural and healthy part of human life. Our sense of self is shaped not only by our individuality but also by the groups we belong to. As a result, we are motivated to defend our group identities, which can create challenges when the group’s beliefs clash with reality. For instance, when watching a favorite sports team commit a foul, one might recognize the rule violation but feel pressured to agree with fellow fans who believe it was acceptable. This tension between conflicting thoughts is known as cognitive dissonance, and people often seek to resolve this discomfort.
In politics, this behavior can be particularly problematic. While allegiance to a party can help individuals form a political identity and support agreeable policies, partisan-based cognitive dissonance may lead people to dismiss evidence that contradicts party beliefs or undermines party leaders. When large groups revise facts to support partisan beliefs, it can result in policies that lack a foundation in truth or reason.
This issue is not new; political identities have existed for centuries. However, studies indicate that partisan polarization has significantly increased in recent decades. One explanation for this trend is the clustering of like-minded communities, while another is the reliance on partisan news and social media bubbles, which often serve as echo chambers.
Fortunately, cognitive scientists have identified strategies to counteract this distortion. One approach is to recognize that personal biases may be stronger than one realizes. When encountering new information, it is beneficial to consciously evaluate it analytically rather than relying solely on initial instincts. Within groups, fostering a culture of fact-checking and questioning assumptions can be valuable. Additionally, warning individuals about potential misinformation can be helpful. When attempting to persuade others, affirming their values and framing issues in familiar language can increase receptiveness.
While there is much work to be done to address partisanship, these tools may aid in keeping us better informed and capable of making evidence-based decisions about our shared reality.
Engage in a structured debate with your classmates on the influence of partisanship in politics. Divide into groups representing different political perspectives and discuss how partisanship can lead to irrational decision-making. Focus on understanding opposing viewpoints and practice articulating your arguments clearly and respectfully.
Participate in a workshop where you will analyze datasets similar to those in the study mentioned in the article. Work in pairs to interpret the data and identify how personal biases might affect your conclusions. Reflect on how political beliefs can influence data interpretation and discuss strategies to mitigate these biases.
Take part in a role-playing exercise where you assume the identity of a political figure or a member of a partisan group. Explore how cognitive dissonance and group identity can influence decision-making. After the exercise, discuss with your peers how these factors impacted your choices and what strategies could help overcome such biases.
Create a project that examines the role of media and social media in reinforcing partisan beliefs. Analyze different news sources and social media platforms to identify potential biases and echo chambers. Present your findings to the class, highlighting the importance of media literacy in combating partisan distortion.
Write a reflective essay on your personal experiences with partisanship and cognitive dissonance. Consider how your political beliefs have influenced your interpretation of information in the past. Discuss strategies you can implement to ensure more rational and evidence-based decision-making in the future.
In 2013, a team of researchers conducted a math test administered to over 1,100 American adults. The exam was designed, in part, to evaluate participants’ ability to analyze sets of data. Among the math problems were two nearly identical questions, both using the same challenging data set and each having one objectively correct answer. The first question addressed the correlation between rashes and a new skin cream, while the second focused on the correlation between crime rates and gun control legislation.
Participants with strong math skills were more likely to answer the first question correctly. However, the results for the second question were markedly different. In this case, math skills were not the best predictor of correct answers; instead, political identity played a significant role. Participants whose political beliefs aligned with the correct interpretation of the data were much more likely to answer correctly. Even the study’s top mathematicians were 45% more likely to answer the second question incorrectly when the correct answer contradicted their political beliefs.
This raises the question: what is it about politics that leads to such illogical errors? Can political identity actually influence one’s ability to process information? The answer lies in a cognitive phenomenon known as partisanship. While often associated with politics, partisanship can be broadly defined as a strong preference or bias towards a particular group or idea. Our political, ethnic, religious, and national identities are all forms of partisanship.
Identifying with social groups is a natural and healthy aspect of human life. Our sense of self is shaped not only by our individuality but also by the groups we belong to. Consequently, we are motivated to defend our group identities, which can lead to challenges when the group’s beliefs conflict with reality. For example, when watching a favorite sports team commit a foul, one might recognize the violation of rules but feel pressured to align with fellow fans who believe it was acceptable. This tension between conflicting thoughts is known as cognitive dissonance, and people often seek to resolve this discomfort.
In politics, this behavior can be particularly problematic. While allegiance to a party can help individuals form a political identity and support agreeable policies, partisan-based cognitive dissonance may lead people to dismiss evidence that contradicts party beliefs or undermines party leaders. When large groups revise facts to support partisan beliefs, it can result in policies that lack a foundation in truth or reason.
This issue is not new; political identities have existed for centuries. However, studies indicate that partisan polarization has significantly increased in recent decades. One explanation for this trend is the clustering of like-minded communities, while another is the reliance on partisan news and social media bubbles, which often serve as echo chambers.
Fortunately, cognitive scientists have identified strategies to counteract this distortion. One approach is to recognize that personal biases may be stronger than one realizes. When encountering new information, it is beneficial to consciously evaluate it analytically rather than relying solely on initial instincts. Within groups, fostering a culture of fact-checking and questioning assumptions can be valuable. Additionally, warning individuals about potential misinformation can be helpful. When attempting to persuade others, affirming their values and framing issues in familiar language can increase receptiveness.
While there is much work to be done to address partisanship, these tools may aid in keeping us better informed and capable of making evidence-based decisions about our shared reality.
Politics – The activities associated with governance, policy-making, and the debate between parties or individuals with differing opinions. – Understanding the politics of an organization is crucial for effectively navigating its power dynamics and decision-making processes.
Rationality – The quality of being based on or in accordance with reason or logic. – In critical thinking, rationality is essential for evaluating arguments and making sound decisions.
Partisanship – Strong, often blind allegiance to a particular political party or cause, which can affect objective judgment. – Partisanship can hinder critical thinking by causing individuals to ignore evidence that contradicts their preferred beliefs.
Cognitive – Relating to mental processes such as perception, memory, and reasoning. – Cognitive psychology studies how people understand, think, and remember information.
Dissonance – A state of mental discomfort or tension resulting from holding two conflicting beliefs or values. – Cognitive dissonance can occur when new information challenges existing beliefs, prompting individuals to reassess their views.
Biases – Systematic deviations from rationality in judgment or decision-making, often due to personal preferences or social influences. – Recognizing one’s own biases is a critical step in developing objective critical thinking skills.
Evidence – Information or data that supports or refutes a claim or argument. – In academic writing, providing strong evidence is essential for substantiating arguments and persuading readers.
Beliefs – Convictions or acceptances that certain things are true or real, often without immediate evidence. – Critical thinking involves questioning and evaluating one’s beliefs to ensure they are well-founded.
Identity – The characteristics, feelings, or beliefs that distinguish individuals or groups, often influencing their perspectives and actions. – A person’s identity can shape their worldview and affect how they interpret information.
Information – Data or knowledge communicated or received concerning a particular fact or circumstance. – In the digital age, the ability to critically assess information is more important than ever.
