Political bias of party affiliations in relation to political agreement

Why is misleading partisan content believed and shared? An influential account posits that political partisanship pervasively biases reasoning, such that engaging in analytic thinking exacerbates motivated reasoning and, in turn, the acceptance of hyperpartisan content. Alternatively, it may be that susceptibility to hyperpartisan misinformation is explained by a lack of reasoning. Across two studies using different subject pools (total N = 1977), we had participants assess true, false, and hyperpartisan headlines taken from social media. We found no evidence that analytic thinking was associated with increased polarization for either judgments about the accuracy of the headlines or willingness to share the news content on social media. Instead, analytic thinking was broadly associated with an increased capacity to discern between true headlines and either false or hyperpartisan headlines. These results suggest that reasoning typically helps people differentiate between low and high quality news content, rather than facilitating political bias.

Get full-text (via PubEx)

Infodemics on Youtube: Reliability of Content and Echo Chambers on COVID-19 (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.32258 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Niccolò Di Marco ◽

Matteo Cinelli ◽

Walter Quattrociocchi

Keyword(s):

Information Diffusion ◽

Two Dimensions ◽

World Health ◽

Interaction Patterns ◽

Political Preference ◽

Political Bias ◽

Echo Chambers ◽

Echo Chamber ◽

Health Organization ◽

The Relationship

UNSTRUCTURED Social media radically changed how information is consumed and reported and elicited a disintermediated access to an unprecedented amount of content. The world health organization (WHO) coined the term infodemics to identify the information overabundance during an epidemic. Indeed, the spread of inaccurate and misleading information may alter behaviours and complicate crisis management and health responses. This paper addresses information diffusion during the COVID-19 pandemic period with a massive data analysis on YouTube. First, we analyze more than 2M users’ engagement in 13000 videos released by 68 different YouTube channels, with different political bias and fact-checking indexes. We then investigate the relationship between each user’s political preference and her/his consumption of questionable/reliable information. Our results, quantified using information theory measures, provide evidence for the existence of echo chambers across two dimensions represented by the political bias and by the trustworthiness of information channels. Finally, we observe that the echo chamber structure cannot be reproduced after properly randomizing the users’ interaction patterns.

Get full-text (via PubEx)

THE PEDIATRICIAN AND THE PUBLIC

PEDIATRICS ◽

10.1542/peds.7.2.247 ◽

1951 ◽

Vol 7 (2) ◽

pp. 247-258

Author(s):

JORGEN S. DICH

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Political Parties ◽

Basic Needs ◽

Modern Society ◽

Social Medicine ◽

Personal Freedom ◽

The Public ◽

Political Bias ◽

The Subject ◽

The Right

The subject of this talk concerns social medicine in the Scandinavian countries, not socialized medicine. The term socialized medicine has a political bias which is not in conformity with the conception of social medicine in Scandinavia. Every step in the development of the Scandinavian social medicine program has been adopted unanimously by all parties, irrespective of their attitudes toward socialism itself. Political parties have advocated liberalism and opposed socialism with the same ardor with which they have supported the expansion of social medicine. In Scandinavia, therefore, it is not necessary to advise us to "Keep politics out of this picture." Politics have always been omitted, even to the extent that a phrase corresponding to the American "socialized medicine" has never been used in Scandinavia. And if you were to try introducing it, it would not be understood. What is social medicine? It can be defined as an organization of the medical services according to a certain conception of individual or human rights and public obligations in a modern society. In all countries it is accepted that there are some basic needs which everyone has the right to satisfy, irrespective of income. Protection of personal freedom belongs to this group; so does education of the children.

Get full-text (via PubEx)

Revelation in Heidegger

The Oxford Handbook of Divine Revelation ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198795353.013.20 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 308-321

Author(s):

Peter Joseph Fritz

Keyword(s):

Martin Heidegger ◽

Divine Revelation ◽

Ontological Status ◽

Political Bias ◽

Belief In God ◽

Christian Understanding ◽

The Way

Martin Heidegger provides positive impetus for fresh thinking on divine revelation. Objections could immediately be raised. While it is contested whether Heidegger observes some sort of ‘methodological atheism’, at the very least he demotes theology—serious thinking based on belief in God—as ‘ontic’ (occasional, region-specific), whereas philosophy enjoys ‘ontological’ status. Heidegger refuses the revealed idea of creation as a distortive axiom for Western thinking that prepares the way for the world’s modern, technological framing. And of course there is Heidegger’s political bias, a concern that has reignited with the publication of his Schwarze Hefte. Nevertheless, this chapter’s primary thesis holds that Heidegger can help to reinvigorate Christian understanding of divine revelation in at least three respects: (1) by centring the theology of revelation on the allied themes of fundamental truth and freedom, (2) by encouraging theologians to continue pursuing renewed interest in apocalyptic, and (3) by bringing to light the revelatory character of inconspicuous, everyday phenomena.

Get full-text (via PubEx)

Political Bias in the Classroom Survey

PsycTESTS Dataset ◽

10.1037/t14872-000 ◽

2011 ◽

Author(s):

Darren L. Linvill ◽

Pamela A. Havice

Keyword(s):

Political Bias

Get full-text (via PubEx)