scholarly journals How the Polls Can Be Both Spot On and Dead Wrong: Using Choice Blindness to Shift Political Attitudes and Voter Intentions

PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. e60554 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Hall ◽  
Thomas Strandberg ◽  
Philip Pärnamets ◽  
Andreas Lind ◽  
Betty Tärning ◽  
...  
Synthese ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Bortolotti ◽  
Ema Sullivan-Bissett

Abstract When subject to the choice-blindness effect, an agent gives reasons for making choice B, moments after making the alternative choice A. Choice blindness has been studied in a variety of contexts, from consumer choice and aesthetic judgement to moral and political attitudes. The pervasiveness and robustness of the effect is regarded as powerful evidence of self-ignorance. Here we compare two interpretations of choice blindness. On the choice error interpretation, when the agent gives reasons she is in fact wrong about what her choice is. On the choice change interpretation, when the agent gives reasons she is right about what her choice is, but she does not realise that her choice has changed. In this paper, we spell out the implications of the two interpretations of the choice-blindness effect for self-ignorance claims and offer some reasons to prefer choice change to choice error.


2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sam Gosling ◽  
Jason Rentfrow ◽  
Simine Vazire
Keyword(s):  

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nichole Thompson ◽  
Tim Abraham ◽  
Ray Parr ◽  
Ryan Halley ◽  
Kate Lachowsky ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annika Karinen ◽  
Joshua M. Tybur ◽  
Reinout E. de Vries

A broad literature indicates that pathogen, sexual, and moral disgust sensitivity relate to, among other things, political attitudes, moral condemnation, and symptoms of psychopathology. As such, instruments measuring disgust sensitivity have been widely used across subfields of psychology. Yet, surprisingly little work has examined whether self-reports in disgust sensitivity reflect systematic trait variation. Here, we present the first study to examine self-other agreement in pathogen, sexual, and moral disgust sensitivity. Romantic partners (n1 = 290), friends (n2 = 212) and acquaintances (n3 = 140) rated each other on these three domains of disgust sensitivity and on the HEXACO personality dimensions. Correlations between dyad partners’ self- and other-ratings were calculated to estimate the magnitude of self-other agreement. We found self-other agreement in all domains of disgust sensitivity (r’s of .36, .46, and .66 for moral, pathogen, and sexual disgust sensitivity, respectively), with this agreement only slightly inferred from personality perceptions (percentages mediated by HEXACO were 15%, 7%, and 33% for pathogen, sexual, and moral disgust sensitivity, respectively). These results suggest that pathogen, sexual, and moral disgust sensitivity reflect systematic trait variation that is detectable by others and distinct from broader personality traits.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document