scholarly journals Contested Science: Individual-level insight into interpretation of evidence explains group- level polarization

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Said ◽  
Helen Fischer ◽  
Gerrit Anders
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Prior Beliefs ◽  
Belief Updating ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
Insight Into

Societal polarization over contested science has increased in the recent years. To explain thisworrisome trend, political, sociological, and psychological research has identified societal macro-phenomena as well as cognitive micro-level factors that explain how citizens reason about thescience. Here we take a radically different perspective, and highlight the effects of metacognition:How citizens reason about their own reasoning. Leveraging methods from Signal DetectionTheory, we investigated the importance of individual-level metacognitive insight for group-levelpolarization for the heavily contested topic of climate change, and the less heavily contested topicof nanotechnology. We found that, for climate change (but not for nanotechnology), increasedinsight into the accuracy of own interpretations of the available scientific evidence related tolower group-level polarization over the science. This finding held irrespective of the direction ofthe scientific evidence (endorsing or rejecting anthropogenicity of climate change). Furthermore,the polarizing effect of scientific evidence could be traced back to higher metacognitive insightfostering belief-updating in the direction of the evidence at the expense of own, prior beliefs. Bydemonstrating how individual-level metacognition links to group-level polarization, the presentresearch adds to our understanding of the drivers of societal polarization over science.

scholarly journals Contested science: Individuals with higher metacognitive insight into interpretation of evidence are less likely to polarize

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Said ◽  
Helen Fischer ◽  
Gerrit Anders
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Signal Detection ◽  
Signal Detection Theory ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Prior Beliefs ◽  
Belief Updating ◽  
Lower Likelihood ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
Insight Into

AbstractSocietal polarization over contested science has increased in recent years. To explain this development, political, sociological, and psychological research has identified societal macro-phenomena as well as cognitive micro-level factors that explain how citizens reason about the science. Here we take a radically different perspective, and highlight the effects of metacognition: How citizens reason about their own reasoning. Leveraging methods from Signal Detection Theory, we investigated the importance of metacognitive insight for polarization for the heavily contested topic of climate change, and the less heavily contested topic of nanotechnology. We found that, for climate change (but not for nanotechnology), higher insight into the accuracy of own interpretations of the available scientific evidence related to a lower likelihood of polarization over the science. This finding held irrespective of the direction of the scientific evidence (endorsing or rejecting anthropogenicity of climate change). Furthermore, the polarizing effect of scientific evidence could be traced back to higher metacognitive insight fostering belief-updating in the direction of the evidence at the expense of own, prior beliefs. By demonstrating how metacognition links to polarization, the present research adds to our understanding of the drivers of societal polarization over science.

Changing minds about climate change: a pervasive role for domain-general metacognition

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manos Tsakiris ◽  
Neza Vehar ◽  
Stephen M Fleming ◽  
Sophie De Beukelaer ◽  
Max Rollwage
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Social Effects ◽  
Negative Evidence ◽  
Prior Beliefs ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
The Face ◽  
Metacognitive Abilities ◽  
Insight Into

Updating one’s beliefs about the causes and effects of climate change is crucial for altering attitudes and behaviours. Importantly, metacognitive abilities - insight into the (in)correctness of one’s beliefs- play a key role in the formation of polarized beliefs. We investigated the role of domain-general and domain-specific metacognition in updating prior beliefs about climate change across the spectrum of climate change scepticism. We also considered the role of how climate science is communicated in the form of textual or visuo-textual presentations. We show that climate change scepticism is associated with differences in domain-general as well as domain-specific metacognitive abilities. Moreover, domain-general metacognitive sensitivity influenced belief updating in an asymmetric way : lower domain-general metacognition decreased the updating of prior beliefs, especially in the face of negative evidence. Our findings highlight the role of metacognitive failures in revising erroneous beliefs about climate change and point to their adverse social effects.

Individual-level psychology and group-level traits

2014 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-266
Author(s):  
Michael Muthukrishna ◽  
Mark Schaller
Keyword(s):  
Social Influence ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Psychological Processes ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Role Differentiation

AbstractPsychological research on social influence illuminates many mechanisms through which role differentiation and collaborative interdependence may affect cultural evolution. We focus here on psychological processes that produce specific patterns of asymmetric influence, which in turn can have predictable consequences for the emergence and transmission of group-level traits.

scholarly journals How reappraisal of new information contributes to optimistic belief updating

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Kube ◽  
Julia Glombiewski
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Good News ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Cognitive Mechanisms ◽  
Prior Beliefs ◽  
Belief Updating ◽  
Significant Group ◽  
New Information ◽  
N 93

People update their beliefs selectively in response to good news and disregard bad news, referred to as the optimism bias. Yet, the precise cognitive mechanisms underlying this asymmetry in belief updating are largely unknown. In three experiments, we tested the hypothesis that cognitive immunisation against new information contributes to optimistic belief updating (e.g. through questioning the reliability of new information). In each study, participants received new information in relation to their prior beliefs, and we examined the influence of cognitive immunisation on belief updating by using a three-group modulation protocol: In one group, cognitive immunisation against new information was promoted; in another group, cognitive immunisation was inhibited; and a control group received no manipulation. This modulation protocol was applied to beliefs about the self, i.e. performance expectations (Experiment 1&2; N=99 and N=93), and beliefs about climate change (Experiment 3; N=227) as an example of factual beliefs. The results of Experiments 1&2 showed that the cognitive immunisation manipulation had no influence on the update of performance-related expectations. In Experiment 3, we did find significant group differences in belief updating, and this effect interacted with participants’ general attitudes towards climate change: people who were sceptical about man-made climate change lowered their estimates of the projected temperature rise particularly if they perceived scientific information on climate change as being fraught with uncertainty. These findings suggest that the importance of cognitive immunisation in belief updating may depend on the content of beliefs (i.e. self-related vs. factual) and participants’ attitudes to the subject in question.

scholarly journals Individual behaviors and beyond: Toward a multidimensional view of gamer identity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Crystal Nicole Steltenpohl ◽  
Jordan Reed ◽  
Christopher Keys
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
Individual Identity ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Multiple Contexts ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Accurate Reflection

Aims. “Gamers” have historically been described via consumption habits and other unidimensional definitions such as genres played. Increasingly, researchers understand social identity as situated within multidimensional contexts, including community members’ interactions with other members and society at large.Methods and results. Our qualitative study involving 434 fighting game community members suggests this expanded, more multidimensional view of social identity is a more accurate reflection of how people who play games view their identities. Our findings focused on four themes of gamer identity: (1) behaviors, (2) player motivations, (3) centrality, and (4) negative perceptions.Conclusion. Our research complements more recent research on gamer identity incorporating individual-level gaming habits or preferences and group-level identities emerging from out-of-game and/or in-game worlds. In this way, we consider the influence of multiple contexts on individual identity. Understanding the influence of various social contexts can provide better insight into the multidimensional nature of gamer identity.

Political Preferences, Personality Traits, and Environmentalism

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alistair Soutter ◽  
René Mõttus
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Environmental Attitudes ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Political Orientation ◽  
Anthropogenic Climate Change ◽  
Political Preferences ◽  
Party Voting

Although the scientific evidence of anthropogenic climate change continues to grow, public discourse still reflects a high level of scepticism and political polarisation towards anthropogenic climate change. In this study (N = 499) we attempted to replicate and expand upon an earlier finding that environmental terminology (“climate change” versus “global warming”) could partly explain political polarisation in environmental scepticism (Schuldt, Konrath, & Schwarz, 2011). Participants completed a series of online questionnaires assessing personality traits, political preferences, belief in environmental phenomenon, and various pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours. Those with a Conservative political orientation and/or party voting believed less in both climate change and global warming compared to those with a Liberal orientation and/or party voting. Furthermore, there was an interaction between continuously measured political orientation, but not party voting, and question wording on beliefs in environmental phenomena. Personality traits did not confound these effects. Furthermore, continuously measured political orientation was associated with pro-environmental attitudes, after controlling for personality traits, age, gender, area lived in, income, and education. The personality domains of Openness, and Conscientiousness, were consistently associated with pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours, whereas Agreeableness was associated with pro-environmental attitudes but not with behaviours. This study highlights the importance of examining personality traits and political preferences together and suggests ways in which policy interventions can best be optimised to account for these individual differences.

Reply to Connor and Evers (2020): Critique of the Bias of Crowds Model Simply Restates the Model

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Payne ◽  
Heidi A. Vuletich ◽  
Kristjen B. Lundberg
Keyword(s):  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Systemic Racism ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Core ◽  
Psychological Science ◽  
Implicit Biases ◽  
The Individual

The Bias of Crowds model (Payne, Vuletich, & Lundberg, 2017) argues that implicit bias varies across individuals and across contexts. It is unreliable and weakly associated with behavior at the individual level. But when aggregated to measure context-level effects, the scores become stable and predictive of group-level outcomes. We concluded that the statistical benefits of aggregation are so powerful that researchers should reconceptualize implicit bias as a feature of contexts, and ask new questions about how implicit biases relate to systemic racism. Connor and Evers (2020) critiqued the model, but their critique simply restates the core claims of the model. They agreed that implicit bias varies across individuals and across contexts; that it is unreliable and weakly associated with behavior at the individual level; and that aggregating scores to measure context-level effects makes them more stable and predictive of group-level outcomes. Connor and Evers concluded that implicit bias should be considered to really be noisily measured individual construct because the effects of aggregation are merely statistical. We respond to their specific arguments and then discuss what it means to really be a feature of persons versus situations, and multilevel measurement and theory in psychological science more broadly.

scholarly journals Examining the Effects of Three Group-Level Metacognitive Scaffoldings on In-Service Teachers’ Knowledge Building

2021 ◽  
pp. 073563312110308
Author(s):  
Fan Ouyang ◽  
Si Chen ◽  
Yuqin Yang ◽  
Yunqing Chen
Keyword(s):  
Small Groups ◽  
Mixed Method ◽  
Peer Interactions ◽  
Knowledge Building ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Question Asking ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Task Oriented ◽  
Metacognitive Scaffolding

Group-level metacognitive scaffolding is critical for productive knowledge building. However, previous research mainly focuses on the individual-level metacognitive scaffoldings in helping learners improve knowledge building, and little effort has been made to develop group-level metacognitive scaffolding (GMS) for knowledge building. This research designed three group-level metacognitive scaffoldings of general, task-oriented, and idea-oriented scaffoldings to facilitate in-service teachers’ knowledge building in small groups. A mixed method is used to examine the effects of the GMSs on groups’ knowledge building processes, performances, and perceptions. Results indicate a complication of the effects of GMSs on knowledge building. The idea-oriented scaffolding has potential to facilitate question-asking and perspective-proposing inquiry through peer interactions; the general scaffolding does not necessarily lessen teachers’ idea-centered explanation and elaboration on the individual level; the task-oriented scaffolding has the worst effect. Pedagogical and research implications are discussed to foster knowledge building with the support of GMSs.

Perceived marketization in Poland: Translating key concepts of institutional anomie theory to the micro level

2021 ◽  
pp. 147737082199685
Author(s):  
Jacek Bieliński ◽  
Andreas Hövermann
Keyword(s):  
Structural Equation ◽  
Structural Equation Models ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
Institutional Anomie Theory ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Anomie Theory ◽  
Representative Random Sample ◽  
Order Factor ◽  
Micro Level ◽  
The Individual

Institutional anomie theory (IAT) describes the potentially criminogenic impact of economically dominated social institutions. Although originally cast at the macro level of society, more efforts have emerged lately to capture the IAT framework on the individual level, resulting in a need for appropriate measures representing the presumed marketization processes. Our study addresses this need by offering a theoretically derived, comprehensive measure of the individual-level instantiation of an anomic culture depicted in IAT, that is, ‘marketized mentality’. Structural equation models testing for the single higher-order factor marketized mentality are calculated with a representative random sample of Poland’s population. Finally, the implications and limitations resulting from the analyses are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document