Johnnie Cake Posted February 20, 2017 Author Posted February 20, 2017 Studies on "The Backfire Effect" have found that humans are less likely to effect changes to their closely held beliefs when presented with conflicting information especially when those beliefs are shared with family and social cultural. The more invested an individual is in a culture the less likely they are to have the conflicting information change their beliefs. We discount information that conflicts with closely held beliefs more than conflicting information that is not a closely held belief. In other words we have built in biases against non confirming information.
Glenn101 Posted February 20, 2017 Posted February 20, 2017 19 hours ago, The Nehor said: Stop stealing my shtick!!!!!!! Sorry. I don't do it as well as you in any event. That was the best I could do.
Johnnie Cake Posted February 21, 2017 Author Posted February 21, 2017 In one of the studies I'm aware of Psychologists told a group of subjects that they were testing for a possibly fatal human enzyme deficiency that had been discovered on campus circulating among students. Subject were told to dip a strip of yellow test paper into small sample cup of the participants own saliva and within 20 seconds to place the test paper into an lab envelope. 50% of the subjects were told that the test paper would turn green if they did not have the deficiency or remain yellow if they did...while the other 50% were told that if the paper remained yellow they did not have the deficiency. What none of the participants knew was that the test paper was common yellow construction paper and had no test properties what so ever and that all of the tests strips would remain yellow. What was interesting in the study was the reaction of the participants. Those that believed that they did not have the deficiency followed the instructions, accepted the results and quickly placed their test strip in the envelope...while those who believed that they did have the enzyme deficiency did just the opposite...collectively they ignored the time guidelines and many continued to dip their test strip into their saliva or directly into their own mouths, while others used multiple test strip to repeatedly retest themselves...while others took additional test strips so that they could retest themselves after the study...what none of them did was also telling...none of them completed the task of placing the test strip in the envelope within the 20 second time limit as directed...refusing to accept the information that conflicted with their closely held belief despite information which confirmed their belief was in error. (at least as far as they were concerned) One of the protections that evolved into our human consciousness was this tendency to cling to our closely held beliefs...even when presented with information should cause us to alter our beliefs 1
juliann Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 Quote The Backfire Effect. The Misconception: When your beliefs are challenged with facts, you alter your opinions and incorporate the new information into your thinking. The Truth: When your deepest convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, your beliefs get stronger That is too broad and general. First, there is a difference between contradictory evidence and accusations that live on message boards. Second, this doesn't necessarily generalize to online activity because I think it is not hard to see that online venues seem to attract a subset of humanity, often depending on the venue itself. Thus, I suspect most of us arrived with certain traits already established and we tend to gravitate to those arenas that support that. I like to read blogs but I have never found the format enticing for participation. The topics I generally get involved with have very much changed course since I started on ZLMB. I'm sure every woman can attest to that. There was a time where we couldn't bring up certain things without being derided and shouted down. It wasn't that long ago that every attempt at so-called feminist topics had to be preceded by a declaration of faithfulness to the church to forestall the inevitable apostate accusations. Now, we can have civil discussions on difficult topics like polyandry. Almost no one goes ballistic if we discuss the need of the Church to become more inclusive of women, for instance. The discussions about gays has evolved. And I've had to make these changes. I put aside my anti-feminist leanings long ago after lurking on Mormon feminist sites until it made sense, even though I still find some of them a tad toxic. Likewise, my attitude towards gay issues has changed. All of this came from online sites and listening to what the "other side" had to say. But I have always looked at message boards as a training ground to develop sound positions. Nothing lets you know as quickly when you have a real dog of an argument. Part of this is to realize when you have to drop something as well as knowing when something can stand up to the harshest critics to be found. The earliest and probably best example is with the priesthood ban issues. We began by insisting it wasn't racist. That was absurd. It took a lot of books and a lot of study to learn about what had happened within the historical cultural context, and demand that level of discussion rather than lazy accusations. What happened, of course, is nobody comes out looking very good which defeated the purpose of those there only to finger point at others. 3
Ahab Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 Every discussion I've ever had has proven that I am always right at least in some sense on every issue and that when I have seen any error in any of my ideas I have always corrected my misperceptions so that I am even more right than I was before the discussion. I think of it as a process of ever learning and always able to come to a greater and greater knowledge of the truth, always adding to my the correct understanding that I had before I started another discussion.
Meadowchik Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 3 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: In one of the studies I'm aware of Psychologists told a group of subjects that they were testing for a possibly fatal human enzyme deficiency that had been discovered on campus circulating among students. Subject were told to dip a strip of yellow test paper into small sample cup of the participants own saliva and within 20 seconds to place the test paper into an lab envelope. 50% of the subjects were told that the test paper would turn green if they did not have the deficiency or remain yellow if they did...while the other 50% were told that if the paper remained yellow they did not have the deficiency. What none of the participants knew was that the test paper was common yellow construction paper and had no test properties what so ever and that all of the tests strips would remain yellow. What was interesting in the study was the reaction of the participants. Those that believed that they did not have the deficiency followed the instructions, accepted the results and quickly placed their test strip in the envelope...while those who believed that they did have the enzyme deficiency did just the opposite...collectively they ignored the time guidelines and many continued to dip their test strip into their saliva or directly into their own mouths, while others used multiple test strip to repeatedly retest themselves...while others took additional test strips so that they could retest themselves after the study...what none of them did was also telling...none of them completed the task of placing the test strip in the envelope within the 20 second time limit as directed...refusing to accept the information that conflicted with their closely held belief despite information which confirmed their belief was in error. (at least as far as they were concerned) One of the protections that evolved into our human consciousness was this tendency to cling to our closely held beliefs...even when presented with information should cause us to alter our beliefs How to use judgment beyond personal bias: The Scout Mindset, or in other words, caring more about what is right than being right, 4
Johnnie Cake Posted February 21, 2017 Author Posted February 21, 2017 1 hour ago, Ahab said: Every discussion I've ever had has proven that I am always right at least in some sense on every issue and that when I have seen any error in any of my ideas I have always corrected my misperceptions so that I am even more right than I was before the discussion. I think of it as a process of ever learning and always able to come to a greater and greater knowledge of the truth, always adding to my the correct understanding that I had before I started another discussion. Your honor, I rest my case... 2
Ahab Posted February 21, 2017 Posted February 21, 2017 1 minute ago, Johnnie Cake said: Your honor, I rest my case... Really? Already?
The Nehor Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 On 2/19/2017 at 4:32 PM, Johnnie Cake said: Evidentially this board is actually driving each of us to a firmer conviction of our closely held cherished beliefs instead of convincing each other that our beliefs are in error. While I enjoy this board to test my beliefs and have them challenged I must admit that my participation here has yet to alter my beliefs...and in some instances has made them even more firm...and I'm guessing that believers are experiencing the same thing. Correct? Have your beliefs been challenged or made firmer through your MD&D board participation? I have learned a few things. For example when I was younger I was always suspicious of the assertion that apostasy, particularly adversarial and combative apostasy, dulls the intellect. The more time I spend here the more evidence I accumulate for said assertion.
The Nehor Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 On 2/21/2017 at 1:43 PM, Ahab said: Every discussion I've ever had has proven that I am always right at least in some sense on every issue and that when I have seen any error in any of my ideas I have always corrected my misperceptions so that I am even more right than I was before the discussion. I think of it as a process of ever learning and always able to come to a greater and greater knowledge of the truth, always adding to my the correct understanding that I had before I started another discussion. You are always right but sometimes you are wrong but that just helps you be even more right? Am I following that?
Ahab Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 7 minutes ago, The Nehor said: You are always right but sometimes you are wrong but that just helps you be even more right? Am I following that? Close. I am always at least a little bit right on an issue and with more discussion/education I become more and more right on that issue. I don't lose my knowledge as I learn more and more. I just keep adding to the knowledge I already have.
CMZ Posted February 24, 2017 Posted February 24, 2017 On 2/19/2017 at 2:32 PM, Johnnie Cake said: Evidentially this board is actually driving each of us to a firmer conviction of our closely held cherished beliefs instead of convincing each other that our beliefs are in error. While I enjoy this board to test my beliefs and have them challenged I must admit that my participation here has yet to alter my beliefs...and in some instances has made them even more firm...and I'm guessing that believers are experiencing the same thing. Correct? Have your beliefs been challenged or made firmer through your MD&D board participation? Is the purpose of this board to make people believe or disbelieve in the Church? I would submit that it is not. Testimony first and foremost comes through reading, pondering and praying about The Book of Mormon and resolving to live according to it when you gain a witness from the Holy Ghost. True that some convincing arguments could be made here by mortals for the truthfulness of the restored gospel, but that will never have the same convincing power an answer from the Holy Spirit. And it's not meant to be otherwise. We wait in vain if we think someone's going to present an overwhelmingly convincing academic argument that will make us believe. Amazingly, God respects our agency so much that he doesn't even force belief.
Recommended Posts