Slashdot: News for Nerds


Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

My argument has been quantified

fustakrakich (1673220) writes | about 10 months ago

User Journal 2



Not that I expect different results or anything. In fact I expect even more resistance. *Nothing but a bunch commie talk* Proof that our educational system has been compromised:
Why does public conflict over societal risks persist in the face of compelling and widely accessible scientific evidence? We conducted an experiment to probe two alternative answers: the "Science Comprehension Thesis" (SCT), which identifies defects in the public's knowledge and reasoning capacities as the source of such controversies; and the "Identity-protective Cognition Thesis" (ICT) which treats cultural conflict as disabling the faculties that members of the public use to make sense of decision-relevant science. In our experiment, we presented subjects with a difficult problem that turned on their ability to draw valid causal inferences from empirical data. As expected, subjects highest in Numeracy -- a measure of the ability and disposition to make use of quantitative information -- did substantially better than less numerate ones when the data were presented as results from a study of a new skin-rash treatment. Also as expected, subjects' responses became politically polarized -- and even less accurate -- when the same data were presented as results from the study of a gun-control ban. But contrary to the prediction of SCT, such polarization did not abate among subjects highest in Numeracy; instead, it increased. This outcome supported ICT, which predicted that more Numerate subjects would use their quantitative-reasoning capacity selectively to conform their interpretation of the data to the result most consistent with their political outlooks...

The mechanics behind it was documented in the 30s, and probably long before that.. I'll have to brush up on my Plato and Aristotle.. I can only wish that more of Aristophanes stuff survived. He was kind of the Stephen Colbert of the times.

cancel ×


Can you say, "Confirmation bias"? (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about 10 months ago | (#44899427)

Thanks for the link.

I've downloaded the PDF, will copy to my phone for the morning commute.

Re:Can you say, "Confirmation bias"? (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 10 months ago | (#44902445)

Yeah, this stuff is ancient history to the point of being repetitious. The studies on this are countless and come up with the same results every time, but seems like everybody has to see for themselves, or maybe they want to see their name in lights. It's a work that requires little effort, most of which is spent on trying to make it sound original.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account