Beta
×

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!

Given Truth, the Misinformed Believe Lies More

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the don't-let-the-truth-get-in-your-way dept.

Idle 961

SharpFang writes "In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that misinformed people, particularly political partisans, rarely changed their minds when exposed to corrected facts in news stories. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger."

cancel ×

961 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (5, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899146)

It's nothing but lies designed to obscure the fact that Barak Hussein Obama is a Muslim terrorist who wants to entrance our children with commie healthcare. The sooner he goes back to his hometown in Kenya the better.

And my facts are just fine. Bill O'Reilly told me so.

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (3, Funny)

denmarkw00t (892627) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899196)

This is not communist propaganda, Obama isn't a terrorist, and O'Reilly doesn't know everything. Those are facts, I'm pretty sure I just bolstered your own beliefs :P

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899200)

I think you're supposed to say Glenn Beck and not Bill O'Reilly these days.

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899730)

Yes. To quote Jon Stewart, to Bill O'Reilly, "You're the sanest voice on this entire network. And that's a little scary sometimes."

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (4, Insightful)

EdZ (755139) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899298)

-1 troll? I'm guessing somebody needs to replace the batteries in their sarcasm detector.

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (1)

torgis (840592) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899400)

+1 irony?

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (0)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899442)

I think it's possible that someone merely wrote a script that Troll modded any post that mentioned Bill O'reilly.

Lord knows I'd love to get something to auto "Overrated" mode any post with ^H in it.

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (1)

Theoboley (1226542) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899530)

Yea that was me, I didn't realize it was sarcastic. THUS, im posting here to undo the troll mod.

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (1)

onion2k (203094) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899650)

A sarcasm detector would be really useful.

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899764)

A sarcasm detector based on voice inflection would probably think that people from India are being sarcastic all the time, but in my experience, they are almost never sarcastic. Isn't that ironic?

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (5, Funny)

JustOK (667959) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899802)

Brilliant reasoning. Thank you. Come again.

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (0)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899514)

>>>It's nothing but lies designed to obscure the fact that Barak Hussein Obama [...] wants to entrance our children with [one-payer monopoly] healthcare. The sooner he goes back to his hometown in [Chiacgo] the better.
>>>

Fixed that for you. NOW it's accurate.

Re:This study is nothing but Communist propaganda (1)

xmorg (718633) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899756)

Its about time someone said the truth! Bill has been getting more and more liberal though, I think im gonna stick with Hannity and malkin. I love malkin :)

Cue lefty/righty flame-war (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899154)

n/t

Logical Positivism? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899158)

Didn't RTFA but if this study uses a logical positivist approach to a soc-sci research topic then it's completely pointless.

Re:Logical Positivism? (1)

allcar (1111567) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899548)

"I'm in charge of logical positivism and Bruce is in charge of the sheep dip." Sorry, couldn't resist.

Global warming religious zealots... (-1, Flamebait)

CaptSlaq (1491233) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899190)

on both sides in 3... 2... 1...

This is a win! (1)

JamesP (688957) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899194)

for homeopathy!1111 :P :P

Just kidding :P

But in reality we usually look at 'first facts' and feel they are more credible.

It's not much as lies... if you heard first "A is good" you'll keep thinking that, the same with "A is bad" regardless if A is good or bad in reality

Have to change my strategy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899216)

Now I have to change my strategy for dealing with stupid people. Maybe they'll fall for some homeopathy... fight stupid with stupid.

It's truth! (1)

jshackney (99735) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899222)

It's all a conspiracy.

No surprise... (1, Insightful)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899224)

This explains the popularity of right-wingers, ordinary people who would have nothing to gain for voting for right-wing parties, yet who keep doing so.

Re:No surprise... (4, Insightful)

qortra (591818) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899332)

Hah, you sir are truly delusional. *Every* political party has its share of disinformation and lies. To single out a specific party as being the culprit of misinformation only serves to show just how ignorant and naive you are.

Re:No surprise... (3, Insightful)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899498)

*Every* political party has its share of disinformation and lies.

I'll go one further and say that *every* political party actively engages in pastisanship, fearmongering, and disinformation - with the explicit intent of making the electorate less rational and less able to make clear choices. The study in TFA (correctly) paints this phenomenon as a bad thing, but for political hucksters it's not a bad thing; it's a good thing - a great thing - when you can turn people into mindless partisan zombies just by throwing a few lies around.

Re:No surprise... (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899768)

Well, yes. The GOP are better at it, though, because they understand organization.

Re:No surprise... (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899512)

This explains the popularity of right-wingers, ordinary people who would have nothing to gain for voting for right-wing parties.

Except our constitutionally guaranteed right to remain armed. The Democrats, as it were, just can't help but shoot themselves in the foot with the gun control issue. There are a LOT of people in rural areas and in the Southern states who will literally base their vote on that one issue.

Re:No surprise... (1)

rainmayun (842754) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899736)

sure... with the right guns, you can get all the money, food, education and health care you want.

iPhone 4 anyone? (1)

LittlePud (1356157) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899230)

You mean like the reception/antenna shorting issues with the iPhone 4?

No surprise... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899248)

This explains the popularity of left-wingers, ordinary people who would have nothing to gain for voting for left-wing parties, yet who keep doing so.

Re:No surprise... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899320)

Thing is the ideals behind "left wing" are so that almost everyone profits once the philosophy is realized. Only the richest of the richest lose, so there's like 2% who would not benefit.

Whether the ideals can ever be realized, and whether the politicians will even try to follow up on the promises is a different matter.

No surprise... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899464)

This explains the popularity of chicken-wingers, ordinary people who would have weight to gain for voting for chicken-wing parties, yet who keep doing so.

Re:No surprise... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899682)

I HATE those goddamned CHICKEN_BAGGERS!

Because... (5, Insightful)

cmiller173 (641510) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899250)

... when exposed to corrected facts in news stories.

Perhaps because we have learned to distrust the news providers?

Re:Because... (1)

Midnight's Shadow (1517137) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899274)

... when exposed to corrected facts in news stories.

Perhaps because we have learned to distrust the news providers?

DING! DING! DING! We have a winner folks!

Re:Because... (4, Insightful)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899388)

The saddest part of this story for us, nerds, is that our strongest weapon - our knowledge, superior understanding of facts, digging deeper into matters than cheap news stories, is in fact totally inefficient against "joe average". The more you argue your case the worse your chance to -really- win the argument, convince the other side. More often they will admit defeat to get you off their neck and keep believing their falsehood even stronger.

Re:Because... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899632)

...our strongest weapon - our knowledge...

Sooooo, we're keeping the whole 'death ray' thing on the down-low?

Glen Beck Makes sense, if you think about it. (3, Insightful)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899640)

The saddest part of this story for us, nerds, is that our strongest weapon - our knowledge, superior understanding of facts, digging deeper into matters than cheap news stories, is in fact totally inefficient against "joe average". The more you argue your case the worse your chance to -really- win the argument, convince the other side. More often they will admit defeat to get you off their neck and keep believing their falsehood even stronger.

That is why John Hodgeman's punch line "Glen Beck makes a lot of sense if you think about it. If you don't think about it, he makes even more sense" makes me quite sad.

Re:Glen Beck Makes sense, if you think about it. (3, Insightful)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899828)

That is why John Hodgeman's punch line "Glen Beck makes a lot of sense if you think about it. If you don't think about it, he makes even more sense" makes me quite sad.

No .. what makes me sad is "Third most listened to talk show in the US".

Re:Because... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899700)

And what is your case, that Bush is bad and Obama is good, are those your "facts"?

What are you talking about?

Re:Because... (2, Insightful)

Xamusk (702162) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899716)

The more you argue your case the worse your chance to -really- win the argument, convince the other side. More often they will admit defeat to get you off their neck and keep believing their falsehood even stronger.

Sounds to me like religion.

What's the solution? (1)

Ktistec Machine (159201) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899746)

OK, so we know now that just pointing out the facts doesn't work. What does? Have any studies identified techniques that actually work?

Re:Because... (1)

e2d2 (115622) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899812)

But why is that sad? So I can't win an argument with Joe Average. It's not the end of the world.

Re:Because... (1)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899414)

We have "learned" to distrust news providers that tell us what we don't like to hear...

There's your ringer.

Re:Because... (1)

refrigeratorpanic (1832792) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899368)

Perhaps because we have learned to distrust the news providers when we dont agree with their statements?

fixed.

Re:Because... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899406)

Only trust Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert for the truthiness!

Re:Because... (5, Insightful)

divisionbyzero (300681) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899436)

... when exposed to corrected facts in news stories.

Perhaps because we have learned to distrust the news providers?

Agreed. One of the greatest coups of big business is the co-opting of journalism. Now, nobody believes in objectivity. Everything is just politics.

Re:Because... (1)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899438)

... when exposed to corrected facts in news stories.

Perhaps because we have learned to distrust the news providers?

Nah. If we'd learned to distrust the news providers we wouldn't have simply accepted their misinformation in the first place. We would have gone out and dug up our own information. And our beliefs wouldn't be based on incorrect information in the first place. So it wouldn't be necessary to change our beliefs when the information was corrected by the news provider.

Re:Because... (2, Insightful)

The Mighty Buzzard (878441) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899790)

We would have gone out and dug up our own information. And our beliefs wouldn't be based on incorrect information in the first place.

Be nice to think so but it's been my experience that people, including supposedly intelligent people, will just go find misinformation that suits what they want to believe and truth be damned. I offer the entirety of slashdot comments as evidence.

Re:Because... (1)

COMON$ (806135) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899468)

Honestly, I consider the Daily Show to be the most accurate political commentary on TV...which is really really sad...

Re:Because... (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899594)

It's partly that, partly that the "misinformed" aren't just that, there's more going on and, while I won't get into details, telling those classes of people are going to be likely to fight harder to hold on to their beliefs since they're not based upon facts...they're based upon feelings. When facts follow feelings, you will have no end to trouble and there's little convincing those sorts of people of ANYTHING that they don't feel is to be the truth.

Or even just reserving judgement (5, Insightful)

pavon (30274) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899676)

This is one of the reasons that I dislike discussing/arguing issues in person. They will bring up some information I hadn't heard before, but I have no idea whether it is reliable or not. I try not to be set in my beliefs, but 90% of the "facts" that people spout usually had some foundation in truth originally but have become so misinterpreted by the time they heard it that it is almost complete crap. I like to look into things before I accept them, but that isn't an option in person. If you can't immediately refute any random thing they bring up and won't just accept what they say as gospel truth then you are pegged as a ignorant stubborn idiot. Furthermore, when I am pressed like that I do feel a strong desire to dig in and defend myself, when otherwise I would just take in the information and have one more thing to mull over while I continue to read about the issue.

Re: Because... (2, Insightful)

EXTomar (78739) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899722)

A cultural norm my European cousins have noticed about Americans is that we seem to be taught to believe what "friends tell us" more than "stranger tell us" even when that relationship seems irrelevant. They observe that seems to make Americans rather listen to people we know instead of "experts tell us" and sometimes outright hostility to "authority tells us". Anyone with a little bit of collegic philosophy or logic study should realize that it isn't that our friends are purposely misleading but that they can be just as wrong.

This isn't a surprise.. (1, Insightful)

staryc (852301) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899252)

This is why George W. Bush served two terms.

Re:This isn't a surprise.. (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899610)

Andy why Obama got elected

Everything I say is a lie (3, Funny)

Darth Sdlavrot (1614139) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899258)

Including this

Basis for disconnect (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899260)

In some circle, they call that a leap of faith

Given Truth, the Misinformed Believe Lies More (4, Insightful)

omar.sahal (687649) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899294)

Well people (and by people I mean you and me as well) believe a whole lot of things just because that's the way we were brought up. We have never really dug into our beliefs thoroughly.
When it comes to politics it really is some sort of emotional connection, not fact based, facts can't change our minds when this is the case. Politicians like to play on our innate sense of belonging, our fears, not however our minds.

Re:Given Truth, the Misinformed Believe Lies More (1)

davemik211 (1758706) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899372)

and because rationalizing the familiar is easy.

This explains religion. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899310)

No wonder people are insistent they have "faith" in the absence of facts.

Re:This explains religion. (5, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899708)

Why is this flamebait? Religions provide no objective evidence that they are true, yet require belief. When the facts contradict the dogma, they claim that the facts are just there to test your faith and that a true believer will see through them to the real underlying truth. Sounds like exactly the mindset that TFA is describing.

Change you can believe in (1)

bigfootchick (1855082) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899342)

He was right. The ONE was right. Change is here. We are experiencing change. Change we can believe in. Since we have the truth, the misinformed lie more.

Re:Change you can believe in (1)

cduffy (652) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899560)

-1 believability. If you want to pull off a parody successfully, try using turns of phrase the folks you're trying to parody actually use; "the ONE" is a phrase which I've never seen used in politics except from the perspective of folks trying to characterize their opposition as mindlessly devoted.

D for effort... unless you're trying to make the point that anyone can use this finding to reinforce their preexisting beliefs, which I suppose is true enough.

science (1)

S-4'N3 (1232394) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899348)

Wow. They recently discovered the same thing about beliefs vs. science.

Re:science (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899642)

Heh... No...it's a bit worse than that. :-D

Lets see (0, Troll)

NotSoHeavyD3 (1400425) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899354)

Right wingers are the ones that think Obama was born in Kenya, left wingers are the ones that think Bush fired Shinseki over troop levels. Yup, seems true to me and in other news water is wet, snow is cold, and lead is heavy.

Also rather interesting (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899364)

There's something called the Kruger-Dunning effect which is kinda interesting as well Dunning-Kruger effect [wikipedia.org] . The premise is the following one:

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which an unskilled person makes poor decisions and reaches erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to realize their mistakes.

it is called: Admit you have made a mistake (1)

stanlyb (1839382) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899374)

It is pretty simple. Most of the people are simply not able to admit that they have made a mistake, and when they face the real facts, then become even more stubborn just for the sake of being RIGHT (after they put their heads in the sand of course). In this sense, Christianity is very useful religion, because it says that we are all sinner....a little bit exaggerated, but better than the total ignorance.

Old science. What does this add? (3, Interesting)

Primitive Pete (1703346) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899396)

Seriously, this looks like a weak rehash of Festinger's (1957) Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, only without the data or depth of study. People change their opinions to suit their convictions, and shown by Festinger's study of the reactions of doomsday cults' reactions to the fact the the world didn't end on the expected date (c.f., "When Propheshy Fails"). Really, what am I missing here?

Re:Old science. What does this add? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899558)

The counter-reaction. The gist is not only that facts get discarded and ignored with no effect. It's that facts actually reinforce the opposite, have a strengthening negative effect. 100*lie+1*truth is not 99*lie, nor 100*lie, but 101*lie.

Right (2, Interesting)

e2d2 (115622) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899410)

I know this is Idle but there's been a lot of articles related to how people think lately. Myself, I'm perfectly okay with people having different viewpoints. Even outright wrong ones. Why should I care about it? So there are people that think their party is infallible and fall for the party talking points. Nothing new really and understanding it doesn't really change much. I can't really use this information beyond what I think are some common sense rules about people in general.

Diversity is part of humanity. Who's to say where the next great change will come from? Logical thinking is not the end-all be-all for human prosperity.

As a wise man once said - let them live.

Sounds perfectly fine to me. (2, Informative)

necro351 (593591) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899422)

Excerpt from the article:

"CONAN: And again, we'd like to think of our brain as something that's been trained in, you know, Cartesian logic, when in fact, our brain is sort of hard-wired to leap to conclusions very quickly.

Mr. NYHAN: That's right. And what's interesting is in some of these cases, it's the people who are most sophisticated who are best able to defend their beliefs and keep coming up with more elaborate reasons"

I remember taking a neuroscience course in college once with a professor who had done experimentation that he thought suggested that what separated humans from other mammals (the cortex) was primarily a mechanism to _slow_ learning. In fact in studies I've read child apes are able to more quickly learn how to use tools than child humans. Humans are slow learners in the same way that a feedback control loop needs a dampener: it allows us to stabilize and converge on techniques and facts that serve us well without too easily 'forgetting' them.

WARNING: anecdotal evidence
Walking and talking with people, the more 'reasonable' of us tend to simply be those that think about the issues (whatever they may be) more than others, and so misinformation in their minds will more quickly be 'flushed out'. However you don't _want_ people to just believe 'facts' without great trepidation, that is a good thing, its called skepticism, and it should be hard to overcome. Facts printed in news stories or articles (as mentioned in the article) are often wrong, like the countless stories that mis-reported the Toyota accelerator problem without doing their fact-checking first (one of the biggest proponents was a repeat insurance defrauder).

end anecdotal evidence

Climate science proves this. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899462)

I'm a liberal but I have studied the climate science controversy and no longer believe that CO2 causes catastrophic global warming. I have been following the skeptical web sites. It's real lonely for liberals over there. In fact, the prevalent opinion on those blogs seems to be that global warming is a plot to let the UN take over and make the whole world communist!

Never mind just the public, it seems to me that even scientists will not change their minds in the face of evidence contrary to what they believe.

Libruls (0, Flamebait)

clyde_cadiddlehopper (1052112) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899474)

A Faux News commentator said "Well what would you EXPECT from a bunch of social scientists in the People's Republic of Ann Arbor?"

Re:Libruls (1)

furasato (715764) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899602)

Do you mean ThayroneX, commentator from 4-6PM on AM 1600?

What you want to hear (2, Insightful)

LeepII (946831) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899482)

People tend to want to hear information that agrees with their particular world view. This is why even though all main stream media has a slant to a story there are different "flavors". AP actually puts out 7 different versions of every story depending on which propaganda machine is quoting them. Today's media presents very few facts but presents lots of opinions. Every "expert" speaker is just a person presenting his opinion. While it is easy to bash Faux news you can just as easily catch the same thing going on at NPR, BBC, CNN, etc if you are observant. All of them have money behind them determining how a story is presented, or if it is even presented at all. If your smart enough to read slashdot you should be smart enough to research things for yourself.

Religion and self deception? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899488)

I wonder if there is any correlation between a religious nature and political partisanship? Currently one party claims to be the party of religion, but looking back, this seems to change over the years with first one then the other aligning themselves with a church or religious body. It would be interesting to see if belief in a religion correlates with this political self deception.

So, you know (1)

KnownIssues (1612961) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899490)

This is admittedly totally of topic, but I thought it was interesting that as a word-for-word transcript (but probably excluding um's) how many times both speakers used "so" and "you know". These are two very articulate adults, one of them a regular radio host.

Well, its the truth's fault! (4, Funny)

nweaver (113078) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899496)

After all, we know that the truth has a liberal bias.

Us vs Them (2, Insightful)

ghislain_leblanc (450723) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899528)

This is a problem with pretty much every political issue there is. You have to pick a side eventually. Very few people are truly neutral as far as political spectrum goes. You are leaning either to the right or to the left. The problem is that when you finally pick your side (early twenties, typically) it becomes natural to stick to it no matter what new information comes your way and you end up in a "us versus them" kind of position. You see everything that doesn't make your side look good as propaganda or media bias. I think politics can be compared to professional sports in many ways in the sense that science, data and morality have basically nothing to do with who you are rooting for.

Re:Us vs Them (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899816)

The US culture is almost always "We against you" attitude. Was it a politics (only two parties!) or economic (we to rest of the world) or almost anything else. It is always set to 1 vs 1 situation.
But in other countries there are usually multiple parties, so it would be 1 vs 4 or 1 vs 6. Problem is just that when 20 years ago political groups were every one uniques, today they are almost like identical.

Politics is like Sports and Religion (5, Insightful)

Aceticon (140883) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899534)

For most people, Politics, like Sports and Religion is all about having an emotional attachment to something - they're for/with/believe a group/ideology because they feel like "one of the group" and one cannot be against oneself.

A high level of intelectual abilities (i.e. IQ) is no defense against it: just look at all the religious-like flamewars around things like editors and operating systems.

In order to do trully informed judgements one must first be aware of one's inner-self, one's drives and fears and be capable of analysing one's motives. One must be capable of separating the "logic" from the "feelings" and the "habits" in the way things are perceived, interpreted and reasoned about.

Unfortunatly this requires a level of inner maturity that seems to be far above that of most people ...

This really does affect you, why is this in Idle? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Meoward (665631) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899538)

I just read this [newyorker.com] a while back. There are larger ramifications than political sniping, and beyond politics altogether.

It's a perfect illustration of why this phenomenon matters to all of us.

iPhone users (1)

lyberth (319170) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899542)

I see iPhone users written all over this, flaming not inteded.

Not entirely irrational (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899550)

Given the amount of spin and misrepresentation of facts that people are exposed to on a daily basis, it's not entirely irrational to disregard evidence waved in front of their faces.

I can select stocks the rose over the last quarter to quote as evidence that the market has improved. I can select stocks that fall over the last quarter to quote as evidence that the market hes declined. Or I can select a random sample of stocks and give an answer that is a statistically accurate reflection of what the market did. Whether I sway someone's opinion with these facts depends not just on the facts themselves, but their trust in my choice of facts.

Re:Not entirely irrational (1)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899604)

Note, it's not DISREGARD. It's CONTRADICT. The evidence isn't discarded, it's counted against the case it was intended to support.

Just look at the slashdot story about Toyota (1)

sjonke (457707) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899574)

Slashdotters get even more entrenched in their belief that the Toyota "sudden acceleration" issue was real, even in the face of the conclusions drawn by the NHTSA that it was due to entirely to driver error.

By the way, cause what popular magazine declared that people should stop buying certain models of Toyotas until Toyota "fixed the sudden acceleration problem". That would be Consumers Reports. Sound familiar?

The paper in question (3, Informative)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899590)

Can be found here http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bnyhan/nyhan-reifler.pdf [umich.edu] . The statistical correlations found were weak, in some cases not even statistically significant. Also, for some questions they didn't see any backfire effect (where corrections make people believe the lies more) for all questions. For example, when dealing with liberals, there was no backfire effect when correcting the misconception that George Bush banned stem cell research (he in fact restricted it to a specific set of cell lines). However, in this case, correction did not alter the belief level although it didn't create a backfire result. Clearly, more research is needed. There's also a relevant older article which shows that uninformed people are more likely to think they are informed. http://ann.sagepub.com/content/560/1/143.abstract [sagepub.com] . This connects with the Dunning-Kruger effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect [wikipedia.org] where incompetent individuals generally overestimate their own competency.

Re:The paper in question (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899686)

For example, when dealing with liberals, there was no backfire effect....

Well that's because liberals are intelligent and thinking, and conservatives just hold onto ideas without reason. And if you try to tell me otherwise that will just prove my point by showing that you are an unintelligent conservative. ;-)

The cake is a lie (1)

IflyRC (956454) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899612)

Seriously, it really is.

I'm never misinformed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899626)

No! When I'm misinformed and I get facts presented (esp. in studies), I totally change my mind! I'd argue this news story is wrong!

Well they prove the point themselves (1)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899634)

I mean they were inundated with callers who said that they had changed their minds because of facts. But still believed that people didn't

We all know those people! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899658)

Seems like GNU fans are falling to that group. No matter how hard you explain that Linux kernel is the operating system by using technical and historical facts, they can not drop the GNU/Linux and taunt how it is the only truth.

Ok, so how do we fix this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899672)

Its great that we know this, so how do I convince Joe Average that he is wrong though? He won't believe the truth, so do I threaten him or call him names or what? How do I make Joe Average see the truth when he is ignoring it?

this article (1)

weirdcrashingnoises (1151951) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899674)

it's full of lies, don't believe it!

IQ (1)

MrVictor (872700) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899688)

Hmmm... I wonder how closely habitual acceptance of misinformation parallels with low intelligence. I think this all boils down to 'stupid people are stupid'.

N.P.R. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899690)

National Propaganda Resource

All so called "facts" are suspect coming from this organization. Stories are designed not to engage but to denigrate and dehumanize, embarrass and harass.

NPR is a NWO affiliate and does its bidding, tables ideas, plants seeds and provides misdirection operations with the official face of a media based on "facts".

The truth could nto be more obscured coming from this organization.

Psychology.. (1)

Syniurge (1550185) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899694)

..the peak of human thinking?

What is the truth? (1)

cgfsd (1238866) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899714)

We are so accustomed to be lied to by every facet, what is the truth anymore?

MSNBC tells us one thing, Fox news tells us the opposite. The media can not be trusted to tell any truth.

Then you have political correctness, when even if you do know the truth you can not tell it because it may upset some group.

Face it, truth is dead, pick what lies make you feel the happiest.

Re:What is the truth? (1)

singingjim1 (1070652) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899798)

This needs to be modded up. Everything has a spin and it's nearly impossible to find truth. All one can do it try to wade through the spin and try to find out the underlying truth. But man it's getting harder and harder.

The only solution... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32899742)

seems to be to have a widely viewed news program that is at the same time informational, entertaining, and possibly humorous.

The daily show.
Saving the world, one day at a time.

WOW (1)

FireXtol (1262832) | more than 4 years ago | (#32899750)

I think I finally understand why no one ever believes me.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>