Does ideology trump facts? Studies say it often does

[bigdavediode]

"In the studies, volunteers were shown news items or political adverts that contained misinformation, followed by a correction. For example, a study by John Bullock of Yale showed volunteers a political ad created by NARAL that linked Justice John Roberts to a violent anti-abortion group, followed by news that the ad had been withdrawn. Interestingly, Democratic participants had a worse opinion of Roberts after being shown the ad, even after they were told it was false."

"the findings suggest that facts that contradicted political ideology were simply not taken in; if anything, challenging misbelief with fact checking has the counterintuitive effect of reinforcing that misbelief."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...gy-trump-facts-studies-say-it-often-does.html

 

[trendlover]

Quote from bigdavediode:

"In the studies, volunteers were shown news items or political adverts that contained misinformation, followed by a correction. For example, a study by John Bullock of Yale showed volunteers a political ad created by NARAL that linked Justice John Roberts to a violent anti-abortion group, followed by news that the ad had been withdrawn. Interestingly, Democratic participants had a worse opinion of Roberts after being shown the ad, even after they were told it was false."

"the findings suggest that facts that contradicted political ideology were simply not taken in; if anything, challenging misbelief with fact checking has the counterintuitive effect of reinforcing that misbelief."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...gy-trump-facts-studies-say-it-often-does.html

And that is why rumor is so effective and destructive even when the truth become known.

 

[jonbig04]

Quote from bigdavediode:

"In the studies, volunteers were shown news items or political adverts that contained misinformation, followed by a correction. For example, a study by John Bullock of Yale showed volunteers a political ad created by NARAL that linked Justice John Roberts to a violent anti-abortion group, followed by news that the ad had been withdrawn. Interestingly, Democratic participants had a worse opinion of Roberts after being shown the ad, even after they were told it was false."

"the findings suggest that facts that contradicted political ideology were simply not taken in; if anything, challenging misbelief with fact checking has the counterintuitive effect of reinforcing that misbelief."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...gy-trump-facts-studies-say-it-often-does.html

Makes sense. I've met a lot of people who's biggest issue with Obama was the fact that he was raising taxes on them. Of course when we sat down and found out they would be receiving a significant tax cut, did they change their mind? Nope. A part of me finds that ridiculous. Yet another part of me thinks the blind adherence to some form of idealism on both sides keeps this country on a somewhat even keel. That doesn't mean I have to take part in it though.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

A great example of the truth of this was the claim that Saddam was involved with 9/11. This ideological spin, generated to help rationalize the invasion of Iraq by the Bush Junta, was later denied by Bush as not being supported by the facts.

Yet, there is a large percentage of sheeple out there who still believe Saddam was behind 9/11.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from jonbig04:

Makes sense. I've met a lot of people who's biggest issue with Obama was the fact that he was raising taxes on them. Of course when we sat down and found out they would be receiving a significant tax cut, did they change their mind? Nope. A part of me finds that ridiculous. Yet another part of me thinks the blind adherence to some form of idealism on both sides keeps this country on a somewhat even keel.

Sadly, I don't think it does. It simply means that an uninformed electorate becomes even easier to lead by the various radicals.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

A great example of the truth of this was the claim that Saddam was involved with 9/11. This ideological spin, generated to help rationalize the invasion of Iraq by the Bush Junta, was later denied by Bush as not being supported by the facts.

Yet, there is a large percentage of sheeple out there who still believe Saddam was behind 9/11.

Actually it mentions WMDs in the article, and the studies relating to Fox News as well.

 

[Fractals 'R Us]

Quote from bigdavediode:

"In the studies, volunteers were shown news items or political adverts that contained misinformation, followed by a correction. For example, a study by John Bullock of Yale showed volunteers a political ad created by NARAL that linked Justice John Roberts to a violent anti-abortion group, followed by news that the ad had been withdrawn. Interestingly, Democratic participants had a worse opinion of Roberts after being shown the ad, even after they were told it was false."

"the findings suggest that facts that contradicted political ideology were simply not taken in; if anything, challenging misbelief with fact checking has the counterintuitive effect of reinforcing that misbelief."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...gy-trump-facts-studies-say-it-often-does.html

Socialism does not work BTW. Productive people give up producing after awhile. It was invented by satanists as a replacement for Christianity.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Nice scientific and secular thinking you got going on for you...

Tell me, do you think we should still be burning witches at the stake and stoning prostitutes?

Quote from Fractals 'R Us:

Socialism does not work BTW. Productive people give up producing after awhile. It was invented by satanists as a replacement for Christianity.

 

[loik]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Nice scientific and secular thinking you got going on for you...

Tell me, do you think we should still be burning witches at the stake and stoning prostitutes?

And socialism is OK?

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

You have something against the Veterans Administration and free health care for Vets?

That is socialism, of course...

Quote from loik:

And socialism is OK?