Our brains automatically process opinions we agree with as fa

T

Truth

Guest
Our brains rapidly and automatically process opinions we agree with as if they are facts

Now a team led by Michael Gilead at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev report in Social Psychological and Personality Science that they have found evidence of rapid and involuntarily mental processes that kick-in whenever we encounter opinions we agree with, similar to the processes previously described for how we respond to basic facts.

The researchers write that “their demonstration of such a knee-jerk acceptance of opinions may help explain people’s remarkable ability to remain entrenched in their convictions”.


The background to this involves something you’ve probably heard of, the Stroop Effect – how we’re slower to name the ink colour of colour-denoting words when the word meaning doesn’t match the ink, like RED written in blue ink. The Stroop Effect occurs because our brains rapidly and involuntarily process the colour meaning of the word, which interferes with our processing of the ink colour.

A while back, psychologists showed there’s a similar phenomenon for facts (they called it the “Epistemic Stroop Effect”) – we’re quicker to verify that factual, than non-factual, statements are spelled correctly, suggesting that our rapid discernment of factual accuracy interacts with our judgment about spelling (even though the factual accuracy of the statements is irrelevant to the spelling task).

 
This is certainly true although there is a great deal of, I'll give that a free pass because they're mostly on the right track is also at play. I think the latter is more condusive to being partisan.
 
booooorrriiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng
 
It would be impossible to get through the day without preconceived notions. There's far too much new data to process in the meantime. But we should regularly sit down and 'review and amend our records' if they are factually awry.
 
This is not the same thing as confirmation bias or having a point of view, though. What I think they are saying is not that we seek out opinions that validate our own, which is true but a different thing. In confirmation bias we would all read a list of statistics or listen to a few news stories, then if we were asked to summarize what we heard we would all draw different conclusions based on what we already believe. It's good to be aware that we do that but at least that requires reasoning and drawing conclusions, whether we choose to test them or not.
This is more like if in the example I gave, we're not only biased about which ones get our attention, but in fact they might all be completely made up, yet we would accept them as facts.
And we do this all the time. I don't think it's really something we can help but it is good to try to test the facts your views are based on.
 
but who isn't self aware enough to know when they're doing this anyway? I mean, does anyone really need to be told that they do this?
 
Ironically the more self-awareness you have the more likely you are to test the thought processes you habitually employ. And things that happen automatically and without question are, by definition, things which we are not aware of until we take the time to consider.

Of course someone suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder would believe themselves to be "self aware" and would find the prospect of considering their fallibility to be either boring or absurd.

Now, you've followed me around harassing me and reported me when I responded.
You've managed to get me banned because you're the type of fat c*** to report me and I didn't take the time to report you.
You won.
So f*** off you fat c***. Okay?
 
booooorrriiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng

Remember when I posted it was sad about the Manchester bombing and you posted "hahahaha, I am glad the kids died. Worse things happen at KFC every day"?

You could stand to learn something from this article, although your mental disorder won't go away.

To anyone who didn't see this: no, it's not a joke, check her post history, it was around the time it happened which makes it worse
 
1957 just called. It wants its research back.
 
A discussion about the brain can surely not include me...

I don't need one, I have my sleep and eat clock.

883037-skalman.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom