We tested predictions of two major contrasting theories about the role of deliberation in information processing: Motivated System 2 Reasoning (MS2R) vs Classical dual-process theory
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
Motivated System 2 Reasoning suggests deliberation is used to protect one’s identity – and thus that reasoning is held hostage by partisanship. Prediction: Deliberation increases belief in politically consistent headlines relative to politically inconsistent headlines.pic.twitter.com/5c7VfRXjUT
Prikaži ovu nit -
Classical Dual-Process Theory suggests that deliberation helps people correct flawed intuitive responses - and thus increases accuracy. Prediction: Deliberation decreases belief in false headlines relative to true headlines.pic.twitter.com/65LiB8Tf7l
Prikaži ovu nit -
Prior correlational evidence supports the classical account: People who are more deliberative are less likely to believe false headlines, regardless of partisan consistency. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S001002771830163X …pic.twitter.com/QDF85AkPLj
Prikaži ovu nit -
But correlation ≠ causation!
So we manipulated level of deliberation when assessing news headlines
Subjects gave intuitive response under time pressure+cognitive load. Then headline was presented again without deliberation constraint.
Control=1 rating with no constraintPrikaži ovu nit -
First we tried non-political headlines, where there's no role for partisan motivated reasoning. As expected, belief in false headlines was higher in initial (intuitive) responses than final (deliberative) responses or control ("one response baseline"). Deliberation⇒accuracypic.twitter.com/4amlndqaO1
Prikaži ovu nit -
Then we turned to political headlines... Results were the same! Deliberation increased accuracy, regardless of political consistency. And no effect on partisan differences.
Classical dual-process theory
Motivated System 2 Reasoningpic.twitter.com/rwQ8mnQ62Y
Prikaži ovu nit -
People higher on cognitive reflective abilities were also more likely to engage in deliberation and correct their erroneous intuitive response.
Prikaži ovu nit -
Implications: Analytic thinking is good!! ⇒Interventions that promote critical thinking should be expected to improve accuracy, not increase bias. ⇒Social media design, which encourages fast scrolling and not careful thinking, may exacerbate success of fake news
Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Interesting, but yours is a particular and uncommon definition of "deliberation" (self), when most people would presume group-based discussion At first glance, this seems more akin to effects based on different routes to persuasion, central vs peripheral information processing?
-
Really? Would you say that group-based deliberation is more common? (Particularly in the social media context) Did you, for example, engage in group-based deliberation when you wrote that tweet?
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.