2010
DOI: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00588.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Scientific Impotence Excuse:
Discounting Belief‐Threatening Scientific Abstracts

Abstract: The scientific impotence discounting hypothesis predicts that people resist belief‐disconfirming scientific evidence by concluding that the topic of study is not amenable to scientific investigation. In 2 studies, participants read a series of brief abstracts that either confirmed or disconfirmed their existing beliefs about a stereotype associated with homosexuality. Relative to those reading belief‐confirming evidence, participants reading belief‐disconfirming evidence indicated more belief that the topic co… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
104
4
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(114 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
5
104
4
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, more research is needed in order to investigate under what circumstances, previous experience may lead to the belief that a correct answer exists since there are also reasons to believe that experience may lead to the conclusion “there is no correct answer .” For example, Munro (2010) found that people who have an opinion that contradicts the scientific consensus may conclude that the question cannot be answered within the frame of science. Thus, if a person initially has a belief that is in contrast to the majority of trusted others (e.g., “white and gold” in contrast to a majority of “blue and black” ), they may conclude that the question is not possible to answer.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, more research is needed in order to investigate under what circumstances, previous experience may lead to the belief that a correct answer exists since there are also reasons to believe that experience may lead to the conclusion “there is no correct answer .” For example, Munro (2010) found that people who have an opinion that contradicts the scientific consensus may conclude that the question cannot be answered within the frame of science. Thus, if a person initially has a belief that is in contrast to the majority of trusted others (e.g., “white and gold” in contrast to a majority of “blue and black” ), they may conclude that the question is not possible to answer.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Perhaps, during the Christmas break, we, as reviewers and editors, might all take some time out to reflect on our own innate cognitive biases as well as how to overcome those of others. 29 …”
Section: Featurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is consistent with the broader empirical literature on public understanding of science (PUS) which shows that publics are not passive in their reception of scientific information; they more often resist or re-work scientific ideas based on their own values or experiences (Choudhury et al, 2012;G. Munro, 2010;O'Connor & Joffe, 2013;Pickersgill et al, 2015;Wynne, 1992).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%