When Beliefs Yield to Evidence: Reducing Biased Evaluation by Affirming the Self

Abstract

People often cling to beliefs even in the face of disconfirming evidence and interpret ambiguous information in a manner that bolsters strongly held attitudes. The authors tested a motivational account suggesting that these defensive reactions would be ameliorated by an affirmation of an alternative source of self-worth. Consistent with this interpretation, participants were more persuaded by evidence impugning their views toward capital punishment when they were self-affirmed than when they were not (Studies 1 and 2). Affirmed participants also proved more critical of an advocate whose arguments confirmed their views on abortion and less confident in their own attitudes regarding that issue than did unaffirmed participants (Study 3). Results suggest that assimilation bias and resistance to persuasion are mediated, in part, by identity-maintenance motivations.

Motivating mitigation: when health matters more than climate change

“…On the other hand, this was not the case when solutions emphasizing personal choice (e.g., personal responsibility, donation, paying more for clean electricity) were presented; and in this case the climate frame elicited a stronger response for all subjects regardless of political orientation. This result is consistent with previous research on identity affirmation, in which individuals tend to react dismissively towards information that opposes their cultural values (Cohen et al 2000;Cohen et al 2007;Kahan 2010). In particular, a recent paper (Kahan et al 2012) found that hierarchical individualists (correlated with conservatism) were less likely to find a climate change study scientifically valid if the proposed solution involved air pollution regulation, while communitarian egalitarians (correlated with liberalism) were less likely to find it valid if the proposed solution involved geo-engineering.…”

Uncertainty and religious reactivity: Uncertainty compensation, repair, and inoculation

“…The self-affirmation task was based on that used by Cohen, Aronson, and Steele (2000). For the main analysis, the religiosity scale was averaged as in the previous two studies.…”

Past-focused environmental comparisons promote proenvironmental outcomes for conservatives

“…Even subtle differences in framing can mean the difference between acceptance and rejection of a message (28). Messages that are supported by scientific evidence are especially effective when acceptance of the message also means that one's personal values can be upheld (29,30). Messages concerning global warming and climate change are no exception: They need to be tailored with great care (31)(32)(33).…”