COMM_109_12_2_2013-2

Elections lots of evidence for cts that are believed

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: le need for structure Experiment 2: Lack control and pattern perception in snowy image task—those image task—those who lacked control were more likely to report seeing an image in random random patterns ask ppl beliefs about 22 diff CTs anomie - ppl who believe the world is a hostile, nasty place and are more likely to believe in CTs authoritarians - like control, like CTs powerlessness --- more likely to believe CTs when they feel high in powerlessness Members Members of groups that feel powerless: powerless: What predicts belief in CTs? Abalakina-Paap et al. (1999): NeoNeo-Nazis Beliefs in specific CTs (22 of them): Militia men Anomie, Anomie, r = .39, p < .0001 .39, Authoritarianism, Authoritarianism, r = .21, p < .02 .21, Powerlessness, Powerlessness, r = .16, p < .05. .16, know what Cts are, evidence that lots of ppl who believe them despite lack of evidence, some ppl = more likely to believe Cts than others, but why do they persist? Biased Biased assimilation: Information that supports your position is uncritically accepted, whereas contrary information information is scrutinized and discredited; Fundamental Fundamental attribution error: People overestimate the role of dispositions over situational factors in explaining the the behavior of other people; most stuff happens, and most ppl do stuff bc of the situations they're in, but when we try to explain why we look to their personalities Evolution of risk averse psychology Error Management Theory says we're full of psych adaptations that are risk averse. Very common to mistake a stick for a snake but very unlikely that you'd do the reverse. Ppl who make the latter error are dead. Not costly to mistake a stick of a snake, but it is to mistake a snake for a stick... Part Part 4: What explains the staying staying power of CTs? AntiAnti-globalization protestors Ethnic Ethnic minority groups that are subject to intense intense discrimination Looked into Kennedy assassination and had ppl rate on scale how certain they were LHO killed JFK or how unlikely, has a spectrum of ppl. Gives ppl an evidentiary summary for each side of the issue. 9 pieces of evidence for each piece. McHoskey (1995) “Do “Do you believe that President John F. Kennedy was killed by a lone assassin named Lee Harvey Oswald, or that there were multiple assassins and therefore were multiple assassins, and therefore a conspiracy conspiracy to kill President Kennedy? completely completely certain Oswald alone killed JFK (JFK (- 50) to completely certain a conspiracy killed JFK (+ 50). 5 12/2/2013 Ss Ss read 850 word evidence summaries for each side side of the issue. Nine Nine pieces of evidence for each side. Ss evaluated evaluated each for how persuasive it was. E.g., eye-witnesses identified shots from the eye witnesses identified shots from the “grassy “grassy knoll” “Inadequacy of the “single-bullet theory” “singleBack and to the left. . . Back and to the. . . all evid for CTs, asked to rate how believable each piece of evid is. Take 2 extremes (CTs vs LHO believers) reading same evidence. Each side hearing same evidence and judging what's persuasive/believable simply reflects their prior belief. The stronger prior belief, the more likely to interpret evid as confirming their prior belief. Not surprising it's hard to persuade ppl because they're unwilling to accept contrary evidence. Conclusion When? Social Social conflict Social Social anxiety/uncertainty Leadership and justifications for war/change Leadership and justifications for war/change Why? Manage Manage specific emotions The The CTs contain important information There There is narrative appeal 6...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online