Conservatives are more susceptible to believing lies — but not because they're stupid

[WakeandBake]

Why are conservatives so susceptible to misinformation? The right wing's disregard for facts and reasoning is not a matter of stupidity or lack of education. College-educated Republicans are actually more likely than less-educated Republicans to have believed that Barack Obama was a Muslim and that "death panels" were part of the ACA.

And for political conservatives, but not for liberals, greater knowledge of science and math is associated with a greater likelihood of dismissing what almost all scientists believe about the human causation of global warming.

It's also not just misinformation gained from too many hours listening to Fox News, either, because correcting the falsehoods doesn't change their opinions. For example, nine months following the release of President Obama's long-form birth certificate, the percentage of Republicans who believed that he was not American-born was actually higher than before the release.

Similarly, during the 2012 presidential campaign, Democrats corrected their previous overestimates of the unemployment rate after the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the actual data. Republicans' overestimated even more than before.

Part of the problem is widespread suspicion of facts - any facts. Both mistrust of scientists and other "experts" and mistrust of the mass media that reports what scientists and experts believe have increased among conservatives (but not among liberals) since the early '80s.

The mistrust has in part, at least, been deliberately inculcated. The fossil fuel industry publicizes studies to confuse the climate change debate; Big Pharma hides unfavorable information on drug safety and efficacy; and many schools in conservative areas teach students that evolution is "just a theory."

The public is understandably confused about both the findings and methods of science. "Fake news" deliberately created for political or economic gain and Donald Trump's claims that media sites that disagree with him are "fake news" add to the mistrust.

But, the gullibility of many on the right seems to have deeper roots even than this. That may be because at the most basic level, conservatives and liberals seem to hold different beliefs about what constitutes "truth." Finding facts and pursuing evidence and trusting science is part of liberal ideology itself. For many conservatives, faith and intuition and trust in revealed truth appear as equally valid sources of truth.

Baptist minister and former Republican congressman J.C. Watts put it succinctly. Campaigning for Sen. Rand Paul in Iowa in 2015 he observed, "The difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Republicans believe people are fundamentally bad, while Democrats see people as fundamentally good."

These conservative traits lead directly to conservative views on many issues, just as liberal traits tend to lead to liberal views on many issues. But when you consider how these conservative traits and these conservative views interact with commonly shared patterns of motivated reasoning, it becomes clearer why conservatives may be more likely to run into errors in reasoning and into difficulty judging accurately what is true and what is false.

Similarly, greater valuation of stability, greater sensitivity to the possibility of danger, and greater difficulty tolerating difference and change lead to greater anxiety about social change and so support greater credulity with respect to lurid tales of the dangers posed by immigrants. And higher levels of repression and greater adherence to tradition and traditional sources of moral judgment increase the credibility of claims that gay marriage is a threat to the "traditional" family.

Conservatives are also less introspective, less attentive to their inner feelings, and less likely to override their "gut" reactions and engage in further reflection to find a correct answer. As a result, they may be more likely to rely on error-prone cognitive shortcuts, less aware of their own unconscious biases, and less likely to respond to factual corrections to previously held beliefs.

The differences in how conservatives and liberals process information are augmented by an asymmetry in group psychological processes. Yes, we all seek to keep our social environment stable and predictable. Beliefs that might threaten relationships with family, neighbors, and friends (e.g., for a fundamentalist evangelical to believe that humans are the result of Darwinian evolution or for a coal miner to believe that climate change is real and human-made) must be ignored or denied, at peril of disrupting the relationships.

But among all Americans, the intensity of social networks has declined in recent years. Church attendance and union membership, participation in community organizations, and direct political involvement have flagged. Conservatives come disproportionately from rural areas and small towns, where social networks remain smaller, but denser and more homogeneous than in the big cities that liberals dominate.

https://amp.businessinsider.com/why-conservatives-are-more-susceptible-to-believing-lies-2017-11


opcorn:

 

[Louis Gossett Jr]

Where do you fall if you believe people are fundamentally dumb as shit?

 

[WFFaithful]

Intuition has its basis in religion and Fox News. Evangelicals believe that they are free to interpret the Bible as they see fit under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Why the Holy Spirit guides people to so many radically diverse interpretations is a topic for another conversation. Fox News shapes people's instinct by sowing fear and distrust in the place of reasoned thinking.

 

[WakeandBake]

I've been told that I need to learn from the recent election. This piece has been helpful.

 

[Deacon923]

This article is perfectly summed up in the exchange I had with 2&2 the other day when I asked him to provide any evidence at all for one of his assertions, and he responded that he didn't need evidence to form an opinion, or that the type of evidence he relies on to form opinions cannot be found on the internet (aka the greatest repository of easily accessible factual information ever created by mankind).

 

[Liquid Karma]

This article is perfectly summed up in the exchange I had with 2&2 the other day when I asked him to provide any evidence at all for one of his assertions, and he responded that he didn't need evidence to form an opinion, or that the type of evidence he relies on to form opinions cannot be found on the internet (aka the greatest repository of easily accessible factual information ever created by mankind).

Also the greatest repository of false or misleading information ever created by mankind.

 

[Gooner]

Also the greatest repository of false or misleading information ever created by mankind.

Which makes it even crazier that he couldn't back it up using the internet. Almost any opinion one can have, from the falsest of false to the truest of true can be backed up with information found on the internet. If you can't, then you are WAAAAAYYYYYY out in the weeds.

 

[ImTheCaptain]

Also the greatest repository of false or misleading information ever created by mankind.

religious source-documents are way ahead of you, bro

 

[Deacsfan27]

People want confirmation for their beliefs. When they see it on FoxNews, Breitbart, The Federalist, or InfoWars and it lines up with what they want to believe then they accept it as the truth. That's true for pretty much anybody out there.

 

[Deacon923]

Which makes it even crazier that he couldn't back it up using the internet. Almost any opinion one can have, from the falsest of false to the truest of true can be backed up with information found on the internet. If you can't, then you are WAAAAAYYYYYY out in the weeds.

Right. I told him to post anything at all, even infowars.

 

[IamThunderbolt]

Not just Conservatives:

Oatmeal on the Backfire Effect

 

[PhDeac]

Not just Conservatives:

Oatmeal on the Backfire Effect

That's great.

 

[ConnorEl]

Yea, that oatmeal piece is great.

To be fair, the article in the op (originally published on Slate) acknowledges that folks across the political divide are potentially susceptible towards disbelief of truth/facts. While, IMO, reasonably accurately pointing out that (and hypothesizing as to why) conservatives are generally more so.