How partisans internalize “facts”
Friday, Sep 2, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Ian Anson in the New Republic…
In a recent paper published in Political Research Quarterly, I tested competing expectations about the ways media can convince partisans to engage in motivated reasoning. The study examines the conditions under which partisans internalize their preferred “facts.”
The Cooperative Congressional Election Study is a massive survey project put together by more than 50 research teams nationwide. I presented survey-takers with one of five randomly assigned articles about the economy during the 2014 wave of the study. These stories were designed to mimic the type of content they might see when visiting a partisan news source. Some of the articles presented readers with “just the (congenial) facts”: these survey-takers saw a news story showing either optimistic or gloomy economic data. Others saw stories that presented these facts paired with statements blaming or praising President Barack Obama for the trend. These latter treatments make survey-takers highly aware of the agenda of the story’s author – especially if they identify as partisans.
Just as expected, Republicans and Democrats in the study were most likely to learn from the news story when it reinforced their own worldview. Republican Reba believed the bad news, while Denny the Democrat believed the good news.
The surprising finding was that this pattern only held for the “just the facts” news stories – not the overtly partisan ones. In other words, partisans enjoy cheerleading for their party but are even more strongly affected by news stories that appear to be highly objective. When asked to report whether they thought the economy in the past year had gotten better or worse, partisans in these treatment conditions were significantly more likely than others to give the party-congenial response.
* And…
In a second paper recently published in the Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, I show that this is indeed the case: An analysis of a large number of public opinion polls reveals partisans tend to agree on the state of the stock market. The ubiquitousness of this economic indicator allows it to bypass even the most intense agenda-setting efforts.
We would normally expect partisans to feel the mental discomfort known as cognitive dissonance when knowledge of stock market performance conflicts with their biased economic judgments. As the stock market soars to record highs, this news conflicts with the idea that the economy is still stuck in post-Great Recession doldrums. Partisans should adjust their beliefs.
However, to echo the title of a recent paper by Danish political scientist Martin Bisgaard, I nevertheless show in survey analyses that “bias will find a way.” Partisans perform mental gymnastics by changing the way they think the economy works. When stock market performance runs in conflict with the partisan economic narrative, partisans become less likely to say the stock market matters at all for the broader economy.
- Bogey Golfer - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 9:26 am:
What we would refer to in college as “Draw your curves, then plot your data”.
- Anon221 - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 9:31 am:
Rauner is a good example of mental gymnastics:
Feb 3, 2016
Asked about my story (Greg Hinz) this morning that the Emanuel administration believes he’s trying to sabotage its efforts to rescue CPS, Rauner said bond traders “make their own decision. I don’t interact with them. I don’t talk to them. Frankly I don’t much care about them one way or the other.”
But, barely catching his breath, Rauner went on to blast the idea of issuing more bonds, which CPS hopes to bring to market later today.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20160203/BLOGS02/160209921/rauner-denies-sabotage-but-blasts-cps-borrowing-plan
- Anotheretiree - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 9:37 am:
An example is conservatives and Gold. Gold peaked in 2009 right around the time the Stock Market turned up. They were assured that Obama was going to usher in 1979’s/Weimar inflation. Basing your investment decisions on your politics can be financially fatal.
And then there is climate change….
- Grandson of Man - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 9:49 am:
Nowadays, with so much access to information and so many media outlets, many choose to go where they want, to reinforce their beliefs and be surrounded by like-minded people.
In earlier times, when newspapers were bigger and there were fewer media outlets, people would get contradictory opinions right next to each other, in the op-ed section. Nowadays we have many more options to avoid opinions we don’t like.
- Sir Reel - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:02 am:
Conflicting views bring one’s position, judgement, intellect, etc into question. More comfortable to ignore them.
- Last Bull Moose - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:02 am:
Most people use informal Bayesian updating, where new information is added to existing knowledge and beliefs. The stronger the original knowledge and beliefs, the more new information is needed to change conclusions.
This usually makes sense as data is seldom clean and we do not have the ability to fully vet new information. An added complication is that systems do change and past predictors may mislead.
Part of the Trump phenomenon is that so many people discount new information because they have decided it is unreliable or intentionally false.
Long way of saying it is an interesting study with results consistent with my prior beliefs.
- some doofus - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:06 am:
>Rauner is a good example of mental gymnastics:
:-)
A study that explains how partisans of both sides bend their worldviews to explain facts away, and commenters immediately begin pointing out how the theory applies best to their opponents!
- NoGifts - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:06 am:
In many cases, people observe and agree on “what” is happening (like the stock market) but not “why.” In most cases the why is more subject to different viewpoints.
- Ghost - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:15 am:
this is like the anti vaccination and ant global warming stuff. people decide what they want to beleive, then twist the world or ignore truths that conflcit with their decided belief.
Platos cave is more real then we may want to beleive.
- 47th Ward - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:28 am:
How can the stock market be at an all-time high when all I hear on Fox News is how awful the Obama economy is?
- NoGifts - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:30 am:
If you don’t have stock options, pay in stock, 401k, 457 or IRA, it’s not that good.
- Huh? - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:45 am:
So the gist is “Don’t bother me with facts, I’ve already made up my mind.”
- anon - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:48 am:
We are also much better at detecting flaws in our opponents than we are in ourselves. Let’s face it, partisans across the spectrum engage in mental gymnastics to evade the inconvenient truth. It would be more therapeutic if we first point out how our side does it.
- NoGifts - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 10:59 am:
The gist is that facts are usually much more multifaced and nuanced than the proclamations of truth people make. People are uncomfortable with a complex world but should really never trust a a black and white statement.
- Norseman - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 11:14 am:
Trump, is an excellent example of the result of this internalization process. This reality star’s alternate reality has found fertile ground because of this internalization by partisans.
- Rich Miller - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 11:15 am:
===Trump, is an excellent example===
Wanna see an excellent example from the other side? Read half of these comments: https://capitolfax.com/2016/09/02/todays-number-304000-jobs/
- LuckY Pierre - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 12:02 pm:
47th ward the obvious answer is most people don’t own alot of stocks and the better number for economic security is wage growth which has been stagnant for over a decade.
62% of people according to Real Clear Politics aggregate polling think the Direction of the Country is on the wrong track.
Bernie Sanders got 45% of the Democratic vote and Trump received the majority of the Republican primary vote. Both are change candidates because the majority of people don’t like the current track we are on
- Anonymous - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 12:09 pm:
Dunning Kruger effect>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
- Grandson of Man - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 12:21 pm:
To me the problem is not so much partisanship and ideology. It’s okay to have strongly-held beliefs and identify and support a political party. If that means bending the facts to fit one’s beliefs, as long as the warping is not significant or substantial distortions, I guess it’s okay. We’re only human.
The bigger problem is an unwillingness to sit with opponents and try to compromise and see others’ points of view, and to see what’s acceptable and what isn’t. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. I’m willing to accept “reasonable” cuts that would negatively impact me, for example, but not what Rauner is trying to force upon me and certain segments of the state.
- Harry - Friday, Sep 2, 16 @ 4:26 pm:
Anonymous at 12:09pm
Dunning-Kruger is a great theory, I love it, but not really the main point here; even the most expert of people are subject to confirmation bias.