LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+48 48 0
Published 2 months ago with 5 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • leweb
    +6

    Sloman and Fernbach see in this result a little candle for a dark world. If we—or our friends or the pundits on CNN—spent less time pontificating and more trying to work through the implications of policy proposals, we’d realize how clueless we are and moderate our views. This, they write, “may be the only form of thinking that will shatter the illusion of explanatory depth and change people’s attitudes.”

    This is exactly the point I keep trying to make. Ridiculing and censoring does nothing but get people to hold more firmly to their beliefs, however crazy they are. The only way to counter this is to get them to think about those beliefs without judging them.

  • Appaloosa
    +4

    "The majority were satisfied with their original choices; fewer than fifteen per cent changed their minds in step two."

  • Lucky
    -2

    The backfire effect regarding confirmation bias has been long established. Basically, when someone presents you with information that contradicts your existing political/religious/ideological beliefs, it just makes you double down on your existing beliefs.

    Yes, this is basically what happens when the right calls the left 'SJWs' and the left calls the right 'Fascist Nazis'. The back and forth backfire effect is driving a massive ideological wedge between the population.

Here are some other snaps you may like...