Cargando…
Political polarization: a curse of knowledge?
PURPOSE: Could the curse of knowledge influence how antagonized we are towards political outgroups? Do we assume others know what we know but still disagree with us? This research investigates how the curse of knowledge may affect us politically, i.e., be a cause of political polarization. BACKGROUN...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10368969/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37502753 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1200627 |
_version_ | 1785077636451532800 |
---|---|
author | Beattie, Peter Beattie, Marguerite |
author_facet | Beattie, Peter Beattie, Marguerite |
author_sort | Beattie, Peter |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Could the curse of knowledge influence how antagonized we are towards political outgroups? Do we assume others know what we know but still disagree with us? This research investigates how the curse of knowledge may affect us politically, i.e., be a cause of political polarization. BACKGROUND: Research on the curse of knowledge has shown that even when people are incentivized to act as if others do not know what they know, they are still influenced by the knowledge they have. METHODS: This study consists of five studies consisting of both experimental and non-experimental and within- and between-subjects survey designs. Each study collected samples of 152–1,048. RESULTS: Partisans on both sides overestimate the extent to which stories from their news sources were familiar to contrapartisans. Introducing novel, unknown facts to support their political opinion made participants rate political outgroup members more negatively. In an experimental design, there was no difference in judging an opponent who did not know the same issue-relevant facts and someone who did know the same facts. However, when asked to compare those who know to those who do not, participants judged those who do not know more favorably, and their ratings of all issue-opponents were closer to those issue-opponents who shared the same knowledge. In a debiasing experiment, those who received an epistemological treatment judged someone who disagreed more favorably. CONCLUSION: This research provides evidence that the curse of knowledge may be a contributing cause of affective political polarization. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10368969 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103689692023-07-27 Political polarization: a curse of knowledge? Beattie, Peter Beattie, Marguerite Front Psychol Psychology PURPOSE: Could the curse of knowledge influence how antagonized we are towards political outgroups? Do we assume others know what we know but still disagree with us? This research investigates how the curse of knowledge may affect us politically, i.e., be a cause of political polarization. BACKGROUND: Research on the curse of knowledge has shown that even when people are incentivized to act as if others do not know what they know, they are still influenced by the knowledge they have. METHODS: This study consists of five studies consisting of both experimental and non-experimental and within- and between-subjects survey designs. Each study collected samples of 152–1,048. RESULTS: Partisans on both sides overestimate the extent to which stories from their news sources were familiar to contrapartisans. Introducing novel, unknown facts to support their political opinion made participants rate political outgroup members more negatively. In an experimental design, there was no difference in judging an opponent who did not know the same issue-relevant facts and someone who did know the same facts. However, when asked to compare those who know to those who do not, participants judged those who do not know more favorably, and their ratings of all issue-opponents were closer to those issue-opponents who shared the same knowledge. In a debiasing experiment, those who received an epistemological treatment judged someone who disagreed more favorably. CONCLUSION: This research provides evidence that the curse of knowledge may be a contributing cause of affective political polarization. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-07-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10368969/ /pubmed/37502753 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1200627 Text en Copyright © 2023 Beattie and Beattie. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Beattie, Peter Beattie, Marguerite Political polarization: a curse of knowledge? |
title | Political polarization: a curse of knowledge? |
title_full | Political polarization: a curse of knowledge? |
title_fullStr | Political polarization: a curse of knowledge? |
title_full_unstemmed | Political polarization: a curse of knowledge? |
title_short | Political polarization: a curse of knowledge? |
title_sort | political polarization: a curse of knowledge? |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10368969/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37502753 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1200627 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT beattiepeter politicalpolarizationacurseofknowledge AT beattiemarguerite politicalpolarizationacurseofknowledge |