Evaluations of science are robustly biased by identity concerns

Abstract

People are known to evaluate science based on whether it (dis)affirms their collective identities. We examined whether personal identity concerns also bias evaluation processes by manipulating the degree to which summaries of ostensible scientific research about an unfamiliar topic manipulating whether summaries were or inconsistent with how participants thought about themselves. In three preregistered experiments ( N = 644) conducted across two continents, participants were more likely to believe the science when its conclusions aligned with prior understanding of their self, effects that were mediated through positive emotional reactions. Two of the experiments also tested a de-biasing intervention: prior to evaluating science, participants received a brief tutorial on the ecological fallacy (of which, self-related biases represent a special case). The tutorial did not mitigate identity-biased evaluations. This experimental evidence raises questions about whether it is possible to engage global citizens more fully in science consumption while not further triggering identity-based biasing processes.

Psychological Underpinnings of Disinformation Countermeasures: A Systematic Scoping Review

“…Digital literacy describes the proficiency of applying and using digital devices and tools (Jones-Jang et al communicates scientific evidence, and how individuals encounter that information (Howell & Brossard, 2021). In a study by Salvatore et al (2021), participants received a brief tutorial on the ecological fallacy explaining that probabilistic information does not need to pertain to every single case in order to be true before being confronted with disinformation, while Tseng et al…”

There is an ‘I’ in truth: How salient identities shape dynamic perceptions of truth

“…The most direct evidence comes from the correlational work of Unsworth and Fielding (2014) described above. Yet to our knowledge there is no causal evidence for the simple psychological process of ‘who I am’ (or ‘who we are’) is what makes something true (although Salvatore and Morton, 2021 demonstrate a relationship between people's personal identities and the favourability of their responses to truth claims). Moreover, as the social identity approach proposes a dynamic self‐concept, an important implication is that judgements of truth will also be dynamic.…”

Psychological Underpinnings of Misinformation Countermeasures

“…Finally, science literacy interventions teach how scientific information is produced, how the media reshapes and communicates scientific evidence, and how individuals encounter that information (Howell & Brossard, 2021). In a study by Salvatore and Morton (2021), participants received a brief tutorial on the ecological fallacy explaining that probabilistic information does not need to pertain to every single case in order to be true before being confronted with misinformation, while Tseng et al (2021) tested a reading guide that taught students to critique scientific claims.…”