Uriah Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I found this interestig from NPR. What BRENDAN Nyhan seems to be finding is that when you're confronted by information that you don't like, at a certain level you accept that the information might be true, but it damages your sense of self-esteem. It damages something about your identity. And so what you do is you fight back against the new information. You try and martial other kinds of information that would counter the new information coming in. In the political realm, Nyhan is exploring the possibility that if you boost people's self-esteem before you give them this disconfirming information, it might help them take in the new information because they don't feel as threatened as they might have been otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bludog Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 It rings true on an intuitive level. Otherwise some people wouldn't cling to their beliefs so tenaciously. But if new information does succeed in negating a central belief we tend to feel undermined. I think it's a healthy thing to be skeptical.... Not accepting new ideas without strong evidence or proof.... There's always the chance you could be right in the end, no matter how convincing the new information seems at first. But assuming the disturbing new information proves true; How do you administer a self-esteem boost strong enough to last through a rude letdown? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts