Skip to main content

Home/ SociaLens/ Group items tagged motivated reasoning

Rss Feed Group items tagged

christian briggs

The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science (via @MotherJones) - 0 views

  •  
    "The theory of motivated reasoning builds on a key insight of modern neuroscience (PDF): Reasoning is actually suffused with emotion (or what researchers often call "affect"). Not only are the two inseparable, but our positive or negative feelings about people, things, and ideas arise much more rapidly than our conscious thoughts, in a matter of milliseconds-fast enough to detect with an EEG device, but long before we're aware of it. That shouldn't be surprising: Evolution required us to react very quickly to stimuli in our environment. It's a "basic human survival skill," explains political scientist Arthur Lupia of the University of Michigan. We push threatening information away; we pull friendly information close. We apply fight-or-flight reflexes not only to predators, but to data itself. We apply fight-or-flight reflexes not only to predators, but to data itself. We're not driven only by emotions, of course-we also reason, deliberate. But reasoning comes later, works slower-and even then, it doesn't take place in an emotional vacuum. Rather, our quick-fire emotions can set us on a course of thinking that's highly biased, especially on topics we care a great deal about."
Kevin Makice

Motivation in their work reduces stress among IT consultants - 0 views

  •  
    Information Technology (IT) consultants experience less stress when they carry out assignments in a working environment that motivates them. It also helps IT consultants experience less stress if they are able to manage their own work and if the demands placed on them in their work are reasonable. This is revealed in a psychology thesis from Gothenburg University, Sweden.
christian briggs

The Science of Why Comment Trolls Suck | Mother Jones - 0 views

  •  
    "The researchers were trying to find out what effect exposure to such rudeness had on public perceptions of nanotech risks. They found that it wasn't a good one. Rather, it polarized the audience: Those who already thought nanorisks were low tended to become more sure of themselves when exposed to name-calling, while those who thought nanorisks are high were more likely to move in their own favored direction. In other words, it appeared that pushing people's emotional buttons, through derogatory comments, made them double down on their preexisting beliefs."
1 - 3 of 3
Showing 20 items per page