follow CCP

Recent blog entries
popular papers

Science Curiosity and Political Information Processing

What Is the "Science of Science Communication"?

Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem

Ideology, Motivated Cognition, and Cognitive Reflection: An Experimental Study

'Ideology' or 'Situation Sense'? An Experimental Investigation of Motivated Reasoning and Professional Judgment

A Risky Science Communication Environment for Vaccines

Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government

Making Climate Science Communication Evidence-based—All the Way Down 

Neutral Principles, Motivated Cognition, and Some Problems for Constitutional Law 

Cultural Cognition of Scientific Consensus
 

The Tragedy of the Risk-Perception Commons: Science Literacy and Climate Change

"They Saw a Protest": Cognitive Illiberalism and the Speech-Conduct Distinction 

Geoengineering and the Science Communication Environment: a Cross-Cultural Experiment

Fixing the Communications Failure

Why We Are Poles Apart on Climate Change

The Cognitively Illiberal State 

Who Fears the HPV Vaccine, Who Doesn't, and Why? An Experimental Study

Cultural Cognition of the Risks and Benefits of Nanotechnology

Whose Eyes Are You Going to Believe? An Empirical Examination of Scott v. Harris

Cultural Cognition and Public Policy

Culture, Cognition, and Consent: Who Perceives What, and Why, in "Acquaintance Rape" Cases

Culture and Identity-Protective Cognition: Explaining the White Male Effect

Fear of Democracy: A Cultural Evaluation of Sunstein on Risk

Cultural Cognition as a Conception of the Cultural Theory of Risk

« Still *another* study finds "scientific consensus messaging" ineffective | Main | Now "in press": the Gateway Belief Illusion . . . »
Wednesday
Jun282017

Do you see an effect here? Some data on correlation of cognitive reflection with political outlooks

It couldn't last. The "asymmetry thesis" is again sucking me into the vortex....

John Jost included one of my papers in his meta-analysis of research on conservatives' cognitive style, including cognitive reflection.  But I have many many datasets with these data in them, and I would have been happy to furnish the essential details with him had he asked me.

Anyway, here are some more findings that support the conclusion that the relationship between CRT scores and ideology is only trivially different from zero:

If one gets a meaningful effect using a convenience sample, then the sample probably is not valid for trying to draw population-level inferences.

Gives me a chance to renew the question, too, about whether probability density distributions of the sort generated by ggplot are a good way to present this sort of info. 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (6)

For three of the four samples it looks as though there might be a relationship between getting 3 out of 3 CRT questions correct and political outlook. Am I seeing things? If not, any thoughts on this?

June 28, 2017 | Unregistered CommenterAnon

@Anon--your eyes are telling you the truth. This is a yuuuuuuuuuuuuge problem w/ ggplot's pretty overlapping density distributions. They give the impression that there are equal number of subjects at each level of the CRT. There isn't: only 7% or so of the sample gets 3 right; 62% get zero.

June 28, 2017 | Registered CommenterDan Kahan

Good point. Thanks for clearing that up!

June 28, 2017 | Unregistered CommenterAnon

Dan,

Looking only at the r's and p's, I see what you mean. As for the pdds, I agree they're very misleading here due to apparently being normalized.

On the topic itself:
Having gone from belief in symmetry to belief in asymmetry (Haidt, Jost, etc) and (somewhat) back (due to your persistent browbeating), I'm a confused mess. I still suspect that what contributes to libs vs. cons being susceptible to CC may be distinct, and hence susceptible to distinct remediation.

June 28, 2017 | Unregistered CommenterJonathan

the business of science communication link drop:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science

Dan - if you really want to help the science curious, puhleeeeez help find a way to break the Elsevier cartel!

June 28, 2017 | Unregistered CommenterJonathan

--snip--

Outside observers tend to fall into a sort of stunned disbelief when describing this setup.

--snip--

Certainly true here. Those numbers are staggering.

June 29, 2017 | Unregistered CommenterJoshua

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>