But here is something to consider: a new paper from Nam, Jost & van Bavel on whether "conservatives" are more prone to "cognitive dissonance avoidance" than "liberals."
But the question: does the result bear on the "asymmetry thesis" (AT)?
AT asserts that conservatives should be more disposed to ideologically motivated reasoning than liberals.
The basis for this hypothesis is the finding of Jost and other scholars who correlate ideology with self-report measures of critical thinking -- Need for Cognition, Need for Closure, Dogmatic thinking, and other scales assessing attitudes toward complexity & uncertainty etc. -- that "conservatives" display a more closed-minded cognitive style.
But maybe it's game over? This paper is the decisive strike?
"Cognitive dissonance avoidance" is very much related to motivated reasoning (itself a tendency to adjust one's assessments of facts to avoid disappointing one's predispositions). And here NJV-B report data that they see as demonstrating asymmetry -- conservatives are more disposed to "cognitive dissonance avoidance," they say, than liberals.
Obviously, I have views. But not time to express them right now. And besides, my views are not usually nearly so interesting as the ones that emerge in the discussion that they are the occasion for.
So let's do an experiment: can we have an interesting discussion w/o my saying anything (other than "hey-- what about this?")?
So what do others think of this study? Game over?
Be a relief to have the debate on AT resolve, I suppose, since researchers could then turn all their attention to more important questions, like what the American public thinks of the NSA's policy on collecting metadata!
But keep the "data" coming!
More-- b/c the asymmetry debate will rage on long after we've all reached consensus on climate change, on whether Ted Williams was a better hitter than Joe DiMaggio, etc. -- here.