Dartmouth political science professor Brendan Nihan and his colleagues found that the backfire effect failed to replicate their study. They then asked people who had positive attitudes towards Trump and negative attitudes toward Clinton to read two incorrect statements made by Trump on the campaign trail. After reading the corrections, most of them changed their beliefs about what they thought was a crime epidemic in America. The results showed that people had quickly and without hesitation updated their opinions after being exposed to new information.
In 2017, YANSS did three episodes about the backfire effect, and by far, those episodes were the most popular that year. Then, in 2018, part four was the most popular.
The backfire effect has his special allure to it, because, on the surface, it seems to explain something we’ve all experienced -- when we argue with people who believe differently than us, who see the world through a different ideological lens -- they often resist our views, refuse to accept our way of seeing things, and it often seems like we do more harm than good, because they walk away seemingly more entrenched in their beliefs than before the argument began.
But…since those first three shows, researchers have produced a series new studies into the backfire effect that complicate things. Yes, we are observing something here, and yes we are calling it the backfire effect, but everything is not exactly as it seems, and so I thought we should invite these new researchers on the show and add a fourth episode to the backfire effect series based on what they’ve found. And this is that episode (again).
- Show notes at: www.youarenotsosmart.com
- Become a patron at: www.patreon.com/youarenotsosmart
SPONSORS
• The Great Courses: Free month at www.thegreatcoursesplus.com/smart
• Squarespace: Use the offer code SOSMART at www.squarespace.com for 10 percent off your first purchase.
Patreon: http://patreon.com/youarenotsosmart