Puncturing the Knowledge Illusion Does Not Reduce Policy and Political Extremism: Evidence From a Replication and Extension

IF 4 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Political Psychology Pub Date : 2023-10-30 DOI:10.1111/pops.12938
Richard M. Walker, Jiasheng Zhang, Edmund W. Cheng
{"title":"Puncturing the Knowledge Illusion Does Not Reduce Policy and Political Extremism: Evidence From a Replication and Extension","authors":"Richard M. Walker, Jiasheng Zhang, Edmund W. Cheng","doi":"10.1111/pops.12938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Understanding the formation of and changes in citizens' extreme views on complex public policies is an important task in our increasingly polarized world. Behavioral sciences offer insights on cognitive processes and potential mechanisms to mitigate extremity in policy preferences and develop more realistic models that underprint political attitudes. About a decade ago, Fernbach et al. (2013) offered a simple cognitive intervention to reduce political extremism: Confront people with their lack of procedural policy knowledge such that their overestimation of knowledge is shattered. We conducted three high‐value replications and extensions to examine the applicability of Fernbach's proposed theory among a sample of 5,139 citizens in postconflict Hong Kong. Our results suggest the opposite: Positional extremity is higher when citizens articulate their understanding of policy. Our study, which is larger in scale, draws on different time periods and extended interventions and examines more controversial policy issues has epistemological and cognitive implications for future research on the political psychology of extremism.","PeriodicalId":48332,"journal":{"name":"Political Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12938","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Understanding the formation of and changes in citizens' extreme views on complex public policies is an important task in our increasingly polarized world. Behavioral sciences offer insights on cognitive processes and potential mechanisms to mitigate extremity in policy preferences and develop more realistic models that underprint political attitudes. About a decade ago, Fernbach et al. (2013) offered a simple cognitive intervention to reduce political extremism: Confront people with their lack of procedural policy knowledge such that their overestimation of knowledge is shattered. We conducted three high‐value replications and extensions to examine the applicability of Fernbach's proposed theory among a sample of 5,139 citizens in postconflict Hong Kong. Our results suggest the opposite: Positional extremity is higher when citizens articulate their understanding of policy. Our study, which is larger in scale, draws on different time periods and extended interventions and examines more controversial policy issues has epistemological and cognitive implications for future research on the political psychology of extremism.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
戳破知识幻觉并不能减少政策和政治极端主义:来自复制和延伸的证据
了解公民对复杂公共政策的极端观点的形成和变化,是当今世界日益两极分化的重要任务。行为科学提供了认知过程和潜在机制的见解,以减轻政策偏好的极端性,并开发更现实的模型,以支持政治态度。大约十年前,Fernbach等人(2013)提供了一个简单的认知干预来减少政治极端主义:面对缺乏程序性政策知识的人们,这样他们对知识的高估就会被打破。我们进行了三次高价值的复制和扩展,以检验芬巴赫提出的理论在冲突后香港5139名公民样本中的适用性。我们的结果恰恰相反:当公民表达他们对政策的理解时,位置极端会更高。我们的研究规模更大,利用了不同的时间段和延长的干预措施,并研究了更多有争议的政策问题,这对未来研究极端主义的政治心理学具有认识论和认知意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Understanding the psychological aspects of national and international political developments is increasingly important in this age of international tension and sweeping political change. Political Psychology, the journal of the International Society of Political Psychology, is dedicated to the analysis of the interrelationships between psychological and political processes. International contributors draw on a diverse range of sources, including clinical and cognitive psychology, economics, history, international relations, philosophy, political science, political theory, sociology, personality and social psychology.
期刊最新文献
When saying sorry is not enough: The paradox of a political apology offered to Irish mother and baby home survivors Political censorship feels acceptable when ideas seem harmful and false Dealing with uncertainty and cognitive biases in international politics Overcoming (vegan) burnout: Mass gatherings can provide respite and rekindle shared identity and social action efforts in moralized minority groups Perceived threat, compassion, and public evaluations toward refugees
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1