Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Dazzling-Climate-318 t1_iwad7nq wrote

I read the report and it is very preliminary. Most importantly it missed perhaps the most germane possible cause of the spreading of misinformation, the inability of a significant portion of the population to engage in Rational thought. Without that ability and practice, a significant portion of the population simply cannot determine if something is true or false. Instead they make decisions based on associations with others and simply repeat what they read or hear without any critical analysis. This per Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. I find the continued assumption that humans are rational actors in analyses such as this truly miss one of the simplest explanations and blindly ignores research that truly could illuminate the phenomenon under study.

1

asbruckman OP t1_iwbqgtx wrote

Actually I think our findings suggest that you need different approaches to helping someone who is rational (Reason to Disagree) than someone who is not (Persistent False Belief). That's the point.

2

Dazzling-Climate-318 t1_iwbxazn wrote

“Persistent False Belief” does not appear to be one of the categories listed in the findings. Is that an alternative name for one or more of the categories?

2

asbruckman OP t1_iwby0fh wrote

Oh sorry--that was the term we used in an earlier draft of the paper, and it's stuck in my head. We changed it to "Steadfast Non-Standard Belief." That's a much better term because we're not necessarily saying their belief is wrong--just that it's non-standard.

2

Dazzling-Climate-318 t1_iwbyat4 wrote

I believe the term used in the article is “steadfast non-standard belief”. Please refer back to the published version of the article.

1