# People unlikely to change their mind, even when facts contradict their views - study



## Bear987 (May 13, 2012)

SOURCE & READ MORE

A fresh study has confirmed that people are reluctant to change their minds and adapt their views, even when new information has been presented. This holds true even if they stand to lose money.

The research from the University of Iowa is based on previous studies indicating that people are particularly likely to stick to their original viewpoint when they’ve had to write their beliefs down– a phenomenon known as the ‘explanation effect’, which also affects future actions.

In the study, Tom Gruca, a professor of marketing at the Tippie College of Business, tried to find evidence of something called ‘confirmation bias’ – the tendency to give preference to existing information or beliefs, rather than considering alternative possibilities. He says equity analysts working on financial markets are particularly prone to this bias, with those who issue written forecasts being especially vulnerable to falling into the trap, despite having access to new data to influence them.


----------



## Bear987 (May 13, 2012)

This bodes well for the forum. :happy:


----------



## Surreal Snake (Nov 17, 2009)

I look at truths as being mainly geographical. Usually conditioning begun when the child quite young. Friends, family and community reinforce said belief, hence "Becoming truth".. Next Continent repeat. Usually different beliefs but just as true to the individual. Convincing one their belief system is wrong a waste of time. Agree with OP on that point.


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

This explains a lot.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

Abstract


> One form of confirmation bias is the tendency for people to ignore information that is inconsistent with their current beliefs. While confirmation bias is the subject of both analytical models and experiments in accounting and finance, its effect on market prices has not been studied due to limitations associated with traditional financial markets. In eleven real-money movie box office prediction markets, confirmation bias was induced in all traders via the explanation effect, i.e. a requirement to submit a box office forecast and an explanation prior to trading. When all traders are subject to confirmation bias, market prices do not accurately reflect new, value-relevant information. However, in comparable a set of seven real-money movie prediction markets that included both traders who have not been subject to explanation requirement and those who have, we find efficient incorporation of new information into market prices. This study extends our knowledge of the conditions under which individual trader biases affect market prices and provides potential insights into open questions about forecasting errors among financial analysts.


When it comes to models of persuasion, we presently have this: http://personalitycafe.com/general-psychology/637322-persuasin-dual-process-theory.html


----------



## Out0fAmmo (Nov 30, 2010)

This should be obvious. It's called "pride". Very few people are humble and objective enough to accept something that doesn't fit their worldview.


----------



## Hidden from Sight (Jan 3, 2014)

"[People] are programmed to think and react to a certain stimuli, in a certain pattern. You cannot change their mind, even if you exposed them to authentic information." - Yuri Bezmenov, Ex-KGB Soviet Defector


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

Ever since I learned about conformation bias, I started to see it everywhere! :wink:


----------



## with water (Aug 13, 2014)

Oh, the people I've seen do this. It hurts my soul.


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

Nuh-uh.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

As I understand it, 

People have a tendency to think _alternative possibilities_ - are not just simply foolishness. I also understand that, ''holding a position'' is not the same as (re: _give preference to_) nor is it a _rejection_ of all alternative possibilities, because as I understand, a ''rejection'' is warranted rationally - and just that said alternative possibilities may be / are unsound / irrational; thus warrant a rational rejection of the said alternative possibility. 

I consider _facts_ - to only be _truth-makers_ but don't always convey ''truth-value'' like propositional statements - so ''all facts must be true'' is _nonsense_. Facts aren't always ''true'' - however, facts - that make truth (re: non-contradictory, consistent, coherent) --> sound deductions, are much better. (re: _Only these facts_ matter).

Most people submit to big boys that write anything that holds a degree - while these individuals are more *warranted* than the guy at Walmart spouting _opinions_ rather then _facts_ - everything they are recording doesn't always have to make sense - 

I have corrected a few of my professors on errors themselves - ''call it _pride_'' - I call it unwillingness to submit to incorrect authority because _authority_ like the rest of the Sheepeoples.


----------



## ae1905 (Jun 7, 2014)

if this is generally true, it means engaging in debate tends to harden our opinions rather than change them and should probably be avoided...and if we have a question that we really want an answer to, it is better to keep our opinions to ourselves while we research it, lest we close our minds to the truth


----------



## Master Mind (Aug 15, 2011)

Yep. This has been known for some time.


----------



## aef8234 (Feb 18, 2012)

From the looks of the study it could also be attributed to that one thing where we don't listen to opposing sides.
In which case, we do listen to neutral parties. I mean, we didn't know how Gruca worded his "facts" presenting them as a neutral party or otherwise.

Confirmation Bias is an assload of factors, saying it's just blatant disregard for facts prefering stuff that reinforces your beliefs is a bit of a misnomer.

Granted, the "us vs them" thing is always there, so.

Quick question, what's the term for what I'm saying? It isn't confirmation bias, it is a form of bias though.


----------



## SalvinaZerelda (Aug 26, 2010)

I have found that cognitive dissonance can cause me to feel like slipping into a catatonic state..
Mental stability sometimes relies on continuing to hold long held beliefs.
It's a structural thing.

Even if thoughts can't be changed without harm to the mental state, outside rules might be heavily and strictly enforced to avoid or at least minimize abuse.

Living an entire life-time or even many years with a belief makes it harder and harder to shake free of held beliefs.
Technically choosing a side or not choosing a side, either way, you are in danger of being harmed.
Either by the person that chose a side, or by being the person that has chosen a side and is slowly being forced to adjust to a world that does not agree.


----------



## General Lee Awesome (Sep 28, 2014)

Bear987 said:


> SOURCE & READ MORE
> 
> A fresh study has confirmed that people are reluctant to change their minds and adapt their views, even when new information has been presented. This holds true even if they stand to lose money.
> 
> ...


i dont believe this


----------



## Toru Okada (May 10, 2011)

I think that's why I think about masturbation a lot when I post here.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

What some people call facts are really their interpretations and not the only conclusion to be drawn. When they present these to others and find others do not readily accept them as fact, they get bent out of shape and call other people illogical, stubbornly holding to beliefs, having cognitive dissonance, etc. The hypocrisy in this is always amusing.... 

When you consider how much "facts" tend to change over time, it is also understandable that people are skeptical to toss out long-held beliefs that other facts they have gathered over time support, especially when a new fact is presented with obvious interpretation. Instead of tossing out a whole framework, they are likely to seek to reconcile it or question the new information. Most of the time, I dont think people understand the premise and reasoning that lead conclusions others hold as belief, which is why they see contradiction when the other person does not.

I think people do stick to beliefs in the face of facts due to pride. If you want to change someone's mind, don't present them with facts to challenge their views. First, appeal to common ground, establish rapport, commend them for things they've got right, sympathize with their concerns, and primarily, understand why they believe as they do. Otherwise, you will be erecting a strawman and just putting them on the defense.


----------



## Sangmu (Feb 18, 2014)

Perhaps because peoples beliefs tend to be value-centered?

Facts do not change values. One person may believe an embryo isn't human. Another person might believe it is. They almost always have knowledge of the same biological facts.

I had a roommate who vehemently argued that children were not people, as in individuals, and therefore did not have rights. They were only what he called _potential people_. He went as far to say that children, the developmentally disabled, and animals are not conscious. Anyway, this man was highly educated yet I disagreed with him. I didn't have anymore "facts" than he did. I just don't agree. The heart of the matter is that we had access to the same information but had a different interpretations of the information. We had different values.


----------



## Dante Scioli (Sep 3, 2012)

Well we could sit here giggling and write something critical about how dumb and unfit we are for not being easily persuaded, or we could realize that this is an adaptation that improves us more than it diminishes us. If you have a feeling about something, you have that feeling for a reason. Reading one or two easily manipulated statistics should not radically change your point of view. That would be _gullible_.

Of course we give _preference_ to existing beliefs. They have a deeper foundation than something you just learned two seconds ago. Preference doesn't mean stubbornly standing your ground and never changing your mind. It just means you'll only change your mind when persuaded with _good reason_. Mediocre reason does not and should not suffice.

Yes this is the sort of thing that is easily mocked, whereby you get to feel better about yourself by condescending to the unspecified masses. Yes when taken to the extreme this is frustratingly dumb. But consider the typical case, not the extreme one, and maybe you'll find it in yourself to be charitable enough not to climb onto your high horse and feel superior.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

@Bear987

Ironic, I was watching an episode of _Enterprise_, and Trip says: "Challenge your preconceptions, or they will challenge you."


----------



## Monteskiusz (Sep 16, 2015)

Yes actually this is very usefull thing generally. Every cult leader rely heavly on that mechanism, or religion. I am not saying that ALL religion is foolish (Thought there are a lot of them and I don't know any truthfull religion), I'm just stating that this is commonly used tool. 

Human that is controlled by this mechanism, drived by pride I say in discussion does not care about finding truth through argument's but want to protect his own hypothesis, even if the argument's say He is wrong.

BTW: 01010100 01101000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01110111 01100001 01110011 00100000 01101111 01100010 01110110 01101001 01101111 01110101 01110011 00100000 01100001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01001001 00100000 01100100 01101111 01101110 00100111 01110100 00100000 01110011 01100101 01100101 00100000 01100001 00100000 01101110 01100101 01100101 01100100 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01110011 01110101 01100011 01101000 00100000 01110011 01110100 01110101 01100100 01111001 00101110


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

@Sad Wanderer

01010111 01101001 01110100 01101000 01101111 01110101 01110100 00100000 01110011 01100011 01101001 01100101 01101110 01110100 01101001 01100110 01101001 01100011 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110001 01110101 01101001 01110010 01111001 00101100 00100000 01101110 01101111 01110100 01101000 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01110110 01100101 01101110 00101110 00100000


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

Sad Wanderer said:


> This was obvious and I don't see a need for such study.


Right, because everything you or I think is obvious cannot possibly be wrong. :kitteh:


----------



## Monteskiusz (Sep 16, 2015)

Snowy Leopard said:


> Right, because everything you or I think is obvious cannot possibly be wrong. :kitteh:


Of course. I mean You ok but I? How could I be wrong?! :laughing:


----------



## Monteskiusz (Sep 16, 2015)

tanstaafl28 said:


> @Sad Wanderer
> 
> 01010111 01101001 01110100 01101000 01101111 01110101 01110100 00100000 01110011 01100011 01101001 01100101 01101110 01110100 01101001 01100110 01101001 01100011 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110001 01110101 01101001 01110010 01111001 00101100 00100000 01101110 01101111 01110100 01101000 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01110110 01100101 01101110 00101110 00100000


01010100 01100101 01100011 01101000 01101110 01101001 01100011 01101100 01111001 00100000 01101110 01101111 01110100 01101000 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01110000 01110010 01101111 01101111 01110110 01100101 01101110 00100000 01100010 01110101 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110111 01100001 01110011 00100000 01100001 01101100 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 01111001 00100000 01101100 01100001 01111001 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100101 01110110 01101001 01100100 01100101 01101110 01100011 01100101 00101110 00100000 01001001 01100110 00100000 01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01110101 01101100 01100100 00100000 01101010 01110101 01110011 01110100 00100000 01101100 01101111 01101111 01101011 00100000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01101000 01101001 01110011 01110100 01101111 01110010 01111001 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 01101110 00100000 01011001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01110111 01101111 01110101 01101100 01100100 00100000 01100011 01101100 01100101 01100001 01110010 01111001 00100000 01110011 01100001 01110111 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100111 01101111 00100000 01110100 01100001 01101100 01101011 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110011 01101111 01101101 01100101 00100000 01110010 01100001 01101110 01100100 01101111 01101101 00100000 01110010 01100101 01101100 01101001 01100111 01101001 01101111 01110101 01110011 00100000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 01101111 01101110 00101110 00100000 00111010 01010000 00100000

Meh. Binary is getting boring. Time for new stuff!


----------



## SilverFalcon (Dec 18, 2014)

ScientiaOmnisEst said:


> Also, I always wonder what the solution is to confirmation bias. If you agree with it, it's wrong?


Confirmation bias is side effect of intuitive search for truth. It is a way to get to resolution with minimum amount of work.
Solution is to consciously look for both agreeing and disagreeing facts and not to filter the ones that suit your hypothesis.



ScientiaOmnisEst said:


> Assume that if someone disagrees, they're right and you should immediately throw out your entire framework and adopt theirs?


Is not so simple. But lets say that some facts undeniably prove huge conspiracy (that is as much "entire framework shift" as I can imagine). Should you automatically accept it as the other person tells it?
Those big shifts in world view require rather tedious and time consuming re-alignment of the framework. Throwing away the boundaries of thought presents huge amount of possibilities. Giving in dissonance would forcing one to re-erect boundaries of though.



ScientiaOmnisEst said:


> Assume all your values are factually and logically wrong and live with the dissonance? I guess if you're a logical person you can make arguments but it doesn't leave many non-painful options for those of us without that capacity. Or maybe just never have opinions in general?


I cannot see values being factually wrong, only contradictory to each other. One should be able to accept that and create hierarchy of those values. The danger of giving into the uneasiness from dissonance is that trying to ignore the contradiction could lead person to pursue a lesser values directly while indirectly compromising on the higher values.


----------



## raskoolz (May 26, 2014)

SERIOUS WONDER | RAW: What the Thinker Thinks, the Prover will Prove - SERIOUS WONDER


----------



## Planisphere (Apr 24, 2012)

See signature.

This brings up an interesting question though. How/why did this evolve in humanity? It contradicts adaptive long-term planning, which is necessary for long-term survival... oh.


----------



## Amine (Feb 23, 2014)

So then why do people change their minds?


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

People are absolute fucking idiots. This is exactly why I don't debate with people online so much anymore, they ask you a question, you present them with facts, and then they decide that the facts aren't true because it contradicts their stupidity.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

And by the way, how is this even news or why was there even a study on this. Wasn't it always obvious?


----------



## Clayfighter (Jun 21, 2016)

Confirmation bias is a pretty old idea though....right?

And they're calling this the explanation effect? You know its kind of funny, There is this thing called ad hoc hypotheses, and people have been using them for years to explain away data that contradicts their beliefs. Seems like a problem that arrives from reaching conclusions too quickly and collecting data later.

People that compile data will conclude after independent verification, for them the evidence pieces together a collective model. Its never fully solved, till it is.
Everyone else will take something as it is and make sense of it. Then they make sense of the next fact, but they do so independent of the first. If you have a conclusion, and then you explain something within your previous conclusions paradigm. You will never have a paradigm shift. The problem is, no one extrapolates conclusions from each piece of data in a unifying but separate manner. Process of elimination!!!

^^Ziggy you're exactly right on this one
Cognitive dissonance is your best friend if you look at one fact at a time. Oh well I already believe this, so it contradicts! Therefore I stick with my original idea! 

Doesnt sound like a good idea to me, but hey what ever gets peoples socks off.

I'm sure some people know they're doing it......but im guessing they dont? Bueller?


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

I've always felt people are willing to change their minds. Not convinced by this study.


----------



## zynthaxx (Aug 12, 2009)

Sporadic Aura said:


> I've always felt people are willing to change their minds. Not convinced by this study.


I don't know if you're being intentionally ironic here.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

zynthaxx said:


> I don't know if you're being intentionally ironic here.


Bad attempt at a joke. Carry on.


----------



## castigat (Aug 26, 2012)

I don't know why this is news to anyone

I get why people being set in their ways is annoying, especially if their views are so asinine they'd have to be willfully obtuse to keep them, but at the same time, people aren't obligated to agree with anything just on the basis of "convincing evidence". Or their opinions. Or anything else, really, and if the subject matter is so important, why keep trying to convince someone that isn't receptive?

There's also the fact that I'm sure many of these arguments come down to opinions, different sets of information/"facts", different viewpoints, worldviews, and so on—and all of these things contribute to a) obstinacy and b) topic matter that isn't one size fits all in the first place. I think people are generally open to receiving new information, but again, they're not obligated to anyone to conform to all new information that comes their way, and studies like this always seem to me like really good ammo for people who expect everyone to agree with them on basis of their 43982767 articles lmao

Lol @ this man trying to find evidence for confirmation bias in the first place. you need evidence.

I didn't read the past pages, how much of it was people vagueposting about others that wouldn't agree with them despite statistics?


----------



## Amy (Jan 15, 2015)

It's easy to see how we humans like to hold our beliefs. When we discover they are not true, we have to get out of our comfort zone.


----------

