Influencing our Beliefs

How Political Parties Influence Our Beliefs — and What We Can Do About It

Adapted from an article by Cell Press

Fake news is everywhere, but why we believe it is still unclear. Drawing on research, psychologists suggest that valuing our identity more than our accuracy leads us to accept incorrect information that aligns with our political party's beliefs. This value discrepancy, they say, can explain why high-quality news sources are no longer enough. Understanding it can also help us find better strategies to bridge the political divide between people of differing political opinions.

First, we must understand how we calculate value. Whether that is which newspaper we look at in the morning or what we have for breakfast, says senior author Jay Van Bavel, a psychologist at New York University. It is when our goals to fit in with certain groups are stronger than the goal we have to be accurate that we are more likely to be led astray.

This idea is what he calls his identity-based model of belief. We assign values to different ideas based on what matters to us most at the moment and then compare those values to decide which idea we believe is true. Because our political parties can provide us with a sense of belonging and help us define ourselves, agreeing with them can bolster our sense of self. And that can sometimes matter more to us than accuracy about an issue, even if accuracy is something we usually do care about. When that happens, we will likely believe the ideas that align with our party's views, no matter how plausible they may seem.

It means that the sources of information we usually rely on to shape our views have less of an impact. Having a really high-quality news source does not matter that much if we think the people producing it belong to a different group than us, Van Bavel says. They might have the best writers, the best investigative journalists, the best editorial standards — all the things we would normally care about. But we stop valuing those things and instead focus on which group we think the news is aligned with.

Still, Van Bavel believes his model offers strategies to bridge the political divide. Our model does not pick a side, he says. What it argues for is increasing the value of truth or finding ways to reduce the effects of identity, whether on the left or the right.

Being put into a role that requires accuracy — like being summoned for jury duty — can give people criteria with which to evaluate information and help them think more critically. Even more simply, Van Bavel says we can increase the value of accurate beliefs by asking people to put their money where their mouth is. When you are in a disagreement, ask your opponent: do you want to bet? Suddenly twenty dollars is on the line and they do not want to be proven wrong.

We can also work to reduce the effects of identity. One way is by creating a superordinate identity — getting people to think of themselves as citizens of a nation or the world rather than as members of a political party. But we also have to pay attention to how we engage with people of different political persuasions. It turns out that if you insult them and publicly criticise them, their identity needs increase and they become less concerned about accuracy. You actually need to affirm their identity before you present information that might be contradictory to what they believe, Van Bavel says.

The message is simple: our partisan identities lead us to believe things that are untrue. So we need to step back and critically evaluate what we believe and why.

Adapted from How Political Parties Influence Our Beliefs, and What We Can Do About It by Cell Press