Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

news.harvard.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 78 posts

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#61

Post by 6gvONxR4sf7o »

tomp wrote: post #36

Clickbait title. Better title: political bias skews guesstimates that COULD be verified. Are we really surprised that people don't know by heart the percentages of income mobility statistics? Also, although the questions, as posed, are technically verifiable , that's not what people really care about - do I care about a statistic of income mobility that includes my parents (soon to be pensioners)? Not really; I care…

> One experiment showed that even when given an opportunity to learn the facts about immigrants in the U.S. for a nominal sum, those holding the most negative and most inaccurate perceptions were the least willing to pay.

There's more to it than just what you pulled out.

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#62

Post by shkkmo »

uoaei wrote: post #28
autokad wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe they thought it was that high. I mean general unemployment is no where near 27% and you'd suspect that with threat of losing visa status, immigrants are more likelier to take a job they dont exactly grok.

"grok" is defined as "comprehend the dynamics of" which I'm not sure you meant.

That is a rather impoverished explanation of a complicated word. A closer description would be "to understand something on such a deep and personal level that the lines of identity between it and you blur."

Here's a passage from the book that coined the term (as a word from an alien language)

> Grok means "to understand," of course, but Dr. Mahmoud, who might be termed the leading Terran expert on Martians, explains that it also means, "to drink" and "a hundred other English words, words which we think of as antithetical concepts. 'Grok' means all of these. It means 'fear,' it means 'love,' it means 'hate'—proper hate, for by the Martian 'map' you cannot hate anything unless you grok it, understand it so thoroughly that you merge with it and it merges with you—then you can hate it. By hating yourself. But this implies that you love it, too, and cherish it and would not have it otherwise. Then you can hate—and (I think) Martian hate is an emotion so black that the nearest human equivalent could only be called mild distaste.

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#63

Post by uoaei »

shkkmo wrote: post #62
uoaei wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"grok" is defined as "comprehend the dynamics of" which I'm not sure you meant.

That is a rather impoverished explanation of a complicated word. A closer description would be "to understand something on such a deep and personal level that the lines of identity between it and you blur." Here's a passage from the book that coined the term (as a word from an alien language) > Grok means "to understand," of course, but Dr. Mahmoud, who might be termed the leading Terran expert on Martians, explains…

The complexities of the word have been lost as the English language continues to evolve, until the colloquial understanding supplants the literal origins.

We exist at a particular moment in time, and language is a tool that is used to be understood. If one wishes to use arcane and literal etymologically-derived definitions of words, it is necessary to say so.

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#64

Post by skeletor_999 »

I think that the results of these types of surveys can be misleading, as they don't always ask if the respondent is unsure. Wouldn't it be better to ask them how knowledgeable they believe they are on a given topic before asking them about the exact numbers? Similarly, wouldn't it be better to ask them first about their support for a given policy change?

Many of these answers will simply be guesses. I think it would be far more informing if these answers were broken down by people who believe they are knowledgeable or who support certain policies.

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#65

Post by growlist »

I suppose you could turn it round and ask: why are certain groups so obsessed with forcing immigration on people that don't want it? Don't those people have a right not to have their minds changed by people with an agenda? Who decides what opinions are palatable or otherwise, and why are they seeking to subvert commonly held beliefs for their own benefit?

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#66

Post by luckylion »

klyrs wrote: post #32
luckylion wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One trick to circumvent this is to report the OPPOSITE conclusion first, and then say, 'actually, it was the opposite' after the listener says 'well, duh.' Study finds political bias improves perception of verifiable facts. I don't think I heard a lot of "well, duh". > In reality, we don't know until we test... We have a lot of stories and biases that we carry all over the place, some are useful, most are shorthand…

> Study finds political bias improves perception of verifiable facts. This is one way of flipping it. What if we go with Study finds conservative bias improves perception of verifiable facts. and Study finds liberal bias improves perception of verifiable facts. showing each to people who respectively identify with those labels? Then, I think we would see a lot of people going "well duh"

Sure, but that's just giving people compliments or confirming their world view, isn't it? I did understand the comment to mean that we find things obvious after we hear about them presented as the result of a study. I don't believe that at all, but I'm very much with you that it's correct with a modification: we find them obvious after hearing about them if they agree with our world view.

I don't think that "ideology lessens your ability to perceive reality" falls under worldview, though, and I cannot imagine that anybody was surprised by the result itself. That doesn't make the study useless, it's interesting and important to know how strong the effect is, whether it changes over time or can be negated etc. But other than that? Study finds that people shot with guns die more often than control group. I don't think you need to be an anti-gun-activist to say "well, duh".

More importantly: how did independents and apolitical people guess? Were they closer to the "real" numbers?

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#67

Post by sdenton4 »

luckylion wrote: post #18
sdenton4 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the big human problems in social science is that people are VERY happy to make explanatory narratives instantaneously on hearing a result... Which makes most results seem 'obvious' once reported. One trick to circumvent this is to report the OPPOSITE conclusion first, and then say, 'actually, it was the opposite' after the listener says 'well, duh.' In our own reading, it can be helpful to invert the conclusio…

> One trick to circumvent this is to report the OPPOSITE conclusion first, and then say, 'actually, it was the opposite' after the listener says 'well, duh.' Study finds political bias improves perception of verifiable facts. I don't think I heard a lot of "well, duh". > In reality, we don't know until we test... We have a lot of stories and biases that we carry all over the place, some are useful, most are shorthand…

Another option is just the actual null hypothesis: "Study finds that ideology has no impact on perception of facts."

Which doesn't seem surprising at all to me... After all, is the sky red if Trump says it is?

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#68

Post by ikura »

shkkmo wrote: post #62
uoaei wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"grok" is defined as "comprehend the dynamics of" which I'm not sure you meant.

That is a rather impoverished explanation of a complicated word. A closer description would be "to understand something on such a deep and personal level that the lines of identity between it and you blur." Here's a passage from the book that coined the term (as a word from an alien language) > Grok means "to understand," of course, but Dr. Mahmoud, who might be termed the leading Terran expert on Martians, explains…

Woah, I always thought it came from the unix utility's name - but never thought to wonder why the utility was named the way it was!

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#69

Post by codeddesign »

HeroOfAges wrote: post #55
caseyohara wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are gravely mistaken if you think news stations slant "far left".

Are you referring to local news stations or national networks? I've also suspected CNN and MSNBC have a bias toward the "far left". What would you, caseyohara, accept as proof of left-leaning bias from CNN or MSNBC?

Just to clarify, I was referring to nationwide/major stations. I don’t have any comment on local. I would imagine the bias (or non) would be based upon that social demographic area ( southern Calif is more left compared to South Dakota which is more right)

Re: Study finds political bias skews perceptions of verifiable fact

#70

Post by codeddesign »

bobwaycott wrote: post #56
HeroOfAges wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you referring to local news stations or national networks? I've also suspected CNN and MSNBC have a bias toward the "far left". What would you, caseyohara, accept as proof of left-leaning bias from CNN or MSNBC?

There is a significant difference between being left-leaning , and being far-left .

You are right on this point. However, everything is so politicized that you aren’t allowed to be leaning in any direction. You are force to choose..which is ridiculous. To give an example, why is it unacceptable to many on HN to like policies from both Obama and Trump? Having been on here for a while, you will get applauded for 1 and spit at for the other.
Post reply on HN