Quote:

---

People With Extreme Political Views Have Trouble Thinking About Their Own Thinking

Your super liberal and super conservative relatives might all have one thing in common.
Popular Science |
Sara Chodosh

It's important to doubt yourself sometimes.

Radical political views of all sorts seem to shape our lives to an almost unprecedented extent. But what attracts people to the fringes? A study from researchers at University College London offers some insight into one characteristic of those who hold extreme beliefs—their metacognition, or ability to evaluate whether or not they might be wrong.

“It’s been known for some time now that in studies of people holding radical beliefs, that they tend to… express higher confidence in their beliefs than others,” says Steve Fleming, a UCL cognitive neuroscientist and one of the paper’s authors. “But it was unknown whether this was just a general sense of confidence in everything they believe, or whether it was reflective of a change in metacognition.”

He and his colleagues set out to find the answer by removing partisanship from the equation: they presented study participants with a question that had an objective answer, rather than one rooted in personal values.

They studied two different groups of people—381 in the first sample and 417 in a second batch to try to replicate their results. They gave the first sample a survey that tested how conservative or liberal their political beliefs were. Radicalism exists on both ends of the spectrum; the people at the furthest extremes of left and right are considered “radical.”

After taking the questionnaire, the first group did a simple test: they looked at two different clusters of dots and quickly identified which group had more dots. Then they rated how confident they were in their choice.

People with radical political opinions completed this exercise with pretty much the same accuracy as moderate participants. But “after incorrect decisions, the radicals were less likely to decrease their confidence,” Fleming says.

Unlike political beliefs, which often have no right or wrong answer per se, one group of dots was unquestionably more numerous than the other. But regardless of whether or not there was an objective answer, the radicals were more likely to trust their opinion was correct than to question whether they might have gotten it wrong.

This finding—which the team replicated with tests on the second group of participants—suggests that the metacognition of radicals plays a part in shaping their beliefs. In other words, they actually can’t question their own ideas the same way more moderate individuals can.

It’s not currently known whether radical beliefs help shape metacognition, or metacognition helps shape radical beliefs, Fleming says. That’s something his team is still trying to unravel. But their work already has potential social implications, he says.

There is a body of work out there—small, but growing, Fleming wrote in an email—showing it may be possible to help people gain better metacognitive skills. This might enable individuals to get along better and make shared decisions.

“Widening polarization about political, religious, and scientific issues threatens open societies, leading to entrenchment of beliefs, reduced mutual understanding, and a pervasive negativity surrounding the very idea of consensus,” the researchers write. Understanding the role that metacognition plays in this polarization may help us step back from it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
People With Extreme Political Views Have Trouble Thinking About Their Own Thinking
Your super liberal and super conservative relatives might all have one thing in common.

metacognition, or ability to evaluate whether or not they might be wrong.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:

So basically, everybody... BUT YOURSELF, heh?

I've been around the 'nets for a jaunt or twelve and I have to say... YOU have the most extreme views I've ever seen on pretty much.... EVERYTHING

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I'd nuke a BILLION PEOPLE if it would save the other 7 billion from living under Putin. Hell, I might go all the way to the last 100 people on Earth to keep this planet from being under fascist rule.

---

Quote:

---

WISHY:So basically, everybody... BUT YOURSELF, heh?

I've been around the 'nets for a jaunt or twelve and I have to say... YOU have the most extreme views I've ever seen on pretty much.... EVERYTHING

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I'd nuke a BILLION PEOPLE if it would save the other 7 billion from living under Putin. Hell, I might go all the way to the last 100 people on Earth to keep this planet from being under fascist rule.

KIKI: Your judgement is very poor.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

People With Extreme Political Views Have Trouble Thinking About Their Own Thinking

Your super liberal and super conservative relatives might all have one thing in common.
Popular Science |
Sara Chodosh

It's important to doubt yourself sometimes.

Radical political views of all sorts seem to shape our lives to an almost unprecedented extent. But what attracts people to the fringes? A study from researchers at University College London offers some insight into one characteristic of those who hold extreme beliefs—their metacognition, or ability to evaluate whether or not they might be wrong.

“It’s been known for some time now that in studies of people holding radical beliefs, that they tend to… express higher confidence in their beliefs than others,” says Steve Fleming, a UCL cognitive neuroscientist and one of the paper’s authors. “But it was unknown whether this was just a general sense of confidence in everything they believe, or whether it was reflective of a change in metacognition.”

He and his colleagues set out to find the answer by removing partisanship from the equation: they presented study participants with a question that had an objective answer, rather than one rooted in personal values.

They studied two different groups of people—381 in the first sample and 417 in a second batch to try to replicate their results. They gave the first sample a survey that tested how conservative or liberal their political beliefs were. Radicalism exists on both ends of the spectrum; the people at the furthest extremes of left and right are considered “radical.”

After taking the questionnaire, the first group did a simple test: they looked at two different clusters of dots and quickly identified which group had more dots. Then they rated how confident they were in their choice.

People with radical political opinions completed this exercise with pretty much the same accuracy as moderate participants. But “after incorrect decisions, the radicals were less likely to decrease their confidence,” Fleming says.

Unlike political beliefs, which often have no right or wrong answer per se, one group of dots was unquestionably more numerous than the other. But regardless of whether or not there was an objective answer, the radicals were more likely to trust their opinion was correct than to question whether they might have gotten it wrong.

This finding—which the team replicated with tests on the second group of participants—suggests that the metacognition of radicals plays a part in shaping their beliefs. In other words, they actually can’t question their own ideas the same way more moderate individuals can.

It’s not currently known whether radical beliefs help shape metacognition, or metacognition helps shape radical beliefs, Fleming says. That’s something his team is still trying to unravel. But their work already has potential social implications, he says.

There is a body of work out there—small, but growing, Fleming wrote in an email—showing it may be possible to help people gain better metacognitive skills. This might enable individuals to get along better and make shared decisions.

“Widening polarization about political, religious, and scientific issues threatens open societies, leading to entrenchment of beliefs, reduced mutual understanding, and a pervasive negativity surrounding the very idea of consensus,” the researchers write. Understanding the role that metacognition plays in this polarization may help us step back from it.

---

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/people-with-extreme-political-views
-have-trouble-thinking-about-their-own-thinking?utm_source=pocket-newtab

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Your judgement is very poor.

---

Quote:

---

Signym and 1Kiki had a conversation last year where they agreed America should give its arms over to RUSSIA...and then deleted it. I wonder what possible motives someone could have to say that???

---

Quote:

---

Your judgement is the most demented I've seen... outside of maybe Hitlers

At least on my planet there's that pesky freedom thing for all 100 of us, but on your planet there's mind slavery and dumb bitches everywhere.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNYM: People With Extreme Political Views Have Trouble Thinking About Their Own Thinking

Your super liberal and super conservative relatives might all have one thing in common.
Popular Science |
Sara Chodosh

It's important to doubt yourself sometimes. ...


JSF: Hmmm.
This comes from London, so the translation become suspect right off.
Perhaps also from the Brit perception that nobody can think as well as they.
Long time a go I was warned that the Yurp definitions of Left, Right, Liberal, Conservative are reversed from that of America.
So they start off redefining the political sprectrum, according to the way they see it. I don't know if Yurpeans cannot understand the different segments of the political spectrum, or if these dullards are just intentionally insisting upon being obtuse.
The 5 segments of the political spectrum which is followed by most, (including America) so that we may all speak the same language and words while understanding the meanings - and words do have meanings - are thus:

Radical: far left wing extremist, as exemplified by Democrats today, and their stenographers in MSM.

Liberal: Left leaning, left of center, left of neutral. This could be thought of as the Party of JFK, as long the radicals during the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s are ignored.

Neutral: Neither strongly left nor right. Some folk try to affix the label Centrist to this group. This group is largely personified by the majority of Americans, which radicals refer to as Flyover people, or deplorables, or "swing voters" depending upon the context. This group usually votes for Republicans, Libertarians, Reform Party, Tax Reform, Balanced Budgets, and other popular causes. MSM and/or other Radicals like to bandy about the term or concept of Neutral or Centrist as a misnomer for hard Left Liberals, as they are adamant about denying they they are actually radicals.

Conservative; Right of neutral, and wishing to adhere to the Founding Principles upon which our country was Founded, the Founding Documents, The Constitution. This group desires to preserve out nation, as a going concern, instead of trying to destroy everything.

Reactionary: Far Right Wing Extremists. These portion can take certain ideals to a whole new level. Focus on Gun Rights in the 2nd Amendment, this has grous for that. Focus on the reference and use of "GOD" by our Founding Fathers, there are groups to concentrate on that. Focus on Religious issues such as Murder, Homicide, Infanticide, or other terms for killing newborns, this part of the spectrum has some zealots.


I was planning to further comment upon the results linked, but I am pooped right now.

---

Quote:

---

People on both the far left or far right of the political spectrum tended to have more radical views, involving authoritarianism and dogmatic intolerance for opposing views.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
I think anyone incapable of proffering a cogent argument based on a broad scope of facts is probably intolerant. Because either they're limiting their input to a very narrow range, or they're not applying reason to the facts, or both.


ETA I think there's probably a range of facts that MUST be logically considered in an argument, and a whole range of facts that are irrelevant. For example - if the premise is 'the government doesn't lie', then even one incontrovertible example of the government lying must be considered. But no one needs to consider the statement 'the earth is more or less spherical'.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Perhaps the takeaway from the linked study is this:

Libtards of London think that any reasonable, sensible person has Extreme Political Views. Speaks more to the bias of the supposedly unbiased study managers.

---