Jun 26, 2022 05:55 PM
(This post was last modified: Jun 27, 2022 04:57 AM by C C.)
https://nautil.us/are-you-a-naive-realist-20403/
EXCERPTS: . . . Lee Ross, a professor of psychology at Stanford [...] loved to quote George Carlin. “Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?”...
[...] Ross and his colleagues demonstrated that the fundamental attribution error was fed by the illusion of personal objectivity. In a 2016 Ted Talk, Ross joked that people “believe that their take on the world is the objective one, and what has to be understood or explained is, ‘What is it about those other people that seem to get it wrong?’” Ross came to call this [psychological] “naïve realism,” the tendency for people to think they see the world objectively, as it is, free from personal bias. Ross established three characteristics of the “naïve realist.”
First, the naïve realist believes that their perceptions are realistic and “objective.” Accordingly, other people (at least, reasonable other people) should share their beliefs, preferences, and convictions.
Second, the naïve realist expects that any reasonable, open-minded person will be persuaded to agree with the naïve realist if there is disagreement between parties. If there is disagreement, and if the disagreeing party is a reasonable person, presenting the “real facts” should restore harmony.
Third, anyone who disagrees with the naïve realist after the presentation of real facts is unreasonable, biased, or irrational.
Ross and his colleagues spent decades characterizing instances where the illusion of objectivity shaped how people think. [...] Ross found that people thought their own views were shaped by rational considerations more than biased thinking. They also found that participants’ evaluation of peers relied entirely on the perception of similarity between their views...
[...] how accurately his theory of naïve realism applies to our lives and culture today. America has fractured into separate camps because people are convinced their views are objective while those who disagree with them are deluded...
[...] it turns out that simply raising awareness of cognitive biases helps people identify instances of bias in their own judgments and correct their thinking accordingly. In 2014, psychologists Eran Halperin and Meytal Nasie led a series of studies examining whether merely making people aware of naïve realism and its consequences could lay a foundation for compromise among Israelis and Palestinians. Participants were assigned to a control condition, or to an experimental condition in which they read a passage describing naïve realism and its consequences, which included the following excerpt:
Participants in the experimental condition—in particular, those who held more hawkish political ideologies—reported greater openness to learning about the point of view of the rival group following this short intervention. Remarkably, this was true of both Israelis and Palestinians, offering a simple and intuitive strategy to set the stage for dialogue between parties in conflict.
[...] While learning about naïve realism might help us overcome some of our political animosity, it is naïve to expect that alone is sufficient to repair the fractures in our democracy. A problem of this magnitude requires more than just a shift in individuals’ willingness to entertain others’ perspectives. But it is a place to start... (MORE - missing details)
- - - - - -
Older, naïve realism in the context of perception: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Na%C3%AFve_realism
EXCERPTS: . . . Lee Ross, a professor of psychology at Stanford [...] loved to quote George Carlin. “Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?”...
[...] Ross and his colleagues demonstrated that the fundamental attribution error was fed by the illusion of personal objectivity. In a 2016 Ted Talk, Ross joked that people “believe that their take on the world is the objective one, and what has to be understood or explained is, ‘What is it about those other people that seem to get it wrong?’” Ross came to call this [psychological] “naïve realism,” the tendency for people to think they see the world objectively, as it is, free from personal bias. Ross established three characteristics of the “naïve realist.”
First, the naïve realist believes that their perceptions are realistic and “objective.” Accordingly, other people (at least, reasonable other people) should share their beliefs, preferences, and convictions.
Second, the naïve realist expects that any reasonable, open-minded person will be persuaded to agree with the naïve realist if there is disagreement between parties. If there is disagreement, and if the disagreeing party is a reasonable person, presenting the “real facts” should restore harmony.
Third, anyone who disagrees with the naïve realist after the presentation of real facts is unreasonable, biased, or irrational.
Ross and his colleagues spent decades characterizing instances where the illusion of objectivity shaped how people think. [...] Ross found that people thought their own views were shaped by rational considerations more than biased thinking. They also found that participants’ evaluation of peers relied entirely on the perception of similarity between their views...
[...] how accurately his theory of naïve realism applies to our lives and culture today. America has fractured into separate camps because people are convinced their views are objective while those who disagree with them are deluded...
[...] it turns out that simply raising awareness of cognitive biases helps people identify instances of bias in their own judgments and correct their thinking accordingly. In 2014, psychologists Eran Halperin and Meytal Nasie led a series of studies examining whether merely making people aware of naïve realism and its consequences could lay a foundation for compromise among Israelis and Palestinians. Participants were assigned to a control condition, or to an experimental condition in which they read a passage describing naïve realism and its consequences, which included the following excerpt:
Naïve Realism is the human tendency to form one’s own worldview regarding various subjects, perceived by an individual as the only truth. Accordingly the individual believes that other people’s reluctance to share his or her views arises from ignorance, irrationality, an inability to draw reasonable conclusions from objective evidence, ideological biases, or self-interest. The psychological bias of naïve realism causes people to see the world in a unilateral and simplistic manner. As a result of this bias, people tend to ignore or reject any information that does not fit their pre- existing worldview, which is perceived by them as the only truth. Consequently, they fail to see things from several points of view and may miss opportunities for change and progress.
Participants in the experimental condition—in particular, those who held more hawkish political ideologies—reported greater openness to learning about the point of view of the rival group following this short intervention. Remarkably, this was true of both Israelis and Palestinians, offering a simple and intuitive strategy to set the stage for dialogue between parties in conflict.
[...] While learning about naïve realism might help us overcome some of our political animosity, it is naïve to expect that alone is sufficient to repair the fractures in our democracy. A problem of this magnitude requires more than just a shift in individuals’ willingness to entertain others’ perspectives. But it is a place to start... (MORE - missing details)
- - - - - -
Older, naïve realism in the context of perception: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Na%C3%AFve_realism
