Backfire effects occur only among extreme believers in triggering contexts

Evidence

All this appears to support the Bayesian brain. But it’s not so simple. In my own research, I’ve come to the conclusion that both sides are correct, but misleading on their own. Motivated reasoning – and even belief polarization and backfire effects – do occur. These are real processes. What’s important to know is that in the seminal studies, these effects were often confined to those individuals who held the strongest or most extreme beliefs on an issue – and that’s probably right. But they don’t describe the average individual in an average situation. It’s not our default state. There often needs to be some contextual trigger that decreases people’s motivation to be accurate and increases their motivation to belong, affiliate, and prioritize political commitments. — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 138

Categorization

• DEEPTHINKING: A genuinely nuanced reconciliation of two opposed research camps, resisting the common either/or framing of the motivated reasoning debate.
• XREF: Echoes the accuracy-versus-belonging motivational tradeoff in trust and cooperation literature from other readings. — connects to: Backfire effects occur only under contextual triggers, not as a default state — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects…, 138; Newer studies show debunking usually works despite the proposed backfire effect. — Russell Muirhead and Nancy L. Rosenblum, A Lot of People Are Saying: The New…, 350

Broader Connections

• Backfire effects occur only under contextual triggers, not as a default state #qualifies (0.95) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 138