Confrontation with disconfirming evidence can strengthen false beliefs

Evidence

But one of the most valuable insights in Philip Mirowski’s Never Let A Serious Crisis Go To Waste: How Neoliberalism Survived the Financial Meltdown comes from his account of cognitive dissonance itself. Referring to the work of Leon Festinger, the social psychologist who worked extensively on cognitive dissonance, Mirowski reminds us that cognitive dissonance is not a threat to false beliefs. On the contrary, cognitive dissonance is a mechanism by which false beliefs can be maintained when confronted with evidence that directly disproves them. In fact, as Mirowski writes, Festinger’s crucial claim was “that confrontation with contrary evidence may actually augment and sharpen the conviction and enthusiasm of a believer”. … Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart… suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong; what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervour about convincing and converting people to his view. — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk, 1798

Categorization

• XREF: This is the classic ‘backfire effect’ / belief-perseverance literature also covered in Kahneman and in studies of conspiracy belief maintenance; Fisher frames it through Festinger. — connects to: Disconfirming evidence can strengthen rather than weaken committed beliefs. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 97; Even disconfirmation evidence often fails to break a person’s confirmation bias — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 94; Correcting false beliefs can strengthen them rather than reduce them — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 350 (+10 more)
• QUESTION: Worth chasing: the relationship between Festinger’s cognitive dissonance (1957) and the contemporary ‘belief updating’ / backfire effect experiments in political psychology.

Broader Connections

• Disconfirming evidence can strengthen rather than weaken committed beliefs. #corroborates (0.98) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 97
• Confrontation with contrary evidence can intensify rather than weaken firm belief. #corroborates (0.98) — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 97
• Correcting false beliefs can strengthen them rather than reduce them #corroborates (0.95) — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 350
• Presenting disconfirming evidence to partisans strengthens rather than weakens their views #exemplifies (0.92) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 132
• Cognitive dissonance strengthens rather than weakens false beliefs under contrary evidence #expands (0.88) — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk, 1798
• Directionally motivated reasoning makes people reject disconfirming evidence and seek explanations for it. #expands (0.85) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 166
• Resisting disconfirming evidence only becomes dogmatism after repeated failures #qualifies (0.80) — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 2636
• Belief systems respond to contrary evidence by discounting the evidence #qualifies (0.78)
• Belief systems reject disconfirming evidence rather than revising theories #qualifies (0.76)
• Even disconfirmation evidence often fails to break a person’s confirmation bias #qualifies (0.75) — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 94
• Repeating a false claim to debunk it increases its plausibility #complicates (0.74) — Holm Gero Hümmler, Ulrike Schiesser, Fact and Prejudice, 164