People evaluate persuasive evidence as biased in favor of their own prior views.

Evidence

A strong demonstration of the effect appeared in a study by Lord, Ross, and Lepper (1979), in which students in favor of or opposed to capital punishment examined two sets of evidence, one set supporting capital punishment and one opposing. Students’ judgments of the relative convincingness of the two sets of evidence were strongly shaped by their preexisting opinions. Each opinion group found that the evidence, on balance, favored their own position. This is due to the combinations of tendencies to be attracted to the arguments supporting one’s own position and to be repelled by those supporting the opposing position. It is therefore apparent that the cognitive response effect is a close relative of the similarity-attraction effect. Instead of opinions being credited to a hypothetical stranger (the similarity-attraction effect), they are included in a persuasive communication. Instead of the effect being greater liking or disliking for the stranger with agreeable or disagreeable opinions, it is greater liking for the communication. The tendency to reject a communication that does not support one’s own views is shown especially strongly in the form of the hostile media phenomenon (Vallone, Ross, & Lepper, 1985), in which each of two politically opposed groups interpreted the same (presumably unbiased) news media report of a terrorist attack as objectionable because of its lack of support for their own position. — Anthony G. Greenwald and Mahzarin R. Banaji, Implicit Social Cognition, 139

Categorization

• XREF: No prior attitudinal ‘echo’ of this, but the confirmation-bias and motivated-reasoning literature it feeds into is well documented. — connects to: Prejudice persists because people dismiss evidence contradicting existing attitudes; People often distort evidence to fit preexisting worldviews rather than updating beliefs — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects…, 108; Authoritarians apply a biased standard for evidence that favors their beliefs — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 1298 (+7 more)

Broader Connections

• People often distort evidence to fit preexisting worldviews rather than updating beliefs #expands (0.92) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 108
• People deploy selective perception and motivated reasoning routinely when faced with evidence #expands (0.90) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 144
• Prejudice persists because people dismiss evidence contradicting existing attitudes #corroborates (0.88)
• People preferentially seek confirming evidence and avoid testing their own hypotheses. #expands (0.86) — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 93
• Authoritarians apply a biased standard for evidence that favors their beliefs #exemplifies (0.85) — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 1298
• Selective evidence use lets people maintain the illusion of being objective while holding prejudice #expands (0.85) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2095
• People often resist or reverse belief updating rather than tracking evidence #corroborates (0.84) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 104
• People confirm their initial stereotypes by biased attention and interpretation #exemplifies (0.83) — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1175
• Presenting disconfirming evidence to partisans strengthens rather than weakens their views #corroborates (0.82) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 132
• Exposing people to opposing viewpoints increases rather than reduces polarization #corroborates (0.78) — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof, 453