Resisting disconfirming evidence only becomes dogmatism after repeated failures

Evidence

Suppose a study disconfirmed one of your most cherished beliefs. If you do not drop your beliefs immediately, are you dogmatic? I think not. But if a literature of experiments accumulates, testing the proposition from many perspectives and in many ways, and they all say, “You are wrong” and still you do not budge, then you are likely dogmatic. — Bob Altemeyer, The Authoritarian Specter, 2636

Categorization

• XREF: Parallels the distinction between healthy skepticism and denialism used in science communication and climate denial research. — connects to: Repeated truths eventually overcome even motivated reasoners’ resistance — Lee McIntyre, Post-Truth, 322; Presenting disconfirming evidence to partisans strengthens rather than weakens their views — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects…, 132; Directionally motivated reasoning makes people reject disconfirming evidence and seek explanations for it. — Sander van der Linden, Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects…, 166 (+2 more)