253

Many voters are willing to accept misinformation from political leaders – even when they know it’s factually inaccurate. According to our research, voters often recognize when their parties’ claims are not based on objective evidence. Yet they still respond positively, if they believe these inaccurate statements evoke a deeper, more important “truth.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] solrize@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I haven't read the article or study yet. But I wonder if the observation is one of "probably approximately correct learning" (PAC learning) in action. There's a book of that title by Les Valiant proposing that all biological learning works that way.

[-] ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee 1 points 22 hours ago

Why do you post an article you haven't even read?

[-] VoterFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Because even if it winds up being a bad study, it still evokes a deeper, more important “truth.”

I'm being sarcastic but that's actually what's going on here.

[-] solrize@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

It looked interesting and that was good enough.

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

to me this is just ex-post-facto justification for motivational reasoning or confirmation bias. people just look for the easiest possible way to resolve cognitive dissonance.

this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2024
253 points (97.0% liked)

science

14587 readers
284 users here now

just science related topics. please contribute

note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry

Rule 1) Be kind.

lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about

I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS