We Value What Values Us: The Appeal of Identity‐Affirming Science

Members of the public (Study 1; n = 184) and university students (Study 2; n = 101) evaluated a piece of research and indicated their support for its continuation. The research findings were held constant, but the methods that revealed those findings were attributed to either neuroscience or social science, and the conclusions based on those findings were biased either in favor of men or in favor of women. Study 1 revealed that participants were more positive about research that affirmed their gender identity and that was based on neuroscience rather than social science. Study 2 found this pattern to be apparent in more specialist samples. Indeed, participants with some scientific training were more influenced by research that affirmed the reader's gender identity. Participants with less scientific training, in comparison, were more influenced by the type of science described when making judgments about the value of the research. Contrary to popular claims, this suggests that scientific knowledge alone is no protection against the effects of bias on research evaluation. Implications for the practice and popularization of science are discussed.

[1]  M. Mahoney.  Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system , 1977, Cognitive Therapy and Research.

[2]  Lawrence H. Summers,et al.  Remarks at NBER Conference on Diversifying the Science & Engineering Workforce , 2005 .

[3]  William H. Starbuck,et al.  Turning Lemons into Lemonade , 2003 .

[4]  Bertjan Doosje,et al.  Self and social identity. , 2002, Annual review of psychology.

[5]  J. Lurito,et al.  Temporal lobe activation demonstrates sex-based differences during passive listening. , 2001, Radiology.

[6]  C. McGarty,et al.  A 100 years of certitude? Social psychology, the experimental method and the management of scientific uncertainty. , 2001, The British journal of social psychology.

[7]  Boyce Rensberger.  The Nature of Evidence , 2000, Science.

[8]  F. Pratto,et al.  Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression , 1999 .

[9]  Sheila Jasanoff,et al.  Handbook of Science and Technology Studies , 1995 .

[10]  David Miller.  Introducing the `gay gene': media and scientific representations , 1995 .

[11]  Blair T. Johnson.  Effects of Outcome-Relevant Involvement and Prior Information on Persuasion , 1994 .

[12]  John C. Turner,et al.  Stereotyping and Social Reality , 1994 .

[13]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1993 .

[14]  Shelly Chaiken,et al.  Defensive Processing of Personally Relevant Health Messages , 1992 .

[15]  P. Ditto,et al.  Motivated Skepticism: Use of Differential Decision Criteria for Preferred and Nonpreferred Conclusions , 1992 .

[16]  Miles Hewstone,et al.  The ‘ultimate attribution error’? A review of the literature on intergroup causal attribution , 1990 .

[17]  Blair T. Johnson,et al.  Effects of involvement on persuasion: a meta-analysis , 1989 .

[18]  Alice H. Eagly,et al.  Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. , 1989 .

[19]  Z. Kunda,et al.  Motivated inference: Self-serving generation and evaluation of causal theories. , 1987 .

[20]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion , 1986, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.

[21]  M. Mulkay,et al.  Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists' Discourse , 1984 .

[22]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement , 1983 .

[23]  S. Ceci,et al.  Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again , 1982, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[24]  H. Tajfel.  Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations , 1982 .

[25]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Personal involvement as a determinant of argument based persuasion , 1981 .

[26]  Paul K. Feyerabend.  Problems of empiricism , 1981 .

[27]  L. Ross,et al.  Perseverance of Social Theories: The Role of Explanation in the Persistence of Discredited Information , 1980 .

[28]  L. Ross,et al.  Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence , 1979 .

[29]  M. Mahoney,et al.  Review Paper : Psychology of the Scientist: An Evaluative Review , 1979 .

[30]  H. Tajfel,et al.  An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. , 1979 .

[31]  Hilary Rose,et al.  Science and Society , 1969 .

[32]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[33]  Muzafer Sherif,et al.  A study of some social factors in perception. , 1935 .