Science Curiosity and Political Information Processing

This paper describes evidence suggesting that science curiosity counteracts politically biased information processing. This finding is in tension with two bodies of research. The first casts doubt on the existence of “curiosity” as a measurable disposition. The other suggests that individual differences in cognition related to science comprehension - of which science curiosity, if it exists, would presumably be one - do not mitigate politically biased information processing but instead aggravate it. The paper describes the scale-development strategy employed to overcome the problems associated with measuring science curiosity. It also reports data, observational and experimental, showing that science curiosity promotes open-minded engagement with information that is contrary to individuals’ political predispositions. We conclude by identifying a series of concrete research questions posed by these results.

[1]  Barry J. Fraser,et al.  Development of a test of science‐related attitudes , 1978 .

[2]  Y. Ganzach,et al.  On the perception and operationalization of risk perception , 2008, Judgment and Decision Making.

[3]  B. Nyhan,et al.  When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions , 2010 .

[4]  J. Druckman,et al.  The Nature and Origins of Misperceptions: Understanding False and Unsupported Beliefs About Politics , 2017 .

[5]  Charles S. Taber,et al.  The Motivated Processing of Political Arguments , 2009 .

[6]  D. Scheufele,et al.  The science of science communication , 2013, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Lawrence C. Hamilton,et al.  Education, politics and opinions about climate change evidence for interaction effects , 2011 .

[8]  D. Kahneman.  Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics , 2003 .

[9]  E. Weber,et al.  A Domain-Specific Risk-Attitude Scale: Measuring Risk Perceptions and Risk Behaviors , 2002 .

[10]  G. Loewenstein.  The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. , 1994 .

[11]  Z. Kunda,et al.  The case for motivated reasoning. , 1990, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  S. Owen,et al.  In Pursuit of Validity: A comprehensive review of science attitude instruments 1935–2005 , 2008 .

[13]  D. Kahan.  'Ordinary Science Intelligence': A Science-Comprehension Measure for Study of Risk and Science Communication, with Notes on Evolution and Climate Change , 2014 .

[14]  A. Falk,et al.  Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants and Behavioral Consequences , 2009 .

[15]  Charles S. Taber,et al.  Political Information Processing , 2013 .

[16]  Martin Johnson,et al.  Changing Minds or Changing Channels?: Partisan News in an Age of Choice , 2013 .

[17]  D. Kahan.  What is the 'Science of Science Communication'? , 2015 .

[18]  James N. Druckman,et al.  Citizens’, Scientists’, and Policy Advisors’ Beliefs about Global Warming , 2015 .

[19]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government , 2017, Behavioural Public Policy.

[20]  Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government , 2017, Behavioural Public Policy.

[21]  P. Ubel,et al.  The Hazards of Correcting Myths About Health Care Reform , 2013, Medical care.

[22]  L. Hamilton,et al.  Public knowledge and concern about polar-region warming , 2012 .

[23]  D. Kahan.  Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem , 2015 .

[24]  C. Sunstein,et al.  Misfearing: A Reply , 2006 .

[25]  D. Green,et al.  MISPERCEPTIONS ABOUT PERCEPTUAL BIAS , 1999 .

[26]  Dan M. Kahan,et al.  Ideology, motivated reasoning, and cognitive reflection , 2013, Judgment and Decision Making.

[27]  C. Sunstein.  On the Divergent American Reactions to Terrorism and Climate Change , 2006 .

[28]  S. Simon,et al.  Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications , 2003 .

[29]  Niles Eldredge,et al.  Editorial: Evolution: Education and Outreach goes open access! , 2013, Evolution: Education and Outreach.

[30]  Bruce W. Hardy,et al.  Leveraging scientific credibility about Arctic sea ice trends in a polarized political environment , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[31]  D. Kahan.  The Politically Motivated Reasoning Paradigm , 2015 .

[32]  Erin P. Hennes,et al.  “Hot” Political Cognition: Its Self-, Group-, and System-Serving Purposes , 2013 .

[33]  E. Weber,et al.  Public Understanding of Climate Change in the United States Scientific Understanding of Climate Change These Assess- Ments Support the following Conclusions with High Or , 2011 .

[34]  Stephen Ansolabehere,et al.  Cooperative Survey Research , 2013 .

[35]  Gregory N. Mandel,et al.  The Polarizing Impact of Science Literacy and Numeracy on Perceived Climate Change Risks , 2012 .

[36]  Salman Hameed,et al.  Muslims and evolution: a study of Pakistani physicians in the United States , 2013, Evolution: Education and Outreach.

[37]  Matthew J. Lindberg,et al.  Feeling validated versus being correct: a meta-analysis of selective exposure to information. , 2009, Psychological bulletin.

[38]  Anthony A Leiserowitz,et al.  American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous? , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.