Humans tend to hold on to their preconceived notions and biases when making decisions or thinking about the outcome of situations. They think in terms of “I have seen/ heard X happen, so Y is most likely the answer.” This is part of human nature and is not necessarily a negative thing as it has helped humans survive. However, it can lead people to be myopic in certain situations. People will look for information that supports their current beliefs and ignore evidence that discredits or disproves them. This is known as confirmation bias and it happens to the best of us. Belief perseverance is a similar phenomenon. It states that people cling to their beliefs despite receiving information that contradicts their beliefs. Although changing someone’s
…show more content…
To test her hypothesis, Bui collected a final sample of 201 college students (149 Female, 52 Male) with ages from 18-58 (Mean = 21.05, Median = 19.5, SD = 4.97) using convenience and snowball sampling procedures and had them complete a survey that included demographic questions and a 5- item measure of belief perseverance. Consider- the – opposite and source credibility measures were included. After completing the survey the students were broken up into three categories: Those who believe, those who are unsure, and those who do not believe. To measure emotional perseverance two groups were created: unchanged feelings and changed feelings. A Chi square analysis showed significant differences in beliefs such as when family, friends, or the media reported negative information on their favorite celebrity, they were more likely to be unsure than have a definitive belief or disbelief. If the media caught the celebrity doing something more people were likely to believe it and if the celebrity did or said something on TV or radio people were more likely to believe it as well. However, emotional perseverance retained positive feelings toward the celebrity regardless of the source of information. Essentially, people will believe what they want to …show more content…
In Wright et al.’s (1996) experiments, three studies were conducted to test theory perseverance and the group discussion effect. Study 1 involved 274 college undergraduates who were randomly assigned to two conditions (positive or negative) with four levels (immediate, delayed, transcript, or group discussion judgment). The participants were told to read the given information and case histories and answer the manipulation check question. They were then informed the information they read was fictitious. The first group immediately answered the questionnaire after being debriefed, the second group was told to read the questionnaire and take 7 minutes to think about their response before answering, the third group was given a transcript to read and 7 minutes to think about their answer before rating on a 1 (low/ negative) to 7 (high/ positive) scale what they thought the true relationship between risk preference and firefighter performance was, and the fourth group was given 7 minutes to discuss their judgment with their peers before answering the questionnaire. Using a Duncan’s multiple range test revealed that the positive and negative relationship answers differed as predicted in the first two levels
To test her hypothesis, Bui collected a final sample of 201 college students (149 Female, 52 Male) with ages from 18-58 (Mean = 21.05, Median = 19.5, SD = 4.97) using convenience and snowball sampling procedures and had them complete a survey that included demographic questions and a 5- item measure of belief perseverance. Consider- the – opposite and source credibility measures were included. After completing the survey the students were broken up into three categories: Those who believe, those who are unsure, and those who do not believe. To measure emotional perseverance two groups were created: unchanged feelings and changed feelings. A Chi square analysis showed significant differences in beliefs such as when family, friends, or the media reported negative information on their favorite celebrity, they were more likely to be unsure than have a definitive belief or disbelief. If the media caught the celebrity doing something more people were likely to believe it and if the celebrity did or said something on TV or radio people were more likely to believe it as well. However, emotional perseverance retained positive feelings toward the celebrity regardless of the source of information. Essentially, people will believe what they want to …show more content…
In Wright et al.’s (1996) experiments, three studies were conducted to test theory perseverance and the group discussion effect. Study 1 involved 274 college undergraduates who were randomly assigned to two conditions (positive or negative) with four levels (immediate, delayed, transcript, or group discussion judgment). The participants were told to read the given information and case histories and answer the manipulation check question. They were then informed the information they read was fictitious. The first group immediately answered the questionnaire after being debriefed, the second group was told to read the questionnaire and take 7 minutes to think about their response before answering, the third group was given a transcript to read and 7 minutes to think about their answer before rating on a 1 (low/ negative) to 7 (high/ positive) scale what they thought the true relationship between risk preference and firefighter performance was, and the fourth group was given 7 minutes to discuss their judgment with their peers before answering the questionnaire. Using a Duncan’s multiple range test revealed that the positive and negative relationship answers differed as predicted in the first two levels