Social Exclusion Leads to Conspiratorial Thinking

After analyzing the data, the researcher’s hypothesis was confirmed: Social exclusion does lead to superstitious beliefs and, according to their statistical analyses, is likely the result of one searching for meaning in everyday experiences. NeuroscienceNews.com image is for illustrative purposes only.

Researchers report people who experience social exclusion are more likely to believe disinformation, fake news and conspiracies.

Recent polls have shown that many white, working-class people in America feel pushed out by society, a reason why many voted for President Donald Trump. Many of these supporters latched onto misinformation spread online, especially stories that justified their own beliefs.

New research may show why so many were willing to believe exaggerated and misleading reports. According to a Princeton University study published in the Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, social exclusion leads to conspiratorial thinking.

The two-part analysis — which did not specifically investigate Trump supporters, but two random samples of people — found that the feelings of despair brought on by social exclusion can cause people to seek meaning in miraculous stories, which may not necessarily be true.

Such conspiratorial thinking leads to a dangerous cycle, said co-lead author Alin Coman, assistant professor of psychology and public affairs at Princeton. When those with conspiratorial ideas share their beliefs, it can drive away family and friends, triggering even more exclusion. This may lead them to join conspiracy theory communities where they feel welcome, which in turn will further entrench their beliefs.



“Attempting to disrupt this cycle might be the best bet for someone interested in counteracting conspiracy theories at a societal level,” Coman said. “Otherwise, communities could become more prone to propagating inaccurate and conspiratorial beliefs.”

Coman published the study with Damaris Graeupner, a research assistant in Princeton’s Department of Psychology. For the first part of the study, they recruited 119 participants through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, a crowdsourcing internet marketplace.

Participants engaged in four phases. First, they were asked to write about a recent unpleasant event that involved a close friend. Next, they were asked to rate the degree to which they felt 14 different emotions, including exclusion, which was the emotion being analyzed.

They then were asked to complete a questionnaire that contained 10 statements and rank their agreement or disagreement using a seven-point scale from absolutely untrue to absolutely true. These statements included phrases like “I am seeking a purpose or mission for my life” and “I have discovered a satisfying life purpose.”

Finally, participants had to indicate the degree to which they endorsed three different conspiratorial beliefs ranging from one (not at all) to seven (extremely). These included the following statements: “Pharmaceutical companies withhold cures for financial reasons”; “Governments use messages below the level of awareness to influence people’s decisions”; and “Events in the Bermuda Triangle constitute evidence of paranormal activity.”

“We chose these particular conspiracy theories for their widespread appeal in the population,” Coman said. “These three are, indeed, endorsed by a significant portion of the American population.”

After analyzing the data, the researchers’ hypothesis was confirmed: Social exclusion does lead to superstitious beliefs and, according to their statistical analyses, is likely the result of one searching for meaning in everyday experiences.

“Those who are excluded may begin to wonder why they’re excluded in the first place, causing them to seek meaning in their lives. This may then lead them to endorse certain conspiracy beliefs,” Coman said. “When you’re included, it doesn’t necessarily trigger the same response.”



In the second part of the study, the researchers wanted to causally determine whether the degree to which someone was socially excluded influenced their conspiratorial beliefs. They recruited 120 participants, all of whom were Princeton University students

Participants were first asked to write two paragraphs describing themselves, one about “What it means to be me,” and another about “The kind of person I want to be.” They were told that these paragraphs would be given to two other participants in the room who would then rank whether they’d want to work with them.

Each of the three participants was then randomly selected to either be in the inclusion group (selected for collaboration in a subsequent task), the exclusion group (not selected for collaboration) or the control group (no instructions about selection). This was deceitful: The participants did not evaluate the other participants’ self-descriptions but instead descriptions created by the researchers. Finally, all participants went through the same four phases as the first study, which measured how social exclusion is linked to acceptance of conspiracy theories.

The second study replicated the findings of the first, providing solid experimental evidence that if a person feels excluded, they are more likely to hold conspiratorial beliefs.

In terms of policy, the findings highlight the need for inclusion, especially among populations at risk of exclusion.



“When developing laws, regulations, policies and programs, policymakers should worry about whether people feel excluded by their enactment,” Coman said. “Otherwise, we may create societies that are prone to spreading inaccurate and superstitious beliefs.
Source: Princeton University - NeuroscienceNews.com

YOUR INPUT IS MUCH APPRECIATED! LEAVE YOUR COMMENT BELOW.

Thinking With Our Hands Can Help Find New Ways to Solve Problems

Using objects when trying to solve problems may help to find new ways of finding a solution, researchers report.

Have you ever tried to solve a complicated math’s problem by using your hands, or shaped a piece of clay without planning it out in your head first? Understanding how we think and make decisions by interacting with the world around us could help businesses find new ways of improving productivity – and even improve people’s chances of getting a job, according to experts from Kingston University.

New research by Gaëlle Vallée-Tourangeau, Professor of Organisational Behaviour, and Frédéric Vallée-Tourangeau, Professor of Psychology, is challenging the traditional idea that thinking takes place strictly in the head. Instead, they are seeking to demonstrate how our decision making is heavily influenced by the world around us – and that using tools or objects when problem solving can spark new ways of finding solutions.

The idea that thinking is done only in the head is a convenient illusion that doesn’t reflect how problems are solved in reality, Professor Gaëlle Vallée-Tourangeau explained. “When you write or draw, the action itself makes you think differently,” she said. “In cognitive psychology you are trained to see the mind as a computer, but we’ve found that people don’t think that way in the real world. If you give them something to interact with they think in a different way.”



In a recently-published study in the Acta Psychologica Journal, the two Kingston University academics invited 50 participants to try and solve the problem of how to put 17 animals into four pens in such a way that there were an odd number of animals in each one.

The participants were split into two groups, with the first group able to build physical models with their hands and the second group tasked with using an electronic tablet and stylus to sketch out an answer. They found that the model-building participants were much more likely to find the solution – which requires designing an overlapping pen configuration – than those with the tablet.

“We showed with this study that for some types of problem – regardless of an individual’s cognitive ability – being able to physical interact with tools gave people a fighting chance of solving it,” said Professor Frédéric Vallée-Tourangeau. “By contrast, a pen and paper-type method almost guaranteed they wouldn’t be able to. It demonstrates how interacting with the world can really benefit people’s performance.”

The cognitive psychology experts have also been working on a new piece of research exploring how math’s anxiety – a debilitating emotional reaction to mental arithmetic that can lead sufferers to avoid even simple tasks like splitting a restaurant bill – could potentially be managed through interactivity.



The study now published in the Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications journal, involved asking people to speak a word repeatedly while doing long sums at the same time. It found that the mathematical ability of those asked to do the sums in their heads was more affected than those given number tokens that they could move with their hands.

However, the really interesting finding was how a person’s math anxiety affected the results, Professor Frédéric Vallée-Tourangeau said. “We found that for those adding the sums in their head, their math anxiety score predicted the magnitude of errors made while speaking a word repeatedly. If they’re really math anxious, the impact will be huge,” he explained. “But in a high interactivity context – when they were moving number tokens – they behaved as if they were not anxious about numbers.

“The horrible thing about math’s anxiety is that some people cope by completely avoiding math’s, which only worsens the problem. That’s what makes these findings really interesting. Trying to understand why the fear factor is eliminated or controlled to a manageable level when using your hands rather than just your head is the question we’re trying to get to the bottom of now.”

As well as potentially being of benefit when it comes to teaching, re-examining old ideas of how we think could have numerous practical applications, Professor Gaëlle Vallée-Tourangeau added. “If you look at recruitment, for example, a lot of assessment centers use classical intelligence tests when interviewing candidates. But depending on the type of work they are recruiting for, they may be missing out on the best people for the job.



“In business and management, all the models are using the old metaphor of decision making as information processing, which is something I think we need to overcome. We need to redefine how thinking occurs.”
Source: NEUROSCIENCE NEW, Source: Kingston University

YOUR INPUT IS MUCH APPRECIATED! LEAVE YOUR COMMENT BELOW.