People who are dogmatic and stubborn about whether Firefox or Chrome works best for them might be closet climate change sceptics, according to new research.
This intriguing little nugget is one of many unearthed by researchers affiliated with the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, based in Washington DC. Many of the organisation's researchers have recently been attempting to unearth the psychological roots of global warming denial and other forms of science scepticism.
![How attached are you to the idea that you picked the best web browser?](/web/20170202125045im_/http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/g/t/o/l/l/6/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.gtxhzl.png/1486010447148.jpg)
Their discoveries present a challenge for scientists and activists pushing for forward momentum on major environmental challenges facing the world today, because the research suggests resistance to evidence isn't the result of poor education.
Climate change sceptics turn out to be often well educated and keenly interested in science. The difference arises in the way they process information. While scientists (and rational policy-makers) make decisions based on data, sceptics make decisions in ways that protect their personal beliefs.
"The deposition is to construe evidence in identity-congruent rather than truth-congruent ways, a state of disorientation that is pretty symmetric across the political spectrum," Professor Dan Kahan, of the Yale Law School, recently told the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Professor Troy Campbell, from the University of Oregon's business school, added: "We find that people will take a flight from facts to protect all kinds of belief, including their religious belief, their political beliefs, and even simple personal beliefs such as whether they are good at choosing a web browser."
Separate research, by researcher Caitlin Drummond, of Carnegie Mellon University at Pittsburgh, found a curious correlation between denialism and popularity.
Science topics that received a lot of media coverage — such as the big bang and stem cell research — resulted in marked political and religious division at odds with evidence. Less publicised, but equally important, topics such as nanotech and GMO food, showed much less disagreement.
Sadly, Ms Drummond's research, to be presented at a conference later this month, did not address the matter of browser choice.
1 comment
New User? Sign up