00000caa a22000003i 4500 UP-1685594773861985448 Buklod 20150204090919.0 g||| | || || ta 160622s1979 xx r |||| u|eng d (iLib)UPBAG-00016087998 BAG rda eng Circulation-Monograph Lord, Charles G. author. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization the effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence Charles G. Lord, Lee Ross, and Mark R. Lepper. [Place of publication not identified] American Psychological Association, Inc. ©1979. 6 leaves illustrations 28 cm Includes bibliographical references. People who hold strong opinions on complex social issues are likely to examine relevant empirical evidence in a biased manner. They are apt to accept "confirming" evidence at face value while subjecting "disconfirming" evidence to critical evaluation, and, as a result, draw undue support for their initial positions from mixed or random empirical findings. Thus, the result of exposing contending factions in a social dispute to an identical body of relevant empirical evidence may be not a narrowing of disagreement but rather an increase in polarization. To test these assumptions, 48 undergraduates supporting and opposing capital punishment were exposed to 2 purported studies, one seemingly confirming and one seemingly disconfirming their existing beliefs about the deterrent efficacy of the death penalty. As predicted, both proponents and opponents of capital punishment rated those results and procedures that confirmed their own beliefs to be the more convincing and probative ones, and they reported corresponding shifts in their beliefs as the various results and procedures were presented. The net effect of such evaluations and opinion shifts was the postulated increase in attitude polarization. Discrimination. Capital punishment. Polarization (social sciences). Prejudices. Ross, Lee author. Lepper, Mark R. author. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Vol.37, No.11 (1979) : pages 2098-2109. FO UPBAG UPBAG-MAIN Circulation-Monograph Analytics