| dc.description.abstract |
There is often a curious distinction between what the scientific community and the
general population believe to be true of dire scientific issues, and this skepticism
tends to vary markedly across groups. For instance, in the case of climate change,
Republicans (conservatives) are especially skeptical of the relevant science, particularly
when they are compared with Democrats (liberals). What causes such radical group differences?
We suggest, as have previous accounts, that this phenomenon is often motivated. However,
the source of this motivation is not necessarily an aversion to the problem, per se,
but an aversion to the solutions associated with the problem. This difference in underlying
process holds important implications for understanding, predicting, and influencing
motivated skepticism. In 4 studies, we tested this solution aversion explanation for
why people are often so divided over evidence and why this divide often occurs so
saliently across political party lines. Studies 1, 2, and 3— using correlational and
experimental methodologies— demonstrated that Republicans’ increased skepticism toward
environmental sciences may be partly attributable to a conflict between specific ideological
values and the most popularly discussed environmental solutions. Study 4 found that,
in a different domain (crime), those holding a more liberal ideology (support for
gun control) also show skepticism motivated by solution aversion.
|
|
