Think! Evidence

A Framework for Understanding How People Can Draw Different Conclusions Based on The Same Information

Show simple item record

dc.contributor Robert Ricketts
dc.contributor Jeremy Szteiter
dc.creator Schapiro, Evan
dc.date 2022-05-31T07:00:00Z
dc.date 2022-07-13T07:00:00Z
dc.date.accessioned 2024-04-18T06:25:16Z
dc.date.available 2024-04-18T06:25:16Z
dc.identifier https://scholarworks.umb.edu/cct_capstone/401
dc.identifier.uri https://evidence.thinkportal.org/handle/123456789/32545
dc.description <p>At least partially fueled by misinformation, political polarization is growing in the United States, leading to a breakdown of confidence in our traditional academic and political institutions. A popular belief is that a solution is to train people to think more rationally by eliminating the cognitive biases embedded in their subconscious thought patterns. This paper identifies the influences on my thinking and the framework used to look at these issues from a different perspective through methodological believing and the application of models of learning and conversation. The paper also points out that the methods of scientific inquiry often assume that problems have single knowable answers where objective truth is incontrovertible. However, many real-world problems include randomness, which can lead even rational thinkers to draw incorrect conclusions in some circumstances. Through this analysis, I suggest that cognitive biases should not be classified as flaws, but rather understood as pragmatic mechanisms that humans rely on for allocating limited cognitive bandwidth, and for prioritizing focus to balance the tradeoffs between accuracy and efficiency that most individuals face in their daily lives. The goal of this paper is not to propose solutions, but rather to identify a framework for a greater understanding of others, and for beginning to explore additional solutions. While education on rationality and information literacy are important tools to combat misinformation, I believe that additional tools and approaches are also needed.</p>
dc.subject Triple Loop Thinking
dc.subject debate
dc.subject dialogue
dc.subject Methodological Believing
dc.subject Cognitive Psychology
dc.subject Epistemology
dc.subject Interpersonal and Small Group Communication
dc.title A Framework for Understanding How People Can Draw Different Conclusions Based on The Same Information
dc.thesis Open Access Capstone
dc.thesis Master of Arts (MA)


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search Think! Evidence


Browse

My Account