HOW TO DEBUNK FALSEHOODS, TRIPPLE READING TASK

“Fed up with futile internet arguments, a bunch of psychologists investigated how best to correct false ideas. Tom Stafford discovers how to debunk properly”

By: To Stafford

Published: BBC, 13 November 2014, http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20141113-the-best-way-to-debunk-myths 

Level of difficulty:***

Note to the student: This activity comprises three related texts, the first and second of which are easier than the third – level *** - but the last one of which is difficult. The first two texts will, however, help with the last one making it easier to tackle. The writing task is tough too but should become easier if the reading activities are properly covered.

BEFORE YOU READ

·         Why do we cling to misguided opinions?

·         How can people be persuaded to give up cherished opinions?

·         Is it possible to change convictions?

TEXT 1: HOW TO DEBUNK FALSEHOODS 
QUESTIONS:

1.       Stephen Lewandowsky and John Cook’s purpose in carrying out their experiments was to try and discover ………………………………………….(2 answers, find both)

2.       Why do people cling to wrong beliefs despite evidence to the contrary? Because of…………………..

3.       The…………you know a person, the……………the backfire effect.

4.       In saying “Beliefs don’t work like that”, the writer means we can’t get people to abandon wrong ideas by only……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

5.       Johnson and Steifert proved in their experiments that……………………………………………………………….

6.       At what point in the discussion does the plausible alternative need to be mentioned?

TEXT 2: THE BEST WAY TO WIN AN ARGUMENT

By: Tom Stafford

Published: BBC, 21 May 2014, http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140521-the-best-way-to-win-an-argument

Level of difficulty:***

QUESTIONS

1.       Read the first paragraph of the text. What effect does this approach have?

2.       Acc. To Rozenblitt and Keil, the reason for the illusion of explanatory depth is the fact that …………………………..

3.       The cognitive miser theory holds that:

·         Our understanding of an issue may, in fact, be shallow

·         We feel it is more efficient to take mental shortcuts

·         It takes a special understanding to prove how wrong we are about our understanding

·         All of the above

·         None of the above

4.       Read Fernbach’s experiment carefully to the end. Why did those who provided reasons for their views remain sure that they were right? Because they didn’t………………………………………………….

TEXT 3: WHAT’S THE EVIDENCE ON USING RATIONAL ARGUMENT TO CHANGE PEOPLE’S MINDS?

By: Tom Stafford

Published: https://www.contributoria.com/issue/2014-05/5319c4add63a707e780000cd

Level of Difficulty: **** However, if the other two tasks, text 1 and text 2, are covered first, this will become easier.

QUESTIONS

1.       Read down as far as “Fortunately, as a cognitive scientist…” According to this section,

·         People are influenced by appearances T / F

·         There is a biological explanation for most mental activities. T / F

·         Our daily actions are similar to those of a skilled actor. T / F

·         We are rational beings. T / F

·         Personal characteristics and intuition play an important role in our lives. T / F

2.       We can surmise from the same section that the author thinks we are rational / irrational beings.

3.       Read the section on persuasion carefully. The fact that we twist arguments was verified in the capital punishment experiment because…………………………………………………………………………………….

4.       The above result proves the existence of……………………………………………………………………………………..

5.       The capital punishment experiment, the climate change experiment and others like it prove that humans are rational beings because the subjects in the said experiments are

·         Well educated and well read adults

·         Psychology students

·         Randomly selected participants with specific views

·         All of the above

·         None of the above

·         Other: please specify

6.       The writer considers the fact that the views of the subjects in the experiment didn’t change to be proof of ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

7.       Richard Petty’s experiment showed that it wasn’t ………………………….but………………………….that determined whether people changed their minds. The take home point from this research is that ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

8.       What is the reason for the popularity of the Wason Selection task and similar tasks testing the power of argument?

9.       The success rate on the Wason selection task is closely linked to: mark as many as you see fit.

·         The number of members in the group

·         Collaboration

·         Time allowed

·         Cooperation

10.   Why is social loafing not observed in experiments using mathematical problems?

11.   From experiments on “illusion of explanatory depth” we understand that ……………………………..is confused with……………………………………………………………

12.   Statistical reasons have been found to be more ineffective in changing opinions because they lack……………………………………………………………………………

13.   Why do you think the explanations group was more likely to shift their position compared to the reasons group? Open ended.

14.   Both in the case of the explanations group and deliberative polling ……………………………..are impossible and people end up with less entrenched views as they are…………………………………..

15.   What does “This theory” in the phrase “This theory connects with that of another important theorist of rationality” refer to? There are two answers, find both.

16.   What conclusion does the writer himself draw from Cialdiani’s “six factors which can help persuade other people”?

17.   Read Singer’s opinions to the end. A moral argument requires objectivity because……………………

18.   Acting completely objectively to persuade others can have two possible consequences. These are: ……………………………..

19.   The writer asks a question in the conclusion. What’s his answer? How do you know?

WRITING TASK

Based on all you have read, do you think humans are rational creatures or rationalizing creatures? Write an essay in which you defend your own opinions and refute the counter arguments.

HOW TO DEBUNK FALSEHOODS KEY AND TEACHER’S NOTES

This is a relatively straight forward article yet it is vital it be covered carefully in preparation for text3, which is tough. If carefully analyzed, these three texts will lead to a very challenging essay task.

1. A right way to correct someone when they believe something is wrong; OR, practical evidence based techniques for correcting misinformation.
2. The backfire effect
3. Less, greater
4. Telling people the evidence for the truth
5. Debunkers need to work with the fact psychological factors affect how we process information if they want the best chance of being believed.
6. At the beginning

THE BEST WAY TO WIN AN ARGUMENT KEY

1.       The persons on the receiving end hardens their existing position

2.       We mistake our familiarity with things for the belief that we understand how something works when in fact…

3.       All of the above

4.       Explain how the policy they were advocating would work.

TEXT 3: WHAT’S THE EVIDENCE ON USING RATIONAL ARGUMENT TO CHANGE PEOPLE’S MINDS? KEY

1.       T, T, T, F, F

2.       Rational

3.       The people who had pro-death penalty views found flaws and biases in anti death penalty views and vice versa. OR, the participants in the experiments ended up with more extreme views than they started with.

4.       The biased assimilation effect

5.       1, 2

6.       Rationality

7.       The strength of the argument but the involvement of the subjects; strong arguments can be persuasive but only when people are motivated to deliberate on the issue

8.       There is a right answer

9.       Collaboration and cooperation

10.   Groups in these experiments have a common goal, trust each other and are committed to the task. Furthermore, the solutions can be demonstrated to be correct.

11.   The ease with which we interact with these systems / our own knowledge

12.   Explanations, causal reasons

13.   Possible answer: The explanations group has to think in detail as opposed to just rattling off some reasons

14.   Knee-jerk reactions/ better informed, more willing to compromise and more aware of nuances

15.   That reason evolved to convince other people in arguments; the purpose of reason is to persuade others that we are right

16.   Maybe relying on these factors to judge whether you should be persuaded can lead to irrational mistakes, but in the long term, they might help distinguish more rational from less rational arguments.

17.   You need to advance a rule that the other people can agree to

18.   It can come back to bite you; it might even lead to conclusions you didn’t expect when you first formulated them

19.   A rational animal; reason has a quiet power