3 ms·
I don't see how this study is valid. Participants were shown "unfavorable stories [that] reported that the target was facing criminal charges". But is it nece
by MarkMc 8y ago
I don't see how this study is valid. Participants were shown "unfavorable stories [that] reported that the target was facing criminal charges". But is it necessarily bias to think that Trump is more likely to commit criminal behaviour before reading the story, and therefore more likely to think such a story is true?
If I see a story that "an unseeded female tennis player beat the top-seeded male tennis player" shouldn't I rate it less likely to be true than a story with the genders reversed?
- bscphil 8y agoI agree. This is why I said (below) that the study seems to measure susceptibility to believing fake news, not the rate at which one actually believes fake news. If one walks around with a liberal bias, one will believe some wrong things, and believe some fake news, but one will still be overall have more correct beliefs than someone who walks around with a conservative bias. (I would not call myself a liberal, for what it's worth - this is a point about the positions typically held by these two groups in US politics.)
- belorn 8y agoBecause we actually have data and some scientific understand about gender differences, that question is not very representative of bias. Change gender with race like: "an unseeded white player beat the top-seeded African American tennis player" - Should you rate it less likely to be true if the race was reversed? Trump vs Obama becomes less a bias test the more factual information a participant has. The test I can only guess assume that participants do not actually have factual information about either president, thus all being equal they should not have anything concrete to base a logic conclusion.