People who claim superior beliefs
exaggerate their own knowledge
University of Michigan
No one likes smug
know- it-all friends, relatives or co-workers who believe their knowledge and
beliefs are superior to others.
But now these
discussions at the dinner table, bar or office might be less annoying. A new
University of Michigan study indicates what many people suspect: these
know-it-all people are especially prone to overestimating what they actually
know.
Even after getting
feedback showing them how much they didn't know relevant political facts, these
people still claimed that their beliefs were objectively more correct than
everyone else's. On top of that, they were more likely to seek out new
information in biased ways that confirm their sense of superiority.
The study focused on
people who profess "belief superiority" -- or thinking their views
are superior to other viewpoints -- as it relates to political issues.
The researchers noted that people also claim belief superiority in a variety of other domains besides politics, such as the environment, religion, relationship conflicts, and even relatively trivial topics such as etiquette and personal preferences.
The researchers noted that people also claim belief superiority in a variety of other domains besides politics, such as the environment, religion, relationship conflicts, and even relatively trivial topics such as etiquette and personal preferences.
The research used
several studies to answer two key questions about political belief superiority:
Do people who think that their beliefs are superior have more knowledge about
the issues they feel superior about? And do belief-superior people use superior
strategies when seeking out new knowledge?
To answer the first
question, participants reported their beliefs and feelings of belief
superiority about several political topics. Researchers asked them how much
they thought they knew about these topics and then had them complete quizzes
testing their actual knowledge about those issues.
Across six studies and
several political topics, people who were high in belief superiority thought
that they knew a great deal about these topics. However, when comparing this
perceived knowledge to how much people actually knew, they found that belief-superior
people were consistently overestimating their own knowledge.
"Whereas more
humble participants sometimes even underestimated their knowledge, the belief
superior tended to think they knew a lot more than they actually did,"
said Michael Hall, a psychology graduate student and the study's lead author.
For the second
question, researchers presented participants with news articles about a
political topic and asked them to select which ones they would like to read.
Half of the articles supported the participants' own point of view, whereas the
other half challenged their position.
Belief-superior people
were significantly more likely than their modest peers to choose information
that supported their beliefs. Furthermore, they were aware that they were seeking
out biased information: when the researchers asked them what type of articles
they had chosen, they readily admitted their bias for articles that supported
their own beliefs.
"We thought that
if belief-superior people showed a tendency to seek out a balanced set of
information, they might be able to claim that they arrived at their belief
superiority through reasoned, critical thinking about both sides of the
issue," Hall said.
Instead, researchers
found that these individuals strongly preferred information that supported
their views, indicating that they were probably missing out on opportunities to
improve their knowledge.
So why do people seem
to shun opposing viewpoints? Researchers suggest that while some people insist
that they are always right, all of us feel good when the beliefs we think are
important are confirmed.
In other words, when a
belief is strongly held, is tied to one's identity or values, or is held with a
sense of moral conviction, people are more likely to distance themselves from information
and people that challenge their belief.
"Having your
beliefs validated feels good, whereas having your beliefs challenged creates
discomfort, and this discomfort generally increases when your beliefs are
strongly held and important to you," said Kaitlin Raimi, U-M assistant
professor of public policy and the study's co-author.