When Beliefs Yield to Evidence: Reducing Biased Evaluation by Affirming the Self

TLDR

People often cling to beliefs even when faced with disconfirming evidence, interpreting ambiguous information in a way that reinforces strongly held attitudes. The study aimed to test whether affirming an alternative source of self‑worth could reduce these defensive reactions. Participants were self‑affirmed before being presented with evidence challenging their views. Self‑affirmed participants were more persuaded by evidence against their capital‑punishment views, more critical of pro‑abortion arguments, and less confident in their own attitudes, suggesting that assimilation bias and resistance to persuasion are partly mediated by identity‑maintenance motivations.

Abstract

People often cling to beliefs even in the face of disconfirming evidence and interpret ambiguous information in a manner that bolsters strongly held attitudes. The authors tested a motivational account suggesting that these defensive reactions would be ameliorated by an affirmation of an alternative source of self-worth. Consistent with this interpretation, participants were more persuaded by evidence impugning their views toward capital punishment when they were self-affirmed than when they were not (Studies 1 and 2). Affirmed participants also proved more critical of an advocate whose arguments confirmed their views on abortion and less confident in their own attitudes regarding that issue than did unaffirmed participants (Study 3). Results suggest that assimilation bias and resistance to persuasion are mediated, in part, by identity-maintenance motivations.