The source attribution effect: Demonstrating pernicious disagreement between ideological groups on non-divisive aphorisms

Paul H.P Hanel,Uwe Wolfradt,Gregory R Maio,Antony S.R Manstead

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2018.07.002

Abstract

We tested whether mere source attribution is sufficient to cause polarization between groups, even on consensual non-divisive positions. Across four studies (N = 2182), using samples from Germany, the UK, and the USA, agreement with aphorisms was high in the absence of source attribution. In contrast, atheists agreed less with brief aphorisms when they were presented as Bible verses (Studies 1 and 2), whereas Christians agreed more (Study 2). Democrats and Republicans (USA) and Labour supporters and Conservative supporters (UK) agreed more with politically non-divisive aphorisms that were presented as originating from a politician belonging to their own party (e.g., Clinton, Trump, Corbyn) than with the same aphorisms when they were presented as originating from a politician belonging to the rival party (Studies 3 and 4). This source attribution effect was not moderated by education, amount of thinking about the aphorisms, identification with the ingroup, trust, dissonance, fear of reproach, or attitude strength. We conclude that source attribution fundamentally interferes with epistemic progress in debate because of the way in which attributions of statements to sources powerfully affects reasoning about their arguments.

Highlights

In the present research, we examine whether agreement on uncontroversial, non-partisan issues is reduced by the simple knowledge that they are endorsed by “the other side”
This pattern of findings shows that British and American atheists have a specific dislike of the Bible, and may reflect the fact that Jews are not considered by atheists to be an especially relevant outgroup
Analysis of the quotes from Greek philosophers revealed a significant interaction, F(1, 762) = 13.25, p < .001, η G2 = 0.02, a significant main effect of worldview, F(1, 762) = 74.53, p < .001, η G2 = 0.09, and a significant main effect of source attribution, F (1, 762) = 9.01, p < .001, η G2 = 0.01. We found that both atheists and Christians were influenced by labeling aphorisms as originating from the Bible

Summary

Introduction

We examine whether agreement on uncontroversial, non-partisan issues is reduced by the simple knowledge that they are endorsed by “the other side”. There are increasingly distrustful and entrenched divisions between religious and political ideological groups. In the USA, differences in religious ideology are manifested in the lower trust felt toward atheists than other religious groups (e.g., Muslims; Edgell, Gerteis, & Hartmann, 2006). In 2014, atheists and Christians, especially Evangelical Christians, rated each other as the coldest group on a feeling thermometer (Lipka, 2014). There are remarkable differences in political ideology. 9% of US-American married couples consist of Democrat-Republican pairs (Rosenfeld, Reuben, & Maja Falcon, 2015), and the degree of political attitude concordance between spouses exceeds the concordance in personality and physical traits (Alford, Hatemi, Hibbing, Martin, & Eaves, 2011)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion