Ideological Extremism And Metacognition
Current political and social conflicts have forced researchers to not only shift their attention to what is happening, but also to how the brains of extremists work. Until now, we did not know if those who are for ideological extremism do so only when it comes to ideas and specific topics, or if it is something broader and more complex.
Recent studies show that it is likely that they do not do so on specific topics. Extremists can be radical in almost every aspect of your life, causing even more questions to arise. Is there a personality trait associated with this type of behavior? And what is ideological extremism really hiding?
The study we are talking about today focused on people who agree with a kind of ideological extremism and the relationship it has with metacognition. But first, what is metacognition? It is a process if people learn to reason through. It requires constant reflection and is the knowledge you have about the knowledge itself, about what you know and do not know.
The experiment on ideological extremism
Neuroscientist Steve Fleming and his team at University College London conducted a study to measure a test group’s ability to identify a defect.
The aim was to see if the individuals who had radical political views on things had developed dogmatic opinions because they were confident in their opinions, or if their beliefs, on the other hand, were the product of metacognition problems (their thoughts on their own way of thinking) .
Participants responded to surveys that measured their beliefs and political ideologies regarding alternative worldviews. From the results of the survey, the researchers identified those whose point of view was absolutely radical.
To measure metacognition
As soon as they had been classified, participants were asked to observe two pictures with small dots and find out which one had more dots.
Afterwards, they were asked to rate how confident they were in their answers. In fact, researchers paid them in cash to incentivize very precise answers.
Then they told the patients which picture had the most dots. The most radical individuals had trouble admitting that they were wrong, even when they received evidence to the contrary.
Reduced ability to accept new evidence
The results of Dr. Fleming’s research showed that radical people have a reduced ability to ask questions about the ideas they seem confident in.
Those who support strong ideological extremism show great resistance to changing their beliefs in the face of evidence that contradicts them. Thus, the ability to reflect on yourself and what you mean is directly related to the ability to add new evidence to previously established beliefs to make more accurate decisions.
Ideological extremism: The heavy burden of a rigid mind
The results of this study are very interesting. Making decisions based on dots is not very convincing: People do not feel that this is “personal”. Yet the most radical individuals defended their erroneous answers, ignoring the evidence completely.
This invites us all to reflect. This type of poor metacognition is a cognitive burden that extends to fields beyond politics. Other studies on the same subject seem to establish that those who have cognitive difficulties when adapting to change are more likely to be authoritarian and nationalistic. It seems that this translates into a sense of superiority of their own ideology.
José Manuel Sabucedo, Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Santiago de Compostela, dedicated many years of his academic life to studying authoritarianism. He says that authoritarian attitudes are directly linked to the concept called naive realism: When people blindly believe that reality is exactly as they perceive it.
