Violent intimidation or peaceful protest?

Nov 2007
1,794
915
Prague, Czech Republic
#1
Just read something which made me think of this forum, in light of how much time is spent in endless partisan bickering over things like an old man arguing with some children, and who was at fault.

The article is from the Stanford Law Review, and was all about how ideology influences our interpretation of events (and the legal implications of this, but that's not what I wanted to point out).

What they did was take a video of some people protesting, who were dispersed by the police; and showed it to participants in a study. They told participants that the protestors were suing the police for infringing on their rights; and asked them to imagine themselves as jurors deciding on the case. The people were divided into two groups, and both came to about the same conclusions about police liability. Below shows the percentage of participants in each group which agreed with the various statements they were asked to judge on:

1550603325580.png

So why is this interesting? Well, there was a significant difference in how people's ideology affected their viewpoints. Conservatives were significantly more likely to find the police at fault in the first case while, by contrast, liberals were significantly more likely to fault the police in the second case.

Why would this be so? Well, the experimenters lied to people about what they protest was actually about. The first group were informed it was an anti-abortion protest outside an abortion clinic; the second that it was a protest outside a military recruitment centre against the 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy'.

It's healthy to reflect on our own cognitive biases sometimes.
 
Jul 2011
55,806
10,877
NYC/Москва
#4
Just read something which made me think of this forum, in light of how much time is spent in endless partisan bickering over things like an old man arguing with some children, and who was at fault.


YOu mean a stolen valor fake vietnam veteran who harrassed some minors?