The Backfire Effect - Why you'll never win a debate online

[Sachinism]

The Misconception: When your beliefs are challenged with facts, you alter your opinions and incorporate the new information into your thinking. The Truth: When your deepest convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, your beliefs get stronger. A bit of info on the backfire effect and how it works.

Once something is added to your collection of beliefs, you protect it from harm. You do it instinctively and unconsciously when confronted with attitude-inconsistent information. Just as confirmation bias shields you when you actively seek information, the backfire effect defends you when the information seeks you, when it blindsides you. Coming or going, you stick to your beliefs instead of questioning them. When someone tries to correct you, tries to dilute your misconceptions, it backfires and strengthens them instead. Over time, the backfire effect helps make you less skeptical of those things which allow you to continue seeing your beliefs and attitudes as true and proper.

Have you ever noticed the peculiar tendency you have to let praise pass through you, but feel crushed by criticism? A thousand positive remarks can slip by unnoticed, but one “you suck” can linger in your head for days. One hypothesis as to why this and the backfire effect happens is that you spend much more time considering information you disagree with than you do information you accept. Information which lines up with what you already believe passes through the mind like a vapor, but when you come across something which threatens your beliefs, something which conflicts with your preconceived notions of how the world works, you seize up and take notice. Some psychologists speculate there is an evolutionary explanation. Your ancestors paid more attention and spent more time thinking about negative stimuli than positive because bad things required a response. Those who failed to address negative stimuli failed to keep breathing.

Now this part I found very interesting, maybe due to its something I already believed in () Its the reason I tend not to get involved in debates online anymore as I know where they're heading

The last time you got into, or sat on the sidelines of, an argument online with someone who thought they knew all there was to know about health care reform, gun control, gay marriage, climate change, sex education, the drug war, Joss Whedon or whether or not 0.9999 repeated to infinity was equal to one – how did it go? Did you teach the other party a valuable lesson? Did they thank you for edifying them on the intricacies of the issue after cursing their heretofore ignorance, doffing their virtual hat as they parted from the keyboard a better person? No, probably not. Most online battles follow a similar pattern, each side launching attacks and pulling evidence from deep inside the web to back up their positions until, out of frustration, one party resorts to an all-out ad hominem nuclear strike. If you are lucky, the comment thread will get derailed in time for you to keep your dignity, or a neighboring commenter will help initiate a text-based dogpile on your opponent. What should be evident from the studies on the backfire effect is you can never win an argument online. When you start to pull out facts and figures, hyperlinks and quotes, you are actually making the opponent feel as though they are even more sure of their position than before you started the debate. As they match your fervor, the same thing happens in your skull. The backfire effect pushes both of you deeper into your original beliefs.

Look at all the times you've debated online, notice any similarities... If anyone wants to read the full article: http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/10/the-backfire-effect/

[Prakat]

good one.

[CSK Fan]

Well most debates are for the benifits of neutral/not so neutral readers and not for the ones debating

[Raghav_12]

I think my signature below summarises well about winning and losing of debates.

[Sidhoni]

^ gr8 signature :two_thumbs_up: :nice: article, very true

[achilles]

Wonderful article and signature.

[bulbul]

most debates Online are to satisfy Individual EGO more than affection towards subject..

[Dhondy]

Of all the greatest mismatches, the most damaging is that between time and work. If you have a lot of work and very little time, that's good- all your energies are focused on completing the job and very little is wasted. The bad mismatch arises with the reverse- a job that doesn't demand your full and unceasing attention, or worse- no job at all. Job can be employment or studies- so this includes students. Spare time takes the path of least resistance- internet. Brain in 4th gear, idle debates, nothing at stake, clock-watching. It kills the soul and demeans you. You are looking for some crumbs of comfort that this is time well spent- so any e-accolades are most welcome. It's a kind of sop to the guilty conscience that's screaming out at you at your profligacy with time. Fortunately, my profession keeps me at an equivalent of a dog doing a perpetual long distance run, tongue hanging out, trying to catch the ever diminishing breath....most of the time. A struggle just to stay alive. Unfortunately, on days like this, with time to kill, the old Dhondy comes out- dispensing unwanted wisdom, hoping for a pat on the back, missing out on a chance to read up the latest articles in journals bought with hard earned money. It's a slippery slope guys- be warned.

[f.b.m]

Of all the greatest mismatches, the most damaging is that between time and work. If you have a lot of work and very little time, that's good- all your energies are focused on completing the job and very little is wasted. The bad mismatch arises with the reverse- a job that doesn't demand your full and unceasing attention, or worse- no job at all. Job can be employment or studies- so this includes students. Spare time takes the path of least resistance- internet. Brain in 4th gear, idle debates, nothing at stake, clock-watching. It kills the soul and demeans you. You are looking for some crumbs of comfort that this is time well spent- so any e-accolades are most welcome. It's a kind of sop to the guilty conscience that's screaming out at you at your profligacy with time. Fortunately, my profession keeps me at an equivalent of a dog doing a perpetual long distance run, tongue hanging out, trying to catch the ever diminishing breath....most of the time. A struggle just to stay alive. Unfortunately, on days like this, with time to kill, the old Dhondy comes out- dispensing unwanted wisdom, hoping for a pat on the back, missing out on a chance to read up the latest articles in journals bought with hard earned money. It's a slippery slope guys- be warned.

But isnt this idle time (which isnt quite the same as 'leisure time') worth it in some way? I dont mean the pointless online wars but actually watching/reading stuff on random subjects that might catch the eye.

[Brainfade]

Of all the greatest mismatches, the most damaging is that between time and work. If you have a lot of work and very little time, that's good- all your energies are focused on completing the job and very little is wasted. The bad mismatch arises with the reverse- a job that doesn't demand your full and unceasing attention, or worse- no job at all. Job can be employment or studies- so this includes students. Spare time takes the path of least resistance- internet. Brain in 4th gear, idle debates, nothing at stake, clock-watching. It kills the soul and demeans you. You are looking for some crumbs of comfort that this is time well spent- so any e-accolades are most welcome. It's a kind of sop to the guilty conscience that's screaming out at you at your profligacy with time. Fortunately, my profession keeps me at an equivalent of a dog doing a perpetual long distance run, tongue hanging out, trying to catch the ever diminishing breath....most of the time. A struggle just to stay alive. Unfortunately, on days like this, with time to kill, the old Dhondy comes out- dispensing unwanted wisdom, hoping for a pat on the back, missing out on a chance to read up the latest articles in journals bought with hard earned money. It's a slippery slope guys- be warned.

You want a pat on the back, Doc? Here you go - Doc, you da man (or woman ... who knows for sure?). This is why I rue the summers. As an academic, the summer is a time for me to teach one course and work on long-term projects without the burden of daily deadlines. And that turns me into a procrastinating, prolific ICFer. Once August comes around, and there are papers to be finished and sylabbi to be made, and students to be helped, I will disappear like LeBron James in an NBA final!

[ganeshran]

I have seen that people who are too emotionally attached to a debate topic are never even able to carry on a conversation for a long time because their emotion getting the better of them.

[akshayxyz]

- Wise men argue cases, fools decide them.

[zen]

This is true to an extent, i.e. the more you argue for something, the more you convince your own self. Many argue their cases because they have a certain opinion on a subject. Once you start debating your emotional investment increases whereby your beliefs gets strengthened. You also do some research to support your views, which will make you believe in what you believe even more In a way, parallels can be drawn to how you get attracted to someone. For e.g., there is a girl and you think she is beautiful but not drop dead gorgeous. The more you see her, she starts to appear more and more beautiful. If you develop emotions, then the feeling only gets stronger. As they say the beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder

[akshayxyz]

^ And wise men are flexible enough to change their stand when presented with counter-indicating facts. Purpose of debate should not be win or loss, instead progress of knowledge, exchange of facts, (and yes many times plain simple trolling). The moment when you start thinking in terms of win loss, you tend to do what you just wrote...that should explain a bit about difference in your approach and the way I have seen I / few-others do it.

[zen]

^ And wise men are flexible enough to change their stand when presented with counter-indicating facts. Purpose of debate should not be win or loss, instead progress of knowledge, exchange of facts, (and yes many times plain simple trolling). The moment when you start thinking in terms of win loss, you tend to do what you just wrote...that should explain a bit about difference in your approach and the way I have seen I / few-others do it.

Talking about me, personally, usually I know both sides so the chances of someone opening my eyes (at least for online discussions) is less .... For online debates, usually, I decide which side I want to be on depending upon the balance and my interest at that point .... I may write against something here and defend the same point at some other place Sometimes, I like to practise coming out of tough situations or where majority of population is of a different opinion (and if it is not spot IMO on then it's even better). What better place to practise that than online? How you debate, what you debate or discuss depends upon a lot of factors

[ravishingravi]

Fair article.

[zen]

To add, this article is more relevant to those who come off on line like they are in the real world (which is a boring thing to do somewhat).... Online world is so versatile and also allows you to play different roles. To experiment, it is not even bad to take up a position that is dfferent from your viewpoint. In that way, at least you are making an effort yourself (rather than waiting for someone to open your eyes) to see different sides of things .... Online, realistically, you have nothing to lose. People travel to different parts to experience different things, while online, you can get different experiences and learn to see different things without even leaving your home :winky:

[zen]

If you are talking about the various SRT vs threads that you participate in .... they aren't any real "debates" to begin with. You simply don't have the necessary discipline and honesty to indulge in a meaningfull / mature debate. In fact I dont even think you come here to debate in the first place.

That's your opinion to which I dont agree. I have my opinion too but I don't think this is a place to go into that .... But I appreciate the database of stats you have built on SRT

[Sachin=GOD]

“Discussion is an exchange of knowledge; argument is an exchange of ignorance”

[zen]

Of all the greatest mismatches, the most damaging is that between time and work. If you have a lot of work and very little time, that's good- all your energies are focused on completing the job and very little is wasted. The bad mismatch arises with the reverse- a job that doesn't demand your full and unceasing attention, or worse- no job at all. Job can be employment or studies- so this includes students. Spare time takes the path of least resistance- internet. Brain in 4th gear, idle debates, nothing at stake, clock-watching. It kills the soul and demeans you. You are looking for some crumbs of comfort that this is time well spent- so any e-accolades are most welcome. It's a kind of sop to the guilty conscience that's screaming out at you at your profligacy with time. Fortunately, my profession keeps me at an equivalent of a dog doing a perpetual long distance run, tongue hanging out, trying to catch the ever diminishing breath....most of the time. A struggle just to stay alive. Unfortunately, on days like this, with time to kill, the old Dhondy comes out- dispensing unwanted wisdom, hoping for a pat on the back, missing out on a chance to read up the latest articles in journals bought with hard earned money. It's a slippery slope guys- be warned.

Good post Reminds me of the tons of stuff I have to go over too .... But here I am posting