IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0171108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A massive experiment on choice blindness in political decisions: Confidence, confabulation, and unconscious detection of self-deception

Author

Listed:
  • Andrés Rieznik
  • Lorena Moscovich
  • Alan Frieiro
  • Julieta Figini
  • Rodrigo Catalano
  • Juan Manuel Garrido
  • Facundo Álvarez Heduan
  • Mariano Sigman
  • Pablo A Gonzalez

Abstract

We implemented a Choice Blindness Paradigm containing political statements in Argentina to reveal the existence of categorical ranges of introspective reports, identified by confidence and agreement levels, separating easy from very hard to manipulate decisions. CBP was implemented in both live and web-based forms. Importantly, and contrary to what was observed in Sweden, we did not observe changes in voting intentions. Also, confidence levels in the manipulated replies where significantly lower than in non-manipulated cases even in undetected manipulations. We name this phenomenon unconscious detection of self-deception. Results also show that females are more difficult to manipulate than men.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrés Rieznik & Lorena Moscovich & Alan Frieiro & Julieta Figini & Rodrigo Catalano & Juan Manuel Garrido & Facundo Álvarez Heduan & Mariano Sigman & Pablo A Gonzalez, 2017. "A massive experiment on choice blindness in political decisions: Confidence, confabulation, and unconscious detection of self-deception," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0171108
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0171108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171108
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171108&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0171108?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Arceneaux, 2012. "Cognitive Biases and the Strength of Political Arguments," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(2), pages 271-285, April.
    2. Diego E Shalom & Maximiliano G de Sousa Serro & Maximiliano Giaconia & Luis M Martinez & Andres Rieznik & Mariano Sigman, 2013. "Choosing in Freedom or Forced to Choose? Introspective Blindness to Psychological Forcing in Stage-Magic," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-9, March.
    3. Lars Hall & Thomas Strandberg & Philip Pärnamets & Andreas Lind & Betty Tärning & Petter Johansson, 2013. "How the Polls Can Be Both Spot On and Dead Wrong: Using Choice Blindness to Shift Political Attitudes and Voter Intentions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-6, April.
    4. Jacob Feldman, 2000. "Minimization of Boolean complexity in human concept learning," Nature, Nature, vol. 407(6804), pages 630-633, October.
    5. Lars Hall & Petter Johansson & Thomas Strandberg, 2012. "Lifting the Veil of Morality: Choice Blindness and Attitude Reversals on a Self-Transforming Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(9), pages 1-8, September.
    6. Somerville, Jason & McGowan, Féidhlim, 2016. "Can chocolate cure blindness? Investigating the effect of preference strength and incentives on the incidence of Choice Blindness," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-11.
    7. Saiegh, Sebastián M., 2015. "Using Joint Scaling Methods to Study Ideology and Representation: Evidence from Latin America," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 363-384, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Strandberg & Jay A Olson & Lars Hall & Andy Woods & Petter Johansson, 2020. "Depolarizing American voters: Democrats and Republicans are equally susceptible to false attitude feedback," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lotta Stille & Emelie Norin & Sverker Sikström, 2017. "Self-delivered misinformation - Merging the choice blindness and misinformation effect paradigms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-17, March.
    2. Thomas Strandberg & Jay A Olson & Lars Hall & Andy Woods & Petter Johansson, 2020. "Depolarizing American voters: Democrats and Republicans are equally susceptible to false attitude feedback," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Somerville, Jason & McGowan, Féidhlim, 2016. "Can chocolate cure blindness? Investigating the effect of preference strength and incentives on the incidence of Choice Blindness," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Joshua S. Rule & Steven T. Piantadosi & Andrew Cropper & Kevin Ellis & Maxwell Nye & Joshua B. Tenenbaum, 2024. "Symbolic metaprogram search improves learning efficiency and explains rule learning in humans," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Patricio Navia & Lucas Perelló & Vaclav Masek, 2022. "Demand without supply? Mass partisanship, ideological attachments, and the puzzle of Guatemala's electoral market failure," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 25(2), pages 99-120, June.
    6. Mi, Yunlong & Wang, Zongrun & Quan, Pei & Shi, Yong, 2024. "A semi-supervised concept-cognitive computing system for dynamic classification decision making with limited feedback information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 315(3), pages 1123-1138.
    7. Arthur Cheng-Hsui Chen & Hsiu-Hui Wu, 2020. "How Should Green Messages Be Framed: Single or Double?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-16, May.
    8. Patrick O. Waeber & Natasha Stoudmann & James D. Langston & Jaboury Ghazoul & Lucienne Wilmé & Jeffrey Sayer & Carlos Nobre & John L. Innes & Philip Fernbach & Steven A. Sloman & Claude A. Garcia, 2021. "Choices We Make in Times of Crisis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.
    9. J. Gerard Wolff, 2019. "Information Compression as a Unifying Principle in Human Learning, Perception, and Cognition," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-38, February.
    10. Iris Stucki & Fritz Sager, 2018. "Aristotelian framing: logos, ethos, pathos and the use of evidence in policy frames," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 373-385, September.
    11. König Pascal D., 2020. "Why Digital-Era Political Marketing is Not the Death Knell for Democracy: On the Importance of Placing Political Microtargeting in the Context of Party Competition," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 87-110, June.
    12. Wittels, Annabelle Sophie, 2020. "The effect of politician-constituent conflict on bureaucratic responsiveness under varying information frames," SocArXiv 4x8q2, Center for Open Science.
    13. Theocharis, Zoe & Harvey, Nigel, 2019. "When does more mean worse? Accuracy of judgmental forecasting is nonlinearly related to length of data series," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 10-19.
    14. Luke Fowler & Stephen Utych, 2021. "Are people better employees than machines? Dehumanizing language and employee performance appraisals," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 2006-2019, July.
    15. Royce Carroll & Hiroki Kubo, 2018. "Polarization and ideological congruence between parties and supporters in Europe," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 247-265, July.
    16. J David Smith & Shawn W Ell, 2015. "One Giant Leap for Categorizers: One Small Step for Categorization Theory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    17. Danny Hayes & Jennifer L. Lawless & Gail Baitinger, 2014. "Who Cares What They Wear? Media, Gender, and the Influence of Candidate Appearance," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1194-1212, December.
    18. Heo, Cindy Yoonjoung & Kim, Bona & Park, Kwangsoo & Back, Robin M., 2022. "A comparison of Best-Worst Scaling and Likert Scale methods on peer-to-peer accommodation attributes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 368-377.
    19. Kevin E. Levay & Jeremy Freese & James N. Druckman, 2016. "The Demographic and Political Composition of Mechanical Turk Samples," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(1), pages 21582440166, March.
    20. Cheung, Tracy & Junghans, Astrid & Dijsterhuis, Garmt & Kroese, Floor & Johansson, Petter & Hall, Lars & De Ridder, Denise, 2015. "C(l)ue Me In - Enhancing Consumers' Attention to Ingredient List Information," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202723, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0171108. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.