分歧错位?与陌生人讨论政治分歧会产生意想不到的积极效果。

IF 4.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Psychological Science Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-28 DOI:10.1177/09567976241230005
Kristina A Wald, Michael Kardas, Nicholas Epley
{"title":"分歧错位?与陌生人讨论政治分歧会产生意想不到的积极效果。","authors":"Kristina A Wald, Michael Kardas, Nicholas Epley","doi":"10.1177/09567976241230005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Differences of opinion between people are common in everyday life, but discussing those differences openly in conversation may be unnecessarily rare. We report three experiments (<i>N =</i> 1,264 U.S.-based adults) demonstrating that people's interest in discussing important but potentially divisive topics is guided by their expectations about how positively the conversation will unfold, leaving them more interested in having a conversation with someone who agrees versus disagrees with them. People's expectations about their conversations, however, were systematically miscalibrated such that people underestimated how positive these conversations would be-especially in cases of disagreement. Miscalibrated expectations stemmed from underestimating the degree of common ground that would emerge in conversation and from failing to appreciate the power of social forces in conversation that create social connection. Misunderstanding the outcomes of conversation could lead people to avoid discussing disagreements more often, creating a misplaced barrier to learning, social connection, free inquiry, and free expression.</p>","PeriodicalId":20745,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"471-488"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Misplaced Divides? Discussing Political Disagreement With Strangers Can Be Unexpectedly Positive.\",\"authors\":\"Kristina A Wald, Michael Kardas, Nicholas Epley\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09567976241230005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Differences of opinion between people are common in everyday life, but discussing those differences openly in conversation may be unnecessarily rare. We report three experiments (<i>N =</i> 1,264 U.S.-based adults) demonstrating that people's interest in discussing important but potentially divisive topics is guided by their expectations about how positively the conversation will unfold, leaving them more interested in having a conversation with someone who agrees versus disagrees with them. People's expectations about their conversations, however, were systematically miscalibrated such that people underestimated how positive these conversations would be-especially in cases of disagreement. Miscalibrated expectations stemmed from underestimating the degree of common ground that would emerge in conversation and from failing to appreciate the power of social forces in conversation that create social connection. Misunderstanding the outcomes of conversation could lead people to avoid discussing disagreements more often, creating a misplaced barrier to learning, social connection, free inquiry, and free expression.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20745,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"471-488\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241230005\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241230005","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人与人之间的意见分歧在日常生活中司空见惯,但在谈话中公开讨论这些分歧却可能少之又少。我们报告了三项实验(N = 1,264 位美国成年人),结果表明,人们在讨论重要但可能引起分歧的话题时,其兴趣会受到他们对谈话将如何积极展开的预期的引导,从而使他们更有兴趣与同意或不同意他们观点的人进行交谈。然而,人们对谈话的预期被系统性地误判了,以至于人们低估了谈话的积极程度--尤其是在意见不一致的情况下。预期失准的原因是低估了谈话中出现的共同点的程度,以及没有认识到谈话中产生社会联系的社会力量的力量。对谈话结果的误解可能会导致人们更频繁地避免讨论分歧,从而对学习、社会联系、自由探究和自由表达造成错误的障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Misplaced Divides? Discussing Political Disagreement With Strangers Can Be Unexpectedly Positive.

Differences of opinion between people are common in everyday life, but discussing those differences openly in conversation may be unnecessarily rare. We report three experiments (N = 1,264 U.S.-based adults) demonstrating that people's interest in discussing important but potentially divisive topics is guided by their expectations about how positively the conversation will unfold, leaving them more interested in having a conversation with someone who agrees versus disagrees with them. People's expectations about their conversations, however, were systematically miscalibrated such that people underestimated how positive these conversations would be-especially in cases of disagreement. Miscalibrated expectations stemmed from underestimating the degree of common ground that would emerge in conversation and from failing to appreciate the power of social forces in conversation that create social connection. Misunderstanding the outcomes of conversation could lead people to avoid discussing disagreements more often, creating a misplaced barrier to learning, social connection, free inquiry, and free expression.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological Science
Psychological Science PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
13.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Psychological Science, the flagship journal of The Association for Psychological Science (previously the American Psychological Society), is a leading publication in the field with a citation ranking/impact factor among the top ten worldwide. It publishes authoritative articles covering various domains of psychological science, including brain and behavior, clinical science, cognition, learning and memory, social psychology, and developmental psychology. In addition to full-length articles, the journal features summaries of new research developments and discussions on psychological issues in government and public affairs. "Psychological Science" is published twelve times annually.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信