Negative Bias

Most of our human problems, not caused by nature are the result of our emotions in relationship to other people or environment. Most of those are due to negative reasoning. Once a person understands that fully, the simplest answer is to intend to be mindful of others and nature. The only thing that stands in the way of our working together is our emotions. Below is the partial explanation.

Conformity is the tendency to align one’s attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors with those of a group around them. Studies suggest that conformity may evolve in childhood and become stronger with age. The need to belong to a group and conform is presumed to be genetic. This often leads us to imitate what others do while following the majority opinion, and conforming to the common standards of behavior that are implicitly agreed upon by society.  The positive side of conformity helps to give us a sense of belonging, an opportunity to be part of a group that we approve of while helping us with our communications, interactions, following instructions, social norms, ethics, and rules through cohesiveness. So conformity helps us to form a sense of identity and security.

On the negative side, conformity can stifle creativity and lead people to give in to destructive peer pressures. A negative consequence of group conformity is the formation of outgroups or groups that we view as fundamentally different from us. Outgroup bias is a form of cognitive bias that causes us to hold negative attitudes toward outgroups. These negative behaviors can also lead to mob mentality, gangs, terrorism, and war.

Some examples of negative group bias and negative conformity are;

•  The Stanford Prison Experiment: A famous psychological study that showed how ordinary people can conform to the roles of prisoners and guards, and behave in cruel and abusive ways.
• The Milgram Experiment: Another famous psychological study that showed how people can conform to the authority of an experimenter, and inflict electric shocks on a learner, even when they hear screams of pain. A real life example is thee Abu Ghraib prison scandal was a case of human rights violations and war crimes committed by US soldiers and intelligence officers against Iraqi detainees in 2003 and 2004. The abuse included physical and sexual torture, humiliation, and killing 
• The Jonestown Massacre: A tragic event that occurred in 1978, when over 900 members of a cult called the Peoples Temple committed mass suicide or murder, following the orders of their leader, Jim Jones.
• The Rwandan Genocide, a horrific event that occurred in 1994, when over 800,000 people, mostly from the Tutsi ethnic group, were killed by the Hutu majority, who were incited by propaganda and hate speech.
• The genocide in Gaza 2023. A massacre of civilians in Israel subsequently led to an Israeli attack on Palestinians. 
• Problems associated with biodiversity and climate change have led to a cognitive bias in opposition and climate denialism.

The rise of authoritarianism is a global phenomenon that is happening in the present day, when many people are supporting leaders who are oppressive, corrupt, or violent, and who undermine democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.

Ashe Conformity study

In the original Conformity study, Solomon Ash arranged to have participants match the length of a line with one of three comparison lines. However, they were surrounded by confederates who gave the same wrong answer on some trials. The first study revealed that, on average, 33% of participants and 38% in the 2nd study conformed incorrectly to the majority opinion across all the 12 critical trials. Moreover, 75% of the participants conformed at least once. This showed that people would discount their own perceptions in favor of conforming to the group. The study also demonstrated that people trusted following a group more than they were certain of what they witnessed as truth.  In 2023, the study was replicated yielding very similar results. 

“Much of the time, it is in the interest of the individual to follow the crowd, but in the social interest for individuals to say and do what they think best” - Cass Sunstein

According to Sunstein, "When people find themselves in groups of like-minded types, they are especially likely to move to extremes. And when such groups include authorities who tell group members what to do, or put them into certain social roles, very bad things happen."  ― pg 2 Cass Sunstein "Going to Extremes."

Conformity can potentially reduce the motivation and opportunity to think critically.   

When people conform, they often rely on the opinions or judgments of others, rather than their own reasoning or evidence. People may also avoid challenging or questioning the group’s views, for fear of being rejected or punished. This can lead to a loss of individuality, creativity, and curiosity.

Different cultures have their own norms and expectations, which create a sense of harmony within each group. However, these norms and expectations can vary widely across different cultures and groups. The word culture implies conformity to the group’s standards. The pressure to conform in Asian countries, for instance is greater than in countries like the U.S., Australia, U.K. and New Zealand where there is more support for individuality. 

Critical points to understand:

As we grow older, the pressure to conform increases. Sunstein points out that people who have uncertainty tend to moderate and avoid extremes while surrounding oneself with like-minded people tends to lead to confirmation bias and greater susceptibility to extremes. Sunstein reported "You will become more confident that you are correct and be more likely to move in an extreme direction." "The power of conformity and cascades has deep implications for political polarization." 

 Sunstein defines social cascades as “large-scale social movements in which many people end up thinking something, or doing something, because of the beliefs or actions of a few early movers” (Sunstein, 2023, p. 34). So many people end up thinking, believing and acting, based on the beliefs and actions of others of choice or others they trust. He refers to informational and reputational cascades. 

• Informational cascades: People rely on the information conveyed by others or from people in the group that they trust, rather than their own private information. 
• Reputational cascades:  People infer how others will judge them based on their beliefs or actions. People want to avoid being criticized or ostracized by their preferred group members while attempting to gain their approval and respect.

One factor that is apparent to me with regard to group cohesiveness and conformity is that the impact of emotional attachment to a chosen group may influence a person's emotional feelings regarding their relationships to others and to the environment based on the influence to conform to norms and standards of the preferred group.  That attachment can lead to emotional reasoning favoring a chosen group instead of actively seeking out independent truth, and reason for making the best decisions. One way to avoid those hazards mentioned above is to use critical thinking skills. In Wikipedia under conformity, it is stated, "With the appropriate environmental influence, conforming in early childhood years, allows one to learn and thus, adopt the appropriate behaviors necessary to interact and develop "correctly" within one's society. So clearly, teaching critical thinking skills and an understanding of negative groupthink while discouraging participation in groupthink is essential to every child's healthy development.

Conformity can potentially reduce the motivation and opportunity to think critically. When people conform, as stated they may rely on the opinions or judgments of others, rather than their own reasoning or evidence. People may also avoid challenging or questioning the group’s views, for fear of being rejected or punished. This can lead to a loss of individuality, creativity, and curiosity. And that leads to groupthink.

Normative conformity is a term used in psychology to describe the tendency to behave in certain ways in order to be accepted by a group and to avoid being rejected. Studies indicated that "in situations where the group is clearly wrong, such as when they give an incorrect answer to an obvious question, some people will still conform to the group’s answer, even if they know it is wrong."(Wikipedia, conformity). Conformity will be motivated by normative influence; the participants will conform in order to be accepted by the group.    

There was clear evidence that in Nazi Germany people conformed because they wanted to avoid being rejected, persecuted, or executed by the authorities or their peers. But also because they were influenced by propaganda, fear, and group pressure.  This resulted in a massive violation of human rights and a devastating war that cost millions of lives.  

Social media:

Social media has been the platform for group polarization, making it easier for people to be radicalized and to participate in like-minded thinking potentially leading to extremes. "With the Internet, it is exceedingly easy for each of us to find like-minded types." pg 81 Cass Sunstein "Going to Extremes."

• In Myanmar, Facebook was used to spread disinformation and hate speech against the Rohingya minority, which contributed to the persecution and genocide of the ethnic group.
• In the U.S., social media platforms were used to organize and mobilize the rioters who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, in an attempt to overturn the presidential election results.
• In India, social media platforms were used to spread rumors and incite mob violence against people accused of kidnapping children or slaughtering cows.
• In Nigeria, social media platforms were used to amplify the #EndSARS protests against police brutality, but also to spread misinformation and propaganda that fueled tensions and violence.
• In France, social media platforms were used to radicalize and recruit members of terrorist groups such as ISIS, who carried out several deadly attacks in the country.

 
Critical thinking (Wikipedia): is the ability to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information in an objective and rational way.  (Click here to go to positive reasoning - critical thinking)

Groupthink is not a fallacy, but rather an informal fallacy that occurs when a group of well-intentioned people make irrational or non-optimal decisions spurred by the urge to conform or the belief that dissent is impossible. It is important to recognize the situations in which groupthink is most likely to occur, such as when groups feel threatened or when decision-making is rushed. But groupthink and groupthink hysteria are psychological phenomena that occur when people in a group conform to a common opinion or belief, sometimes at the expense of their own critical thinking or rationality. Individual reactive nature is the tendency to change one’s behavior or attitude based on the presence or expectations of others. These concepts are related because they both involve the influence of social pressure and the desire for acceptance or belonging.  Cognitive dissonance is the uncomfortable feeling that arises when one’s actions or beliefs are inconsistent with one’s values or self-image.  To reduce this feeling, people may either change their actions or beliefs to match their values or self-image, or rationalize their actions or beliefs to justify the inconsistency.  groupthink and individual reactive nature can both result from the motivation to avoid or reduce cognitive dissonance.   Groupthink hysteria is an extreme form of groupthink that involves collective fear, anxiety, or panic mostly is the explanation for all of the groupthink behaviors listed below. In a nutshell, it is collective negative reasoning or bias resulting in negative emotional reasoning. So, in one sense, the negative behavior is mostly a consequence of not recognizing alternate or better options. It can also be influenced by individual reactive nature, as people may react more strongly or emotionally to a perceived threat or danger when they are in a group. 

To minimize the risk of groupthink, it’s critical to allow enough time for issues to be fully discussed and for as many group members as possible to share their thoughts. When dissent is encouraged, groupthink is less likely to occur. It is important to evaluate each individual based on their own actions and merits rather than making assumptions based on their political affiliation or beliefs such as voter suppression or taking away someone’s right to vote based on their political affiliation or beliefs that is generally considered unfair and undemocratic. An informal fallacy is a type of incorrect argument in natural language. The source of the error is not just due to the form of the argument, as is the case for formal fallacies, but can also be due to their content and context.   The concept of groupthink was first introduced by Irving Janis, a social psychologist, in his classic study Victims of Groupthink in 1972. He defined groupthink as "a mode of thinking that people engage when they are deeply involved in a cohesive group, when the members’ striving for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action". Signs of groupthink

• perceiving the group as invulnerable or invincible—believing it can do no wrong.
• believing the group is morally correct.
• self-censorship by group members, such as withholding information to avoid disrupting the group consensus.
• the quashing of dissenting group members’ opinions.
• the shielding of the group leader from dissenting views. (Bush,  avoidance of truth regarding WMD)
• perceiving an illusion of unanimity among group members.
• holding stereotypes or negative attitudes toward the out-group or others’ with differing viewpoints (Janis).

The Milgram experiment, showed that people can obey an authority figure to the point of potentially harming others, demonstrating the dangers of conformity to a group. 

Other studies involving conformity can be found here at  Frontiers | Social Conformity in Immersive Virtual Environments: The Impact of Agents’ Gaze Behavior (frontiersin.org.). 

Critical points to understand:

By definition, "groupthink" is the cohesion of its members, applying pressure from within toward harmony and conformity that discourages creative thinking, resulting in dysfunctional and irrational decisions that require, according to Wikipedia "individuals avoid raising controversial issues or alternative solutions."  That position is opposite and contrary to the "Problem-Solving Model" on this website that suggests being open to a universe of possibilities to solve problems, otherwise known as "brainstorming." So, the greater the propensity to conform the less likely critical thinking will occur, potentially resulting in extreme behaviors. 

Group polarization:

 Group polarization is a psychological phenomenon in which the beliefs, attitudes, and decisions of groups tend to be more amplified or more extreme than those held by individual group members. The phenomenon is shaped by personal experiences, informational insights, and the emotional need for social acceptance and conformity.  Group polarization is the phenomenon that people tend to adopt more extreme positions when they are in groups of like-minded others, as opposed to when they are by themselves or exposed to different opinions.  That definition is the same as mob behavior.  Group polarization can have important implications for understanding decision-making in various social and political contexts. So, groups holding similar beliefs and positions before they congregate will confirm their bias when they get together and become more extreme after meeting.   It would appear to me that under those circumstances there is already a predisposition that is reinforced by like-minded individuals that encourages the person to act when they might not otherwise do so alone. In other words, like-minded people in groups give permission for extremist behaviors. Reasons suggested:

• Social comparison: People tend to evaluate their own beliefs by comparing them to those of others in the group. If they find that their views are different from the group norm, they may adjust them to fit in and gain approval.
• Persuasive arguments: People are exposed to more arguments that support their initial position and fewer arguments that challenge it when they interact with like-minded peers. This can strengthen their confidence and conviction in their views.
• Social identity: People may identify themselves with a certain group and adopt its values and attitudes as part of their self-concept. This can increase their loyalty and commitment to the group and make them more resistant to opposing views.
• Informational influence: People may learn new information or insights from other group members that reinforce or extend their existing views. This can make them more knowledgeable and persuasive about their position.
• Diffusion of responsibility: People may feel less accountable or responsible for their individual decisions when they are part of a group. This can reduce their risk aversion and make them more willing to take extreme actions.

Genocide:
"When you have been prepared in the right way by the radios and the official advice, you obey more easily, even if the order is to kill your own neighbor." As members of a group meet and move toward extremist views, the Salient feature that tends to unify and bond extremists is often their emotional ties or attachment to each other more than the reasoning for a cause. The group may lose members as they move toward extremist views. But those who remain usually also have stronger cohesive bonds or attachments with each other.

possible ways to manage group polarization,

• Encouraging respectful, constructive, and empathetic communication that fosters mutual understanding, learning, and cooperation.
• Provide balanced resources, information, and perspectives that challenge the group’s views and preferences.
• Foster a culture of tolerance, diversity, and critical thinking that values different opinions and experiences.
• Take a silent ballot before any group discussion to avoid conformity pressure and social comparison.
• Ask people to do some writing and reflecting about their values before group discussions to reduce emotional attachment and bias.
• Choose words carefully, hedging claims, and emphasizing areas of agreement to avoid triggering emotional reactions, stereotypes, or conflicts.

Mob Behavior/herd mentality:  A mob is a large group of people, especially when the group is disorganized or unruly usually with a common cause or purpose that can lead to herd mentality, potentially resulting in violence or illegal acts. Mob behavior, herd mentality, or deindividuation is an example of individuals influenced by the larger group, social norms, and the desire to fit into the group in a manner that the individual might not otherwise behave outside of the group. Mob behavior can be seen in different situations, such as protests, riots, sports events, or disasters. This is another example of group conformity. 

Religious groupthink: 

According to Sunstein people often conform to the expectations of their religious communities, even if they do not fully agree with them, because of the benefits of belonging and the costs of dissenting. He has also examined how religious traditions can evolve and adapt to changing circumstances, and how they can influence or be influenced by legal rules and institutions

“Trauma bonding” is a term used to describe relationships formed under heightened negativity (shared pain) and often at a young age. Leaders of hate groups exploit this vulnerability using collective fear and insecurity of their members as a catalyst to persecute others.  

Groupthink is common in religion for these reasons;  

• Religion often involves a strong sense of group identity and loyalty, which can make people more likely to conform to the norms and expectations of their religious community.
• Religion often appeals to emotions and values, which can make people less likely to question or challenge their beliefs or actions, especially if they feel that they are doing good or following a higher purpose.
• Religion often faces opposition or criticism from other groups or sources, which can make people more defensive and resistant to change, or more hostile and aggressive towards outsiders
• Religion often relies on authority figures or sacred texts, which can make people more obedient and less independent in their thinking, or more prone to rationalize or justify their decisions.
• People may adopt religious beliefs or practices without critically examining them, just because they want to conform to their group or leader.
• People may ignore or rationalize evidence that contradicts their religious views, or dismiss alternative perspectives as evil or misguided.
• People may suppress or persecute those who question or challenge their religious doctrines or authorities, or feel threatened by outsiders or minorities.
• People may engage in harmful or violent actions in the name of their religion, believing that they are doing the right thing or fulfilling a divine plan.

Some religions teach children and adults about the persecution of Jesus, his followers, and discrimination against nonbelievers. They may encourage the security of religious groups when facing fears or difficult times rather than teaching personal empowerment and reasoning. Common fallacies of reasoning are just-world reasoning, the assumption people get what they deserve, and that the world is fair,  fallacy of composition, the assumption that what is true for one part of a group is true for the whole group, and fallacies of false equivalencies, two things that are very different are equivalent. These fallacies are used to promote discrimination and retribution for those who fall victim to false reasoning, accelerating blame toward others in any outgroup.”

So, when individuals feel that their self-worth is tied to the group, they may be more likely to conform to the group’s norms and standards and develop attitudes and beliefs about an out-group, even if they disagree with them. 

According to a Pew Research Center report, religious beliefs and practices are often closely tied to social and cultural factors such as race, ethnicity, and education. The report also found that religious affiliation is strongly correlated with political and social attitudes, with members of different religious groups often holding different views on issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, and the role of government in society.

Gang groupthink: A gang is a cohesive group of people sharing common interests, identity, and purpose that also commonly engage in violent activity, often associated with a collective vision of invulnerability.  There is a fine line between normal aggressive biological changes and psychological development that affects behavior and cognition, during adolescence years and adolescent disorders like YMS (Youth Male Syndrome). They are influenced by factors such as hormones, brain maturation (F-25 yrs., M-30 yrs.), personality, and environment. They can result in increased risk-taking, impulsivity, emotionality, competitiveness, creativity, curiosity, and adaptability. So that gang activity are social and cultural phenomena that involves mostly young males engaging in risky and violent behaviors, often to gain status, resources, or mates. They are influenced by factors such as peer pressure, social context, cultural norms, and economic conditions. They can result in increased violence, aggression, and crime, but also in social bonding, identity formation, and collective action.  Gangs/terrorist: Gangs and terrorists both operate in a clandestine or subversive manner, but gangs usually have a local or regional scope, while terrorists usually have a political or possibly religious cause and operate on a national or global reach. Religion can be a factor of either. Homophily is a factor, "birds of a feather flock together."

Political groupthink:  

Keep in mind that political reasoning may be motivated reasoning or emotional reasoning that may be putting party interests over the best interest of the people (democracy). So, there may be a significant difference between political groupthink and a well-reasoned response that is seeking truth in the best interest of people. Most people do not necessarily critically think about the best-reasoned response as much as they rely upon heuristics (mental shortcuts) to support a party.  Thus, conforming to the group rather than putting in the time to think out the best-reasoned response. 

A clear recent example of political conformity is a report that indicated 69% of Republicans and Republican-leaners said that Biden’s win was not legitimate, even though multiple reports stated otherwise with exhausted documentation. See the information in the summary this page. Clearly, there was no interest in taking the time to check out the facts.

Political groupthink occurs when a group of people who share a common political ideology or affiliation prioritize harmony and conformity over critical thinking and rational decision-making. Political groupthink can lead to biased, irrational, or unethical actions and outcomes, as the group members ignore and dismiss any information, evidence, or opinions that challenge or contradict their views. Political groupthink can also result in dehumanizing or demonizing the opposing groups (outgroups) or parties, and reducing the complexity and diversity of political issues and solutions.

Some of the factors that can contribute to political groupthink are:

• High stress and time pressure: the group faces a crisis, threat, or deadline that requires a quick and decisive response, and does not allow for careful deliberation or consultation
• High group cohesion and loyalty: the group has a strong sense of identity, solidarity, and commitment, and values the group’s goals and interests over the individual’s
• Isolation from external sources of information and feedback: the group limits or filters its exposure to alternative or opposing views, and relies on its own sources or echo chambers
• Lack of diversity and expertise in the group: the group consists of people who have similar backgrounds, experiences, perspectives, and beliefs, and lacks people who have different or relevant knowledge or skills
• Dominant or charismatic leaders: the group has a leader who has a strong influence or authority over the group, and who expresses his or her preferences or expectations clearly and persuasively
• Organizational culture and norms: the group operates within a system or structure that encourages or rewards conformity, consensus, and loyalty, and discourages or punishes dissent, criticism, and innovation

Some of the symptoms of political groupthink are:

• Illusion of invulnerability: the group is overly confident and optimistic, and takes excessive risks
• Collective rationalization: the group rationalizes away any warnings or contradictory information that might challenge its assumptions or decisions
• Illusion of morality: the group believes that its decisions are morally correct and superior, and ignores any ethical or moral consequences
• Excessive stereotyping: the group stereotypes and dehumanizes its enemies or competitors, and underestimates their capabilities or intentions
• Pressure for conformity: the group pressures and silences any dissenting members, and creates an illusion of unanimity
• Self-censorship: the group members censor their own doubts and objections, and do not express them to the group
• Illusion of unanimity: the group members mistakenly assume that everyone agrees with the group’s decision, and do not seek out or consider any alternative views
• Mindguards: the group appoints some members to protect the group from any adverse or conflicting information or opinions from outside sources

Some of the consequences of political groupthink are:

• Poor decision-making: the group makes decisions that are based on incomplete or inaccurate information, and do not consider the possible outcomes or alternatives
• Irrational actions: the group acts impulsively or emotionally, and does not evaluate the costs and benefits of its actions
• Ethical violations: the group violates the laws, norms, and values of society, and harms others or itself
• Strategic failures: the group fails to achieve its goals or objectives, and faces resistance or retaliation from its opponents or authorities

Therefore, it is important for political groups to prevent and overcome groupthink, by using some strategies, such as:

• Encouraging critical thinking and constructive dissent
• Seeking diverse and independent sources of information and expertise
• Establishing clear and transparent decision-making processes and criteria
• Creating a culture of learning and accountability
• Fostering ethical and moral awareness and responsibility

The 2020 election was the most secure in history:

This was supported by the Brennan Center of Justice in an article dated  December 11, 2020, and according to the Department of Homeland Security (CISA). The 2020 US election was “the most secure in American history" according to , CBS,CNN, Fox and Homeland Security.  The Elections Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council and the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating executive committees also issued a joint statement that this year’s election (2020) marked “the most secure in American history” The statement was made in response to baseless claims of widespread voter fraud in key battleground states by President Trump. They further added there was no voting system “deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or in any way compromised.” Add to that there were 60 court cases, the Supreme Court, Mitch McConnel, Bill Barr, the Department of Justice confirmed that there was no evidence of problem with the 2020 election.

The Washington Post: In response to an article by the Post "voter-fraud overwhelmingly targeted minorities and democrats,

 “Lorraine Minnite, a Rutgers University professor who has written a book on voter fraud, said she was unsurprised there have been so few convictions, since studies, election audits, and reporting have consistently shown that voter fraud is rare.”

“At best, these ‘election integrity’ units, are for show, designed to placate far-right election denialists in the conservative base,” Sawyer said. “At worst, they are used to justify new voting restrictions (1,230 proposed restricted laws listed below) and to intimidate people especially racial minorities from exercising their right to vote.”

Why was there a sudden change after the 2020 election in proposed voter laws?

Proposed voter restriction laws increased from 2020 to 2021 by 7.72 times.

10/23 - 325  restrictive voting bills have been introduced in 45 states this year 10/23.  "More restrictive laws have been enacted this year    

                       than in any year of the last decade except 2021". 

12/22 - 408 restrictive bills were considered by lawmakers in 39 states, while lawmakers in at least 27 states introduced 151 election 

                     interference bills this year.

12/21 - 440 Bills with provisions that restrict voting access have been introduced in 49 states in the 2021 legislative sessions.

12/20 - 57  Legislators have introduced at least 35 bills that would restrict access in 15 states. Thus, when combined with bills carried over from last year, the- 57re are currently 57 in 2020 

57 + 440 + 408+ 325 = 1,230 total 

proposed voter restriction bills went up 7.72 times from 2020 to 2021.

voting rights timeline

The most notable periods of voting rights suppression and resistance are: The Jim Crow era (1877-1965), women’s suffrage movement (1848-1920), The Native American voting rights struggle (1924-present), The immigrant voting rights challenge (1790-present).

The most recent wave of voting rights restrictions began after the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder Supreme Court decision, which invalidated a key provision of the Voting Rights Act that required certain states and jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to obtain federal approval before changing their voting laws. Since then, many states have enacted laws that make it harder to vote, such as requiring voter ID, reducing early voting, purging voter rolls, and closing polling places.  

There is something very wrong in a country if people are unaware of or support voting restriction or suppression when democracy is counting every vote. Restrictions reduce human rights. They don't promote human rights.

A.I. suggestions for the problem:

The impact of these bills on voting rights is mostly negative, especially for voters of color, disabilities, and low literacy levels. These bills make it harder to register, vote by mail, or in person, and have one’s vote counted. They also increase the risk of voter suppression, intimidation, and disenfranchisement

The possible solutions to protect democracy include electoral college reform, a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, reducing barriers to voting, holding social media platforms accountable for spreading misinformation, strengthening civic education, and promoting bipartisanship and dialogue567 1brennancenter.org2usnews.com3brennancenter.org

The problem of conspiracy: reasoning with emotion

• People believe in conspiracy theories due to a combination of personality traits and motivations, including relying strongly on their intuition, feeling a sense of antagonism and superiority toward others, and perceived threats in their environment.
• Conspiracy theories can provide a sense of understanding and consistency, control, or belonging that is consistent with the supported group.
• People who believe in conspiracy theories are often on the “losing” side of a political issue, have a lower social status due to income or ethnicity, have experienced social ostracism, or are prejudiced against “enemy” groups they perceive as powerful. 
• Epistemic motives: the desire for understanding, accuracy, and certainty about the political situation, especially when it is complex, uncertain, or ambiguous.
• Existential motives: the desire for control, security, and protection from the political threats, risks, or challenges, especially when they are perceived as high or imminent
• Social motives: the desire for belonging, identity, and self-esteem within a political group, especially when they are threatened or challenged by another group

 Some of the cognitive and social biases that may result from these motives are:

• Confirmation bias: the tendency to seek out, interpret, and remember the information that confirms one’s existing beliefs, and to ignore, distort, or forget the information that contradicts them
• Attribution bias: the tendency to attribute the causes of one’s own or one’s group’s actions or outcomes to internal or situational factors, and the causes of others’ or other groups’ actions or outcomes to external or dispositional factors
• In-group bias: the tendency to favor one’s own or one’s group’s members, values, and interests over those of others or other groups, and to perceive them as more positive, trustworthy, and competent 
• Out-group bias: the tendency to dislike, distrust, or devalue others or other groups, and to perceive them as more negative, hostile, and incompetent

These biases may lead people to believe that there is a secret and powerful group of people or entities that are conspiring to harm or manipulate them or their group, and to reject or resist any alternative or opposing explanations or evidence. These beliefs may also reinforce or justify one’s own or one’s group’s actions or attitudes, and may provide a sense of meaning, coherence, or empowerment in the face of political uncertainty or adversity 

Military/war groupthink:  the military is vulnerable to groupthink, which is a phenomenon that occurs when a cohesive group prioritizes consensus over critical thinking, and suppresses dissenting opinions, information, or alternatives. Groupthink can lead to poor decision-making, irrational actions, ethical violations, and strategic failures (A.I. 12/5/23). Groupthink is especially relevant and prevalent in the military, as the military decision-making process relies on analysis, inputs, and recommendations from the commander and staff, who normally work in a group environment to plan, synchronize, and control combat operations.  There are many examples of groupthink in the military history,  the Battle of the Little Bighorn, the Battle of Gallipoli, the Battle of Dien Bien Phu, the Iran hostage rescue mission, the Somalia intervention, and the Abu Ghraib scandal . Group think also includes  The Iraq War and Views on the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Groupthink could also include actions by Hamas and Isreal in Gaza 2023.

Systemic reasoning:

Systemic reasoning is a problem-solving method that involves looking at the whole and how its parts work in relationship to the whole. It considers the root aspects that make up the entire system with the understanding that changing one aspect or part of the whole can have an impact on other parts and result in the system functioning differently than anticipated or resulting in unintended consequences. This approach can help us to address the complex and dynamic challenges that we face in our personal and professional lives, as well as in our society and environment.

An important recognition that impacts our human group dynamic thinking or reasoning is to understand that we have all been influenced as a group by our past ancestors and our personal developmental past. As such, we have all been raised under certain habitual principles and manners of thinking that were appropriate for what we understood and believed in our past that may not necessarily apply to an appropriate manner of thinking and acting today. An example might be that I may have been raised to believe in the survival of the fittest principles or ways of thinking that support my beliefs that only the most muscular bully men succeed in getting what they want that certainly may have been a behavior that worked in the past in tribal or caveman ethics. Clearly, this is not an appropriate way of thinking and acting in today’s society.

Therefore, we can summarize the main points as follows:

• Systemic reasoning is a way of thinking that looks at the whole system and its interactions and considers the consequences and alternatives of changing any part of it.
• Human group dynamic thinking or reasoning is a way of thinking that is influenced by our ancestral and personal history, and may not be suitable for the present or future situations. 
• We need to be aware of and challenge our own assumptions and biases, resistance to change, and be open and flexible to alternate ways of working with our relationship to each others and our environment which suggests having a better understanding of mindfulness.

In summary, it is important to recognize that previous systemic reasoning did not prepare us for the following conditions: famine, catastrophic events, ecological and biodiversity destruction, economic collapse, disease, war, expanding population, societal collapse, or living in the most healthy, appropriate manner in relationship to each other or in relationship to our environments. Therefore, it is important to recognize that past behaviors or systemic teachings did not necessarily teach us or prepare us for all that we need to understand to manage our lives in a positive, healthy, and appropriate manner today. There remains much work to do to keep us up to date. A top priority is developing and teaching "mindfulness toward each other and environment while recognizing that we are all part of an existing ecosystem that requires us to work together for the benefit of all in order to survive.."

The cure: The way to avoid groupthink is to have self-worth independent of the group, avoid groupthink, and to reason independently without having to resort to group answers for everything. Use a problem-solving model, not a group answer model.  

One way to do this is to use a problem-solving model that encourages individuals to think critically and independently, rather than relying on group answers.  When individuals feel that their self-worth is tied to a group, they are more likely to conform to the group’s norms and standards, even if they disagree with them. By fostering a sense of self-worth that is independent of the group, individuals may be more likely to think critically and independently.

Fully understanding this website is all about resolving human problems.

How much of our human problems, from personal problems to gangs and war, as well as environmental concerns, are due to factors like oversight, ignorance, cognitive bias, or deliberate malfeasance? How significant is conformity and groupthink a major problem in our society?  One study in 2018 revealed we may believe the lies we tell within as little time as 45 minutes.  And that problem is especially true of older adults.  

In my opinion, gangs, mobs, terrorists, wars, religions fighting religions, destruction of human rights, and the right to vote are all motivated by negative reasoning or negative bias likely originating from childhood, a significant negative event, or a collection of negative events making it difficult to reason alternative positive or alternate options.                      

Emotional reasoning: Any strong emotion regarding reason is usually a sign that the 

emotion needs to be looked at and identified a root cause, the truth, not confirmation bias, and managed. Negative thoughts or words can lead to amygdala hijacking, which is when the amygdala overrides the rational part of the brain and triggers the fight, flight, or freeze response. This can impair one’s ability to think clearly and act appropriately.

Some sources that explain this phenomenon are:   For example, one study found that reading negative words activated the amygdala and increased the perception of threat . Another study showed that imagining fearful scenarios activated the amygdala and increased anxiety. A third study demonstrated that verbalizing negative emotions reduced the activity of the amygdala and increased the activity of the prefrontal cortex, which is involved in rational thinking  

 1healthline.com psychcentral.com bing.com4healthline.com psychcentral.com verywellmind.com en.wikipedia.org healthline.com psychcentral.com bing.com 

Groupthink 2023:

Almost a third, 30% of Americans still believe the 2020 election result was fraudulent, according to nbcnews.com while (93%) of Democrats say Biden won the election fairly, 68% of Republicans say “he won due to voter fraud."   There is a lot of supporting evidence.

Facts 2020: Election was the most secure in history

This was supported by the Brennan Center of Justice in an article dated  December 11, 2020, and according to the Department of Homeland Security (CISA). The 2020 US election was “the most secure in American history”, CBS,CNN, Fox and Homeland Security. The Elections Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council and the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating executive committees also issued a joint statement that this year’s election (2020) marked “the most secure in American history”. They further added there was no voting system “deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or in any way compromised.” Add to that there were 60 court cases, the Supreme Court, Mitch McConnel, Bill Barr, the Department of Justice confirmed that there was no evidence of problem with the 2020 election.

Another example in March 2021 of Groupthink analysis of misinformation across the United States, Europe, and Mexico showed that anywhere from 15% to 37%—believed misinformation about COVID-19. “About two-in-three U.S. adults (64%) say fabricated news stories cause a great deal of confusion about the basic facts.” Many Americans Believed Fake News Is Sowing Confusion, according to Pew Research Center. The Ashe conformity study demonstrated that nearly 75% of the participants in the conformity experiments went along with the rest of the group at least one time. A new revisit to the old study yielded very similar results, suggesting that a high percentage of people will conform to two or more people.

So many of these problems are likely due to groupthink or conformity to the group norms rather than independently searching out truth mostly because of what we want to believe (confirmation bias) leading to cognitive bias rather than checking for truth and facts.  A survey found that half of US adults say made-up news and information is a very big problem in the country today, and about two-thirds say it causes a great deal of confusion about the basic facts of current issues and events. 

1verywellmind.com2pbs.org3harbormentalhealth.com  

According to a study conducted by researchers at The University of Western Australia, misinformation is especially likely to stick when it conforms to our pre-existing political, religious, or social point of view. This means that if you believe something for political or religious reasons, it’s far harder to change a person’s mind and have them understand a fact that differs from that person’s opinion. The report notes that efforts to retract misinformation often backfire. The research found that contrary to common wisdom, trying to correct misinformation actually may lead to the strengthening of an erroneous belief. The researchers found that it is extremely difficult to dislodge strongly held beliefs through rational or logical methods. This was found to be especially true for social, religious, and politically-held beliefs. It is likely that the time it takes for people to catch up and find out the truth varies depending on the individual and the situation.

The circularity of Emotional reasoning (downward spiral):

The Psychological health of faulty reasoning can lead to negative thinking patterns and cognitive distortions, that can exacerbate symptoms of depression and anxiety-related disorders. Faulty reasoning can also contribute to the formation and endurance of stereotypes, which can lead to discrimination and prejudice. In addition, faulty reasoning can cause people to maintain their beliefs even in the face of evidence that contradicts them, leading to the persistence of false beliefs and misinformation. Finally, faulty reasoning can affect the recall of memories by altering the content of what we remember, leading to a newly formed, cobbled-together recollection that does not accurately reflect reality. 

 verywellmind.com psychcentral.com share.upmc.com4theconv 

Altering the circularity of reasoning:

To break the circularity of faulty reasoning requires:
1.   Being open to alternative viewpoints and perspectives, even if they contradict one’s own beliefs  

2. It is important to be aware of common fallacies of logic, negative reasoning, emotional reasoning, cognitive biases and logical fallacies, like confirmation bias, the illusory correlation, and the sunk cost fallacy, as these can lead to faulty reasoning and circularity.

3. One must be open to the thought of being wrong.

4. It’s also important to be open to new information and to critically evaluate the evidence for and against one’s beliefs.

To know what is positive, it helps to know what doesn't work.

 1practicalpie.com2logical-fallacy.com3thoughtco.com4englishgrammarnotes.com
 

Fully understanding this website is all about resolving human problems.