Don’t waste time correcting incorrect information. Alternatively, try the Override Technique.
Don’t waste time correcting incorrect information. Alternatively, try the Override Technique.
By Jonny Thomson | Published: 2025-01-03 15:59:00 | Source: Neuropsych – Big Think
Sign up for Big Think on Substack
The most surprising and impactful new stories delivered to your inbox every week for free.
When families get together over the holidays, it’s usually a good opportunity to get out of our echo chambers. It’s one of the few times a year that we get to spend time with people who often have very different viewpoints. Aunt Olivia has some extreme political views. Your cousin has joined a strange religious sect. Your sister researched the events of September 11 and discovered that “jet fuel does not melt steel beams.” There’s no escape: around the dinner table, for several tense hours, you’re forced to either exchange only pleasantries or enter the battlefield of polarized debate.
A The last paper offers a way outdescribing a strategy we can all use to respond to pseudoscience, conspiracy, and lies. It’s called the “overtaking technique.”
Science shots
Here are three examples of false claims. This information is often cited as true, and if you see it presented as true, that makes it misinformation.
The classic response to anyone providing misleading information is to provide counter-evidence. You can direct them to any of the links above or have them try to find any reputable scientific studies to back up their claim. As researchers at the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) put it, “the gold standard for addressing misinformation is (usually) a correction that actually contradicts the misinformation.” Suppose, for example, your father brings back baked potatoes during a family dinner and says, “Are those GMO? No, I don’t want any more allergies.” You might then say: “In fact, health authorities in all G7 countries agree that GMOs do not cause allergies or rashes.”
But this probably won’t work. The APPC team conducted six experiments where they compared actually correcting someone with “passing over” and found that using evidence and facts to refute someone tended to be much less successful in changing attitudes.
Cognitive Aikido
So, what is overtaking and why does it seem more effective? Overriding is where you advance rather than provide some negative refutation of the claim positive Counterclaims about the topic. For example, if someone says aluminum causes bone problems, you should respond, “Aluminum is one of the key elements in boosting our immune system and making the vaccine effective.” Or, if someone tells you that 5G kills birds, tell them so 5G adds trillions to the global economy.
Don’t mention the false claim. Don’t attack misinformation however Transgression With positive and correct information.
Across the team’s six experiments, they measured participants’ attitudes toward six different claims about misinformation. They used the traditional method of fact-checking with some, overstepping with others, and nothing at all with the rest. In all six studies, crossover was best at improving attitudes towards subjects’ acceptance, for example, participants were agreeable to the expansion of 5G technology.
Bypassing means not meeting your misguided opponent face to face. This is not a battle of arguments or a battle of studies. You are maneuvering an argument into a different situation. It’s a type of cognitive aikido – using someone’s movements and reasoning against them.
Attitudes, not beliefs
There are limitations to the APPC team’s findings. Their study of transgression was largely about attitudes toward policies, not about belief change or belief correction. So, for example, maybe your dad still believes that GMOs cause allergies, but thanks to your transgression, it’s okay for them to be widely used around the world. ‘Fair play, son,’ he’ll say, ‘and I’m glad of that Help prevent World Hunger.” Someone might still believe that 5G kills birds or that aluminum causes bone problems, but they acknowledge that these are necessary evils that are at odds with the positive results they provide.
So, transcendence is not the only tool available, and it may not be the best if your interest is in changing beliefs. Changing someone’s beliefs is a complex psychological topic, and there is certainly no one-size-fits-all strategy. Big Think recently spoke to an expert about this topic, as we examined the many ways you can change someone’s beliefs. But during the discussion, it became clear how complex this issue is. It’s up for debate whether you are He should Change someone’s belief.
When it comes to policy decisions and the willingness to accept a particular technology or drug, overriding seems like a valuable tool to add to your repertoire. Don’t correct people. Don’t check the facts. Do not fight the misguided on their own soil. Make the case for the other side look better.
Sign up for Big Think on Substack
The most surprising and impactful new stories delivered to your inbox every week for free.
ــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ
