Download - Cognitive Illiberalism
![Page 1: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Cognitive Illiberalism
Dan M. Kahan Yale Law School
& many many others!
www.culturalcognition.net
Research Supported by: National Science Foundation, SES--0922714 Oscar M. Ruebhausen Fund at Yale Law School
![Page 2: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
What am I talking about?
Cultural cognition cognitive illiberalism
1. “Motivated numeracy”
2. “Noncommunicative harm principle”
3. Cognitive illiberalism: how big is the problem?
![Page 3: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Motivated Numeracy
![Page 4: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
“How much risk do you believe climate change poses to human health, safety, or prosperity?”
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
low high
Science literacy/numeracy
Greater
Lesser
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
low high
Greater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual ResponseGreater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual Response
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
low high
Greater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re) Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual Response
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
low high
Greater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual ResponseGreater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual Response
source: Kahan, D.M., Peters, E., Wittlin, M., Slovic, P., Ouellette, L.L., Braman, D. & Mandel, G. The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Clim. Change, 2, 732-35 (2012).
![Page 5: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
“Skin cream experiment”
![Page 6: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
“Skin cream experiment”
![Page 7: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Rash Decreases
Rash Increases
Experimental condition
![Page 8: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Numeracy
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
Numeracy scoreEntire Sample
Numeracy scorePolitical outlook subsamples
Conserv_Repub > 0Conserv_Repub < 0
![Page 9: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
01
corr
ect i
nter
pre
tatio
n of
dat
a (=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
Correct interpretation of data
rash decreases
rash increases
Numeracy score
01
corr
ect i
nter
pre
tatio
n of
dat
a (=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
Lowess smoother superimposed on raw data.
![Page 10: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
numeracy score at & above which subjects can be expected to correctly interpret data.
Numeracy
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
Numeracy scoreEntire Sample
Numeracy scorePolitical outlook subsamples
Conserv_Repub > 0Conserv_Repub < 0
![Page 11: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
“Gun ban experiment”
![Page 12: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Four conditions
![Page 13: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
01
corr
ect
inte
rpre
tatio
n o
f d
ata
(=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
rash decreasesrash increases
Numeracy score
01
correct interpretation of data (
=1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
Correct interpretation of data
01
corr
ect i
nter
pre
tatio
n of
dat
a (=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: gun ban
Numeracy score
01
correct interpretation of data (
=1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
crime decreasescrime increases
![Page 14: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
0.0
5.1
.15
.2D
en
sity
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
liberal Democrat
0.0
5.1
.15
.2D
en
sity
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
conservative Republican
Liberal Democrat Conservative Republican
Zconservrepub0
0.0
5.1
.15
.2D
ensi
ty
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
Sample overall
0“Conserv_Repub”
Conserv_Repub is standardized sum of standardized responses to 5-point liberal-conservative ideology and 7-point party-self-identification measures.
![Page 15: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Correct interpretation of data
Liberal Democrats (< 0 on Conservrepub)Conserv Republicans (> 0 on Conservrepub)
01
n_co
rrect in
terp
reta
tio
n o
f d
ata
(=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9n_numeracy
skin cream
01
correct interpretation of da
ta (=1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
rash decreases
rash increasesrash decreases
rash increases
Numeracy score01
n_co
rrect interp
retatio
n of d
ata (=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9n_numeracy
gun ban
Numeracy score
01
corre
ct int
erpr
etatio
n of d
ata (=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
crime decreases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime increases
01
n_correct interpretation of data (=1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9n_numeracy
gun ban
Numeracy score
01
co
rrect in
terp
reta
tio
n o
f d
ata
(=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
crime decreases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime increases
![Page 16: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
01
n_co
rrect in
terp
reta
tio
n o
f d
ata
(=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9n_numeracy
skin cream
01
correct interpretation of da
ta (=1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
rash decreases
rash increasesrash decreases
rash increases
Numeracy score01
n_co
rrect interp
retatio
n of d
ata (=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9n_numeracy
gun ban
Numeracy score
01
corre
ct int
erpr
etatio
n of d
ata (=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
crime decreases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime increases
01
n_correct interpretation of data (=1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9n_numeracy
gun ban
Numeracy score
01
co
rrect in
terp
reta
tio
n o
f d
ata
(=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
crime decreases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime increases
01
n_co
rrect in
terp
reta
tio
n o
f d
ata
(=
1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9n_numeracy
gun ban
Numeracy score
01
correct interpretation of data (
=1)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9numeracy
scatterplot: skin treatment
crime decreases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime increases
Correct interpretation of data
Liberal Democrats (< 0 on Conservrepub)Conserv Republicans (> 0 on Conservrepub)
![Page 17: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
N = 1111. Outcome variable is “Correct” (0 = incorrect interpretation of data, 1 = correct interpretation). Predictor estimates are logit coefficients with z-test statistic indicated parenthetically. Experimental assignment predictors—rash_decrease, rash_increase, and crime_increase—are dummy variables (0 = unassigned, 1 = assigned—with assignment to “crime decreases” as the comparison condition. Z_numeracy and Conserv_Repub are centered at 0 for ease of interpretation. Bolded typeface indicates predictor coefficient is significant at p < 0.05.
Best fitting regression model for experiment results
rash_decrease 0.40 (1.57)rash increase 0.06 (0.22)crime increase 1.07 (4.02)z_numeracy -0.01 (-0.05)z_numeracy_x_rash_decrease 0.55 (2.29)z_numeracy_x_rash_increase 0.23 (1.05)z_numeracy_x_crime_increase 0.46 (2.01)z_numeracy2 0.31 (2.46)z_numeracy2_x_rash_decrease 0.02 (0.14)z_numeracy2_x_rash_increase -0.07 (-0.39)z_numeracy2_x_crime_increase -0.31 (-1.75)Conserv_Repub -0.64 (-3.95)Conserv_Repub_x_rash_decrease 0.56 (2.64)Conserv_Repub_x_rash_increase 1.28 (6.02)Conserv_Repub_x_crime_increase 0.63 (2.82)z_numeracy_x_Conserv_repub -0.33 (-1.89)z_nuneracy_x_Conserv_Repub_x_rash_decrease 0.33 (1.40)z_nuneracy_x__x_rash_increase 0.54 (2.17)z_nuneracy_x__x_crime_increase 0.26 (1.08)_constant -0.96 (-4.70)
![Page 18: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 0.0142
0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 0.0092
0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 0.0139
0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 0.0081
High numeracyLow numeracy
high numeracy = 8 correctlow numeracy = 3 correct
Regression model predicted probabilities
skin treatment
Gun ban
probabilility of correct interpretation of data probabilility of correct interpretation of data
rash decreases
rash increases
rash decreases
rash increasesrash decreases
rash increases
rash decreases
rash increases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime increases
crime decreases
crime increases
Liberal Democrat (-1 SD on Conservrepub)Conserv Republican (+1 SD on Conservrepub)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
crime decreases
![Page 19: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Rash decrease
Rash increase
Crime decrease
Crime increase
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Liberal Democratmore likely
Conservative Republicanmore likely
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Partisan Differences in Probability of Correct Interpretation Of Data
Pct. difference in probability of correct interpretation of data
Predicted difference in probability of correct interpretation, based on regression model. Predictors for partisanship set at + 1 & - 1 SD on Conserv_Republican scale. Predictors for “low” and “high” numeracy set at 2 and 8 correct, respectively. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
![Page 20: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Rash decrease
Rash increase
Crime decrease
Crime increase
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Liberal Democratmore likely
Conservative Republicanmore likely
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Partisan Differences in Probability of Correct Interpretation Of Data
Pct. difference in probability of correct interpretation of data
Predicted difference in probability of correct interpretation, based on regression model. Predictors for partisanship set at + 1 & - 1 SD on Conserv_Republican scale. Predictors for “low” and “high” numeracy set at 2 and 8 correct, respectively. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
![Page 21: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Rash decrease
Rash increase
Crime decrease
Crime increase
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Liberal Democratmore likely
Conservative Republicanmore likely
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Partisan Differences in Probability of Correct Interpretation Of Data
Pct. difference in probability of correct interpretation of data
Predicted difference in probability of correct interpretation, based on regression model. Predictors for partisanship set at + 1 & - 1 SD on Conserv_Republican scale. Predictors for “low” and “high” numeracy set at 2 and 8 correct, respectively. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
![Page 22: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Rash decrease
Rash increase
Crime decrease
Crime increase
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Liberal Democratmore likely
Conservative Republicanmore likely
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Partisan Differences in Probability of Correct Interpretation Of Data
Pct. difference in probability of correct interpretation of data
Predicted difference in probability of correct interpretation, based on regression model. Predictors for partisanship set at + 1 & - 1 SD on Conserv_Republican scale. Predictors for “low” and “high” numeracy set at 2 and 8 correct, respectively. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.
Avg. “polarization”on crime data
for low numeracypartisans
25% (± 9%)
Avg. “polarization”on crime data
for high numeracypartisans
46% (± 17%)
![Page 23: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Perceived climate change risk
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
low high
Science literacy/numeracy
Greater
Lesser
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
low high
Greater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual ResponseGreater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual Response
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
low high
Greater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re) Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual Response
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
low high
Greater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual ResponseGreater
Lesser
Science literacy/numeracy
Low High
perc
eive
d ri
sk (z
-sco
re)
Egalitarian Communitarian
Hierarchical Individualist
Actual Response
source: Kahan, D.M., Peters, E., Wittlin, M., Slovic, P., Ouellette, L.L., Braman, D. & Mandel, G. The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Clim. Change, 2, 732-35 (2012).
![Page 24: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
What am I talking about?
Cultural cognition cognitive illiberalism
1. “Motivated numeracy”
2. “Noncommunicative harm principle”
3. Cognitive illiberalism: how big is the problem?
![Page 25: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
![Page 26: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Did protestors cross the line between “speech” and “intimidation”?
![Page 27: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Experimental Conditions
Recruitment Center ConditionAbortion Clinic Condition
![Page 28: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Experimental Conditions
Recruitment Center ConditionAbortion Clinic Condition
Freedom to Exercise Reproductive Rights Law Section 1. Prohibited Conduct. It is against the law for any person to intentionally (1) interfere with, (2) obstruct, (3) intimidate, or (4) threaten any person who is seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on premises of any hospital or medical clinic that is licensed to perform abortions. Section 2. Order to Desist. If a law enforcement officer observes or is furnished with reliable evidence that any person is engaged in behavior in violation of section 1, the officer may order such person to desist and to leave the immediate vicinity.
Freedom to Serve with Honor Law Section 1. Prohibited Conduct. It is against the law for any person to intentionally (1) interfere with, (2) obstruct, (3) intimidate, or (4) threaten any person who is seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on premises of any facility in which the U.S. military is engaged in recruitment activity. Section 2. Order to Desist. If a law enforcement officer observes or is furnished with reliable evidence that any person is engaged in behavior in violation of section 1, the officer may order such person to desist and to leave the immediate vicinity.
![Page 29: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
1. DTHREAT. The protestors threatened individuals seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on the premises of the abortion clinic campus recruitment center.
2. DINTIMIDATE. The protestors intimidated individuals seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on the premises of the abortion clinic campus recruitment center.
3. DOBSTRUCT. The protestors obstructed individuals seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on the premises of the abortion clinic campus recruitment center.
4. PLISTEN. The people who decided not to enter the abortion clinic campus recruitment center did not feel threatened or intimidated; they just didn’t want to have to listen to what the protestors were saying.
5. PANNOY. It is more likely the police broke up the protest because they found dealing with the entire situation annoying or inconvenient than because they believed the protestors were violating the law.
6. DVIOLENCE. There was a risk that the protestors might resort to violence if anyone tried to enter.
7. DSCREAM. One or more the protestor screamed in face of people who wanted to enter the abortion clinic campus recruitment center.
1. LIABILITY. I would vote to find the police did not have the evidence necessary to stop the protest under the Freedom to Serve with Honor Law/The Freedom to Exercise Reproductive Rights Law.
2. DAMAGES. I would vote to order the police to pay damages to the protestors.
ORDER. I would vote to order the police not to interfere with protests under conditions like the ones shown in the video.
Select fact perception items
Case-outcome items
![Page 30: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
“The record confirms that any distress occasioned by Westboro’s picketing turned on the content and viewpoint of the message conveyed, rather than any interference with the funeral itself.” Snyder v. Phelps, 131 S. Ct. 1207 (2011)
![Page 31: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Experimental Conditions
Recruitment Center ConditionAbortion Clinic Condition
Freedom to Exercise Reproductive Rights Law Section 1. Prohibited Conduct. It is against the law for any person to intentionally (1) interfere with, (2) obstruct, (3) intimidate, or (4) threaten any person who is seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on premises of any hospital or medical clinic that is licensed to perform abortions. Section 2. Order to Desist. If a law enforcement officer observes or is furnished with reliable evidence that any person is engaged in behavior in violation of section 1, the officer may order such person to desist and to leave the immediate vicinity.
Freedom to Serve with Honor Law Section 1. Prohibited Conduct. It is against the law for any person to intentionally (1) interfere with, (2) obstruct, (3) intimidate, or (4) threaten any person who is seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on premises of any facility in which the U.S. military is engaged in recruitment activity. Section 2. Order to Desist. If a law enforcement officer observes or is furnished with reliable evidence that any person is engaged in behavior in violation of section 1, the officer may order such person to desist and to leave the immediate vicinity.
![Page 32: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
1. DTHREAT. The protestors threatened individuals seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on the premises of the abortion clinic campus recruitment center.
2. DINTIMIDATE. The protestors intimidated individuals seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on the premises of the abortion clinic campus recruitment center.
3. DOBSTRUCT. The protestors obstructed individuals seeking to enter, exit, or remain lawfully on the premises of the abortion clinic campus recruitment center.
4. PLISTEN. The people who decided not to enter the abortion clinic campus recruitment center did not feel threatened or intimidated; they just didn’t want to have to listen to what the protestors were saying.
5. PANNOY. It is more likely the police broke up the protest because they found dealing with the entire situation annoying or inconvenient than because they believed the protestors were violating the law.
6. DVIOLENCE. There was a risk that the protestors might resort to violence if anyone tried to enter.
7. DSCREAM. One or more the protestor screamed in face of people who wanted to enter the abortion clinic campus recruitment center.
1. LIABILITY. I would vote to find the police did not have the evidence necessary to stop the protest under the Freedom to Serve with Honor Law/The Freedom to Exercise Reproductive Rights Law.
2. DAMAGES. I would vote to order the police to pay damages to the protestors.
ORDER. I would vote to order the police not to interfere with protests under conditions like the ones shown in the video.
Select fact perception items
Case-outcome items
![Page 33: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
“The record confirms that any distress occasioned by Westboro’s picketing turned on the content and viewpoint of the message conveyed, rather than any interference with the funeral itself.” Snyder v. Phelps, 131 S. Ct. 1207 (2011)
![Page 34: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Hierarchy
Egalitarianism
Individualism Communitarianism
hierarchical individualists hierarchical communitarians
egalitarian communitariansegalitarian individualists
Cultural Cognition Worldviews
![Page 35: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Hierarchy
Egalitarianism
Abortion procedure
Abortion procedure
Risk Perception KeyLow RiskHigh Risk
Individualism Communitarianism
Gays military/gay parenting
Gays military/gay parenting Guns/Gun Control
Guns/Gun Controlhierarchical individualists hierarchical communitarians
egalitarian communitariansegalitarian individualists
Cultural Cognition Worldviews
![Page 36: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
Pct.
Agre
e
Abortion Clinic Abortion Clinic Recruitment CtrRecruitment Ctr
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
![Page 37: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
Pct.
Agre
e
Abortion Clinic Abortion Clinic Recruitment CtrRecruitment Ctr
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
![Page 38: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
Pct.
Agre
e
Abortion Clinic Abortion Clinic Recruitment CtrRecruitment Ctr
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
![Page 39: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
Pct.
Agre
e
Abortion Clinic Abortion Clinic Recruitment CtrRecruitment Ctr
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
![Page 40: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
Pct.
Agre
e
Abortion Clinic Abortion Clinic Recruitment CtrRecruitment Ctr
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
![Page 41: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
Pct.
Agre
e
Abortion Clinic Abortion Clinic Recruitment CtrRecruitment Ctr
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
![Page 42: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
Pct.
Agre
e
Abortion Clinic Abortion Clinic Recruitment CtrRecruitment Ctr
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military Anti-abortion Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
![Page 43: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Pct.
Agre
e
Protestors blocked Screamed in face
Pedestrians just not want to listen Police just annoyed
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-
abortion
Anti-military Anti-
abortion
Anti-military Anti-
abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
50%
69%
43%
56%
25% 25%29%
77%
13%
70%
8%
37%
26%
16%
70%
32%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military Anti-abortion
Anti-military
Police liable Enjoin police Damages vs. police
Egal Comm
Egal Indivd
Hier Comm
Hier Individ
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
abortion clinic recruitment center abortion clinic recruitment center
EI v. HC EC v. HI
Screamed in face
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
abortion clinic recruitment center abortion clinic recruitment center
EI v. HC EC v. HI
Protestors blocked
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
abortion clinic recruitment center abortion clinic recruitment center
EI v. HC EC v. HI
Police just annoyed
0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
abortion clinic recruitment center abortion clinic recruitment center
EI v. HC EC v. HI
Pedesterians not want to listen
![Page 44: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
“The record confirms that any distress occasioned by Westboro’s picketing turned on the content and viewpoint of the message conveyed, rather than any interference with the funeral itself.” Snyder v. Phelps, 131 S. Ct. 1207 (2011)
![Page 45: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
What am I talking about?
Cultural cognition cognitive illiberalism
1. “Motivated numeracy”
2. “Noncommunicative harm principle”
3. Cognitive illiberalism: how big is the problem?
![Page 46: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
“The record confirms that any distress occasioned by Westboro’s picketing turned on the content and viewpoint of the message conveyed, rather than any interference with the funeral itself.” Snyder v. Phelps, 131 S. Ct. 1207 (2011)
![Page 47: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Rash decrease
Rash increase
Crime decrease
Crime increase
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Liberal Democratmore likely
Conservative Republicanmore likely
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Partisan Differences in Probability of Correct Interpretation Of Data
Pct. difference in probability of correct interpretation of data
Predicted difference in probability of correct interpretation, based on regression model. Predictors for partisanship set at + 1 & - 1 SD on Conserv_Republican scale. Predictors for “low” and “high” numeracy set at 2 and 8 correct, respectively. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.
Avg. “polarization”on crime data
for low numeracypartisans
25% (± 9%)
Avg. “polarization”on crime data
for high numeracypartisans
46% (± 17%)
![Page 48: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Hierarchy
Egalitarianism
Abortion procedure
Abortion procedure
Risk Perception KeyLow RiskHigh Risk
Individualism Communitarianism
Gays military/gay parenting
Gays military/gay parenting
Guns/Gun Control
egalitarian communitarians
Cultural Cognition Worldviews
![Page 49: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Rash decrease
Rash increase
Crime decrease
Crime increase
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
Low numeracy
High numeracy
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Liberal Democratmore likely
Conservative Republicanmore likely
-80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
rash decrease
rash increase
crime decrease
crime increse
Partisan Differences in Probability of Correct Interpretation Of Data
Pct. difference in probability of correct interpretation of data
Predicted difference in probability of correct interpretation, based on regression model. Predictors for partisanship set at + 1 & - 1 SD on Conserv_Republican scale. Predictors for “low” and “high” numeracy set at 2 and 8 correct, respectively. CIs reflect 0.95 level of confidence.
Avg. “polarization”on crime data
for low numeracypartisans
25% (± 9%)
Avg. “polarization”on crime data
for high numeracypartisans
46% (± 17%)
![Page 50: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Hierarchy
Egalitarianism
Abortion procedure
Cultural Cognition Worldviews
compulsory psychiatric treatment
Abortion procedure
compulsory psychiatric treatment
Risk Perception KeyLow RiskHigh Risk
Individualism Communitarianism
Environment: climate, nuclear
Guns/Gun Control
Guns/Gun Control
HPV Vaccination
HPV Vaccination
Gays military/gay parenting
Gays military/gay parenting
Environment: climate, nuclear
![Page 51: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
What am I talking about?
Cultural cognition cognitive illiberalism
1. “Motivated numeracy”
2. “Noncommunicative harm principle”
3. Cognitive illiberalism: how big is the problem?
![Page 52: Cognitive Illiberalism](https://reader038.vdocument.in/reader038/viewer/2022103112/551c3222550346a84f8b63ea/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
www. culturalcognition.net
“I am you!”