For this ARQ we are going to reflect on how the organization and overuse of our general knowledge structures can lead to irreconcilable differences of opinion. Consider the following studies below. The studies below are fictitious, but they are based on research from real psychology studies:

In Dr. Lucca’s study, he brought politically active subjects to the lab and had them identify themselves as either liberal or conservative. Following this, subjects read about fictitious candidates that were identified as being either liberal or conservative. Each candidates’ name and party affiliation were followed by a bullet point list about several political ideas held by that candidate. Half of the bullet list for each candidate included positions that were typically considered liberal and half were positions that were typically considered conservative. After reading about these candidates, the subjects chose which candidates they liked the most. They then wrote down all the facts they could remember belonging to that candidate. Dr. Lucca found subjects showed a tendency to select candidates that were of the same political ideology as what they themselves identified as. Additionally, subjects mainly remembered the facts about their chosen candidates that matched that candidate’s listed political party affiliation, while forgetting ideas that did not. For example, a subject might recall a conservative candidate wanted to raise military spending but forgot he/she wanted to restrict gun access. However, in a follow-up study, Dr. Lucca had subjects adopt either a liberal or conservative mindset through positive roleplaying (acting like but not making fun of the character they adopt). The role they played was randomly assigned and not based on subjects; actual political beliefs. They then completed the same candidate study described above. To his surprise, Dr. Lucca found that regardless of the subjects’ actual political identification, when they roleplayed a typically conservative character, they were more likely to select conservative candidates and remember conservative facts. Similarly, when subjects roleplayed a typically liberal character, they were more likely to select liberal candidates and remembered more liberal facts. Task: For the first study, I want you to think about how schemas and knowledge guide our interpretation of the information we encounter. How can you explain the results from the first study based on information from this chapter? What is Dr. Lucca accomplishing by having subjects identify their political ideologies before starting the task? How or why is this affecting their behavior? Make sure to incorporate memory into your response. For the second study, I want you to reflect on the fact that subjects’ self-identified political affiliation seemed to not affect the political positions they agreed with after they roleplayed. When asked to think about something in a specific way, they reinterpreted the candidates they read about. What does this suggest about the way our mental concepts interact with the environment? What theoretical concept does this seem to support? How could you apply the knowledge from this study, and the previous one, to affect the way people have discussions about differences of opinion (beyond just political)? Note: This is a cognitive class so avoid using a social perspective. Do not discuss group think, group membership, polarization of opinion, or social stereotyping. Focus on knowledge structures and chapter material for your answer. Also avoid personal opinions about political thinking; we’re a science class after all! References Considered Bryan, C. J., Dweck, C. S., Ross, L., Kay, A. C., & Mislavsky, N. O. (2009). Political mindset: Effects of schema priming on liberal-conservative political positions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 890 – 895. Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ views of what is and what ought to be. New York: Aldine deGruyter. Larson, D. W. (1994). The role of belief systems and schemas in foreign policy decision-making. Political Psychology, 15 (1), 17 – 33. Lodge, M. & Hamill, R. (1986). A partisan schema for political information processing. The American Political Science Review, 80 (2), 505 – 520.