Skip to content
Who's in the Video
Dr. Tali Sharot is the author of The Influential Mind (2017) and The Optimism Bias (2012). She is an Associate Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience, and the founder and director of the Affective[…]
Sign up for Big Think on Substack
The most surprising and impactful new stories delivered to your inbox every week, for free.

We’ve all tried to win an argument by laying down some strong statistics to prove that we’re right. But cognitive neuroscientist Tali Sharot discusses the limitations of information in changing people’s beliefs. In fact, intelligent people are likely to manipulate data to align with their pre-existing beliefs. That’s when your super smart statistics start to backfire.

In one experiment, providing more extreme data to both believers and skeptics resulted in increased polarization rather than consensus. Brain scans reveal that when two people disagree, the brain seems to “switch off,” not encoding the opposing views. 

In a study at UCLA aiming to convince parents to vaccinate, directly refuting the autism link wasn’t effective. Instead, shifting the focus to the purpose of vaccines – protecting against deadly diseases like measles – was more persuasive. The key is identifying a shared objective or common motive, as seen with the mutual concern for children’s health, rather than emphasizing divisive points.


Related