Facilitating and Hindering Accurate Perceptions of Argument Strength: The Effects of Intergroup Bias and Intellectual Humility.
Published In: Western Journal of Communication, 2025, v. 89, n. 2. P. 395 1 of 3
Database: Academic Search Ultimate 2 of 3
Authored By: Montez, Daniel; Harwood, Jake 3 of 3
Abstract
Intellectual humility (IH), the awareness that one's beliefs could be wrong, is lacking in U.S. political discourse. Guided by the elaboration likelihood model, we conducted an experiment (N = 308) examining people's ability to differentiate objectively strong (versus weak) political arguments. We explore whether IH influences the effects of in-/outgroup sources on perceived argument strength. Results revealed people high in IH were better able to differentiate strong from weak arguments (nonsignificant with covariates in the model (p =.07), but significant without covariates). Additionally, participants evaluated ingroup messages as stronger than outgroup messages, an effect not moderated by IH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Additional Information
- Source:Western Journal of Communication. 2025/03, Vol. 89, Issue 2, p395
- Document Type:Article
- Subject Area:Communication and Mass Media
- Publication Date:2025
- ISSN:1057-0314
- DOI:10.1080/10570314.2024.2369780
- Accession Number:183597072
- Copyright Statement:Copyright of Western Journal of Communication is the property of Western States Communication Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Looking to go deeper into this topic? Look for more articles on EBSCOhost.