Ideological Extremisms And Metacognition

Current political and social conflicts force science to ask not only what is happening in today’s society, but also to question the functioning of the brains of those who adopt clearly extremist positions. The questions are many. It has been asked whether people who support ideological extremisms do so only with certain ideas and opinions on concrete topics or if their attitude concerns a broader dimension.

According to recent studies, proponents of ideological extremisms would adopt a radical position in any area of ​​life, which raises numerous other doubts. Is there a personality trait related to this kind of attitude? What do ideological extremisms actually hide?

The research has focused on the study of people considered extremist from an ideological point of view and their relationship with metacognition. By metacognition we mean the process by which people learn to reason and which requires constant reflection. We could define metacognition as the knowledge that there is of one’s own knowledge, therefore on what one knows or does not know.

The experiment: classification of individuals

The study conducted by neuroscientist Steve Flaming together with his team at University College London was aimed at measuring the ability of the experimental group to recognize errors.

It was a question of identifying whether individuals who support radical ideas on the political plane developed dogmatic beliefs because they have full confidence in these views or, conversely, if their positions were the result of problems of metacognition (thinking about their own thinking).

Two groups of 400 people completed a survey on political beliefs and positions regarding alternative worldviews. The data obtained identified individuals who were at the extremes, that is, whose views were absolutely radical.

Measuring metacognition

Participants were then asked to look at two squares with dots inside and to determine which of the two had the most dots. They were then asked to assess the safety of their decision. There was a cash reward to motivate them to be as accurate as possible in their evaluation.

Subsequently, the correct answer was revealed. It was found that in most cases the participants lowered the confidence level of their answer when it was wrong. The more radical subjects had serious problems recognizing that their answers were wrong, even after showing them the right one.

Reduced discrimination capacity

The results of Dr. Flaming’s research show that the most radical and dogmatic people have a reduced ability to question ideas that they take for granted.

Those who support strong ideological extremisms make an enormous effort to change their position in the face of the evidence. This ability to reflect on oneself and what one thinks is directly linked to the ability to incorporate new evidence into a pre-established belief that allows for safer decisions.

The difficult burden of mental rigidity

The analysis of the results of this study is very curious, especially if we refer to the nature of the problem exposed to the subjects involved in the experiment: making a decision on a square with points inside does not seem a particularly engaging question. However, the more radical individuals defended their wrong answers as correct, putting aside the evidence that refuted them.

All this, transported into the real world, invites us to reflect. Poor metacognition is a cognitive obstacle that extends to areas that go beyond politics. Other studies on the subject seem to confirm that those with cognitive difficulties in adapting to changes are much more likely to be authoritarian and nationalist, which translates into a feeling of ideological superiority.

José Manuel Sabucedo is a lecturer in social psychology at the University of Santiago de Compostela and has devoted many years to the study of authoritarianisms. As for the research conducted on these aspects of the human being, it seems that attitudes of this type are directly linked to the concept of naive realism, that is, when people blindly believe that reality is as they perceive it.