• Video
  • Shop
  • Culture
  • Family
  • Wellness
  • Food
  • Living
  • Style
  • Travel
  • News
  • Book Club
  • Newsletter
  • Privacy Policy
  • Your US State Privacy Rights
  • Children's Online Privacy Policy
  • Interest-Based Ads
  • Terms of Use
  • Your Privacy Choices
  • Contact Us
  • Recalls and Product Safety Alerts
  • © 2026 ABC News
  • News

Faced With Evidence, We Still Get It Wrong

ByOPINION By LEE DYE
March 08, 2011, 10:52 PM

March 9, 2011— -- So you want your political party to take control of the state legislature, and you've just learned that the largest newspaper in the state has thrown its support behind your favorite candidate. Will that make you more or less likely to believe your party will succeed?

It may seem counterintuitive, but the answer is less likely, according to a new study from Brown University in Providence, R.I.

Why would evidence of growing support for your party make you less optimistic?

Because it's weak evidence, according to cognitive scientist Philip Fernbach, professor of psychology at Brown and lead author of a study in the journal Cognition.

Obviously, one endorsement in a political campaign with many candidates for many seats is not going to swing the entire election in one direction. The endorsement may be positive evidence, but it's not conclusive, and when that's the case, according to the researchers, the evidence may backfire.

In five experiments involving participants across the country, people who were given weak evidence in support of a possible cause (more troops should lead to stability in Afghanistan, for example) were less likely to believe the war-torn country would eventually see stable days than people who were given no evidence at all.

Fernbach and two colleagues, Adam Darlow and Steven Sloman, say their research shows that weak evidence can cause someone to make a bad decision, because humans tend to be focused on whatever they have just learned or experienced.

"It turns out that if you give people some evidence that is positive but weak, then actually they focus too much on that piece of positive evidence" and are less likely to incorporate other facts in their decision, Fernbach said in a telephone interview. In all five experiments, participants were required to make a quick decision, so it was an "intuitive judgment that happens quickly, like when you are shopping."

But weak evidence probably influences long-term decisions as well, he added, and undoubtedly plays a role in everything from shopping to electing a president.

Up Next in News—

Couple who split after undergoing IVF go to court over 2nd embryo

October 30, 2026

Minnesota man credited with saving kids, school bus driver surprised with check

October 24, 2026

Seasonal job hiring at Amazon, UPS, Spirit Halloween surging

October 22, 2026

Elizabeth Holmes documentary: What to know, how to watch

October 15, 2026

Shop GMA Favorites

ABC will receive a commission for purchases made through these links.

Sponsored Content by Taboola

The latest lifestyle and entertainment news and inspiration for how to live your best life - all from Good Morning America.
  • Contests
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Your Privacy Choices
  • Children’s Online Privacy Policy
  • Advertise with us
  • Your US State Privacy Rights
  • Interest-Based Ads
  • About Nielsen Measurement
  • Press
  • Feedback
  • Shop FAQs
  • ABC News
  • ABC
  • All Videos
  • All Topics
  • Sitemap
  • Recalls and Product Safety Alerts

© 2026 ABC News
  • Privacy Policy— 
  • Your US State Privacy Rights— 
  • Children's Online Privacy Policy— 
  • Interest-Based Ads— 
  • Terms of Use— 
  • Your Privacy Choices— 
  • Contact Us— 
  • Recalls and Product Safety Alerts— 

© 2026 ABC News