The Influence of Analytical Thinking on Misinformation Beliefs
Misinformation and Education – Shaping elections across Europe.
Educational differences are increasingly defining election results in Europe and the West. This is especially the case in elections characterised by populism and misinformation such as the 2016 and 2020 elections in the USA and Brexit. Individuals with a lower level of education voted so definitively for Trump and Brexit alike that it shocked pollsters. Some academics have explained this phenomenon by pointing out how due to the high volumes of information we are faced with in the digital age, we need greater discernment and analytical thinking skills. These skills are traditionally learned in school and as such could explain the widening political cleavage. This is especially true in an age where politicians and community leaders on either side of the political aisle are quickly abandoning facts and keen to use distorted figures.
Take a look at the simple question below to see how activating analytical thinking impacts your ability to detect misinformation.
In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake?
_____ days.
This question might seem like it has nothing to do with misinformation, however, it actually tests how well one can activate analytical thinking and suppress an intuitive but wrong answer. Intuitively you would think that the answer to this question is 48 however in actual fact the correct answer is 47. Similarly, misinformation provides the individual with a claim that is intuitively correct but that on deeper analysis proves to be untrue. The ability to activate analytical thinking when analysing claims that one may perceive as intuitive is therefore invaluable when distinguishing false from verifiable information. Developing analytical thinking skills is one of the key skills taught in the education system and as such this article will delve into how those with a higher level of education develop better analytical thinking skills and as such are better equipped to notice misinformation.
Misinformation and Analytical thinking
A study by Professor Gordon Pennycook which has been replicated multiple times has routinely found that one’s ability to activate analytical thinking is a key reason why individuals with a higher level of education are more resistant to misinformation. Our brains work in complex systems to interpret the world around us. However, academics are increasingly categorising these into two categories: type 1 analytical thinking and type 2 intuitive thinking. Intuitive thinking is how humans largely interpret the world around them which involves a quick almost automatic reflex such as reacting when threatened. It involves using mental heuristics or shortcuts such as generalisations or rules of thumb. Thus those who analyse information intuitively tend to look for neat simple narratives which unfortunately are often an oversimplification of reality. On the other hand type 2 thinking is more effortful, slow and energy-draining but also accurate and is less susceptible to tricks or shortcuts. Analytical thinking involves rationalising and analysing a problem by breaking it into smaller components and thus relies on type two thinking. Both are good for different things and often complement each other. However, when it comes to looking at important political claims, realising that there could be more at play than meets the eye and activating analytical thinking is invaluable.
Echo chambers compound the problem.
The echo chamber effect compounds this problem as when one likes one form of content online social media algorithms are more likely to show you other similar content thus reinforcing false beliefs. The echo chamber effect is not unique to those with a low education level. The COVID lab theory leak is often pointed to as a time when conspiracy theorists got it right and, for example, media institutions got it wrong. While educated individuals parroted each other largely labelling it a hoax this turned out to be an entirely plausible theory. Even trusted institutions like the BBC had to eat humble pie and backtrack on the issue. Furthermore, in larger countries wealthier traditionally better-educated individuals tend to occupy cities whereas less educated individuals inhabit more rural areas. This is another form of social echo chamber where we see that people with differing backgrounds and views do not mix as much and as such there is less analytical thinking involved in political discussions.
Finally, it is worth noting that bad actors know that analytical thinking is a great barrier to misinformation belief and design their misinformation to try and trick us into type 1 thinking. One way in which they do this is by eliciting anger or fear in the reader. When an individual is angry or scared they tend to also act rashly (intuitively). Intuitive thinking can be elicited by angry emotions which is partially why populists often use fear and anger in their rhetoric.
Does this mean schools are making us adequately good analytical thinkers?
Well yes and no.
Schools theoretically should be making individuals better at analytical thinking and we do see that those who are more educated perform better as a whole at analytical thinking as well as at recognising misinformation. At school one practices routinely breaking down problems, analysing them and then synthesising knowledge from other fields. However, more importantly as one progresses in their education they realise how vast and complex the world is. As Socrates’ adage goes “I know I am intelligent because I know nothing,” the education system teaches us how to be aware of just how much we do not know and to question and analyse things that may appear intuitive.
Schools throughout the West have nonetheless been criticised as being increasingly antiquated and complacent on this matter. Malta is no different. Maltese academics even wrote a letter to the Minister of Education two years ago claiming that the education system is not adequately developing students’ analytical thinking skills. In this letter, the academics highlighted how Malta still prioritises rote learning and how this puts students off pursuing higher education, especially in STEM subjects. A clear example of how schools are failing when it comes to analytical thinking is their approach to AI software. Whilst most students could see the clear opportunity to use such tools to improve their work, educational institutions went all out to try and block and penalise their use. Had our educational institutions been more focused on spotting ways to enhance the education system in terms of analytical thinking they would have seen the potential AI tools have to ask different, more creative questions that require greater implementation of analytical thinking.
One recent solution put into practice was the introduction of the deeply unpopular CASP at the University of Malta, a course in academic skills mandatory for all university students which lists analytical thinking as one of its aims. This somewhat misses the point as it is a part of the university syllabus which means it is only taught to the most educated twenty percent of the population. University courses should all largely feature elements that pertain to analytical thinking and academic skills. Analytical thinking in younger years where children are most curious and malleable is extremely important but underappreciated by contrast.
Rote learning is so pervasive that centrally planned curricula are implemented for children as young as 5. This form of systematic teaching has little scope for the personalisation that is required to generate the enthusiasm needed to delve into problems analytically and inspire an individual to continue to follow an education. Furthermore, this highlights how at the moment the curriculum does not have incentives in the right place for teachers, students and institutions to inspire greater analytical thinking.
Finland is renowned for its quality education system, in particular its novel, student-centric approach to education. Finland uses phenomenon-based learning which looks at issues or topics from a variety of perspectives that cross the usual subject distinctions. Whilst traditional subjects like maths and English remain, the Fins take every opportunity to analyse problems that interest the individual classes from from a variety of perspectives. The process of putting together sometimes opposing viewpoints helps students to understand the complexity of the problems that face Gen Z and allows them to develop the critical patterns of thought required for analysing problems and claims in the post-truth era.
The Ministry of Education has noticed the need for reform, and the Emergent curriculum (a less rigid curriculum which focuses on promoting learning directed towards the student’s interests) is being implemented in preschool. Including coursework in O-level grades is another step in the right direction. As the importance of analytical thinking increasingly becomes more pertinent, more must be done to ensure that education is not just seen as a vehicle to drive one’s career forward but as a means to ensure everyone has the prerequisite skills to thrive in our increasingly complex society.
