On the rationality of pluralistic ignorance

Pluralistic ignorance is a socio-psychological phenomenon that involves a systematic discrepancy between people’s private beliefs and public behavior in certain social contexts. Recently, pluralistic ignorance has gained increased attention in formal and social epistemology. But to get clear on what precisely a formal and social epistemological account of pluralistic ignorance should look like, we need answers to at least the following two questions: What exactly is the phenomenon of pluralistic ignorance? And can the phenomenon arise among perfectly rational agents? In this paper, we propose answers to both these questions. First, we characterize different versions of pluralistic ignorance and define the version that we claim most adequately captures the examples cited as paradigmatic cases of pluralistic ignorance in the literature. In doing so, we will stress certain key epistemic and social interactive aspects of the phenomenon. Second, given our characterization of pluralistic ignorance, we argue that the phenomenon can indeed arise in groups of perfectly rational agents. This, in turn, ensures that the tools of formal epistemology can be fully utilized to reason about pluralistic ignorance.     

The Role of Pluralistic Ignorance in the Reporting of Sexual Harassment

There have been many attempts to explain how and why people report incidents of sexual harassment. One area that has been overlooked is the influence of the targets' social cognition processes on these reports, particularly social comparison processes such as pluralistic ignorance. Pluralistic ignorance is a social comparison phenomenon whereby individuals mistakenly believe they are in the minority. In the case of harassment, pluralistic ignorance occurs when individuals mistakenly interpret the behavioral responses of others to mistakenly believe that they are alone in their discomfort with harassment. We investigated the role of pluralistic ignorance in this process by exposing undergraduate students to sexist jokes while manipulating their access to behavioral responses of others. We measured their comfort level and their perceptions of the humor of the jokes. We compared their responses, most importantly, with how many jokes they read prior to “reporting” their discomfort with the jokes. We found evidence for the proposed role of pluralistic ignorance in the sexual harassment reporting process, whereby exposure to behavioral responses of others influences perceptions of others' relative comfort and humor, which in turn led to a decreased likelihood of reporting the harassment.     

The discovery of pluralistic ignorance: An ironic lesson

In recent years, an increasing number of social and behavioral scientists have begun to pay serious attention to pluralistic ignorance, the shared false ideas of individuals about the sentiments, thoughts, and actions of others. Most of these researchers are unaware of the original effort to investigate these patterns of cognitive error and, consequently, misunderstand, as did the original investigators, some of the implications of their own work. The discovery of this important social phenomenon by Floyd H. Allport and his students, Daniel Katz and Richard L. Schanck, and how their preoccupation with individual characteristics and their relative neglect of social characteristics led them to underestimate the value of their discovery, is discussed. Allport's original interest in pluralistic ignorance and how he and Katz documented it empirically are presented, as is a review of Schanck's research extending their analysis.     

Virtue and Salience

This paper explores two ways in which evaluations of an agent's character as virtuous or vicious are properly influenced by what the agent finds salient or attention-grabbing. First, we argue that ignoring salient needs reveals a greater deficit of benevolent motivation in the agent, and hence renders the agent more blameworthy. We use this fact to help explain our ordinary intuition that failing to give to famine relief (for example) is in some sense less bad than failing to help a child who is drowning right before your eyes, in a way that's compatible with the contention that there's no principled reason to see the one life-saving act as any more or less choiceworthy than the other. Second, we argue that alleged ‘virtues of ignorance’ (modesty, believing better of friends than the evidence supports, etc.) are better understood as ‘virtues of salience’. Rather than placing demands on what we believe, these virtues place demands on what we find salient.     

A Logic for Disjunctive Ignorance

In this paper, we introduce a notion of ‘disjunctive ignorance’, which is a weak combination of two forms of ignorance in the literature. We propose a logical language with ‘disjunctive ignorance’ as a sole modality, explore the logical properties of this notion and its related notions, and axiomatize it over various frame classes. By finding suitable reduction axioms, we extend the results to the case of public announcements and apply it to Moore-like sentences.

     

Biography and Choice: Female Converts to Islam in the Netherlands

This article assesses the relevance of the rational-choice approach for understanding female conversion to Islam in the Netherlands. Rational-choice theories are important for focusing on the increasingly pluralistic character of the religious market and the active nature of religious actors. It is argued that women are active actors who make sensible choices. Yet the rational choice conception of rationality is rather limited and the specific characteristics of the commodity ‘Islam’ are not accounted for in this approach. In addition, the actors are presented as agents without identity and history. By analysing the life stories of three Dutch converts, it is shown how certain Islamic narratives become meaningful in their lives. By using a biographical approach, an attempt is made to bring the history and identity of the actors and the content of their faith into focus without denying the ‘rationality’ of their choice.     

Pluralistic Ignorance and Health Risk Behaviors: Do College Students Misperceive Social Approval for Risky Behaviors on Campus and in Media?

Pluralistic ignorance is a psychological state in which individuals believe that their own beliefs and feelings differ from others' in a group despite the fact that they all behave similarly (Miller & McFarland, 1991). For example, college students reported that they were less comfortable with campus drinking than were other students on their campus (Prentice & Miller, 1993). We replicated this finding and investigated whether college students would show this pluralistic ignorance effect for other health-related risk behaviors (smoking, sexual behavior, and illegal drug use). In addition, we tested whether media portrayals of these behaviors also might result in pluralistic ignorance. The results show that a significant effect of pluralistic ignorance occurred for all 4 health-related risk behaviors, both in ratings of campus behaviors and in ratings of media portrayals of these behaviors. Participants indicated that other students on their campus would have higher comfort ratings with campus patterns of smoking, drinking, illegal drug use, and sexual behaviors than their own comfort ratings. Participants also indicated that other students would have higher comfort ratings with the same 4 behaviors as they are portrayed in the media than their own comfort ratings.     

Same meaning but different feelings: Different expressions influence satisfaction in social comparisons

The same social comparison information may be expressed in different ways (e.g. ‘I am better than him’ versus ‘he is worse than me’). The results of four studies indicated that the way social comparison is expressed can affect an individual's satisfaction (i.e. ‘better’ versus ‘worse’). Specifically, in upward comparisons, the expression ‘I am worse than him’ makes individuals feel less satisfied than the expression ‘he is better than me’. In downward comparisons, those who use the expression ‘I am better than him’ are more satisfied than those who use the expression ‘he is worse than me’. The motivation of information processing acted as the mediator.     

Misalignment and Misperception in Preferences to Utilize Family‐Friendly Benefits: Implications for Benefit Utilization and Work–Family Conflict

Despite their increasing popularity, family‐friendly benefits are frequently underutilized. Drawing on literatures concerning social norms and pluralistic ignorance, this study examines the role of personal preference, group norm misalignment, and misperception of group norms on employees’ utilization of family‐friendly benefits. In 2 samples (154 firefighters and 440 nurses) across 3 data collection periods, we found that when employees’ preferences for benefit utilization were misaligned with the perceived group norm, they adjusted their family‐friendly benefit utilization in a manner congruent with the norm, even when that norm was misperceived. Further, we found that family‐friendly benefit utilization was negatively associated with work–family conflict. Together, our findings suggest that misperceived social norms regarding family‐friendly benefit utilization can lead to situations whereby employees do not utilize family‐friendly benefits because they mistakenly perceive utilization is not socially accepted and, as a result, experience higher work–family conflict.     

An Epistemic Argument for Conservatism

‘Epistemic’ arguments for conservatism typically claim that given the limits of human reason, we are better off accepting some particular social practice or institution rather than trying to consciously improve it. I critically examine and defend here one such argument, claiming that there are some domains of social life in which, given the limits of our knowledge and the complexity of the social world, we ought to defer to those institutions that have robustly endured in a wide variety of circumstances in the past while not being correlated with intolerable outcomes. These are domains of social life in which our ignorance of optimal institutions is radical, and there is uncertainty (rather than quantifiable risk) about the costs of error. This is an argument for the preservation of particular institutions, not particular policies or outcomes, and it specifically identifies these with the institutions that John Rawls called ‘the basic structure of society.’ The argument further implies that to the extent that there is any reason to change these institutions, changes should be calculated as far as possible to increase their ‘epistemic power.’     

To specialize or to innovate? An internalist account of pluralistic ignorance in economics

Academic and corporate research departments alike face a crucial dilemma: to exploit known frameworks or to explore new ones; to specialize or to innovate? Here I show that these two conflicting epistemic desiderata are sufficient to explain pluralistic ignorance and its boom-and-bust-like dynamics, exemplified in the collapse of the efficient markets hypothesis as a modern risk management paradigm in 2007. The internalist nature of this result, together with its robustness, suggests that pluralistic ignorance is an inherent feature rather than a threat to the rationality of epistemic communities.     

Ethical selfhood and the status of the secular: Muslim identity in Mumbai

As part of a larger project, this essay contributes to the current anthropological rethinking of categories such as ‘religion’, ‘secularism’ and ‘politics’ in relation to social processes and subjects: a series of ventures that are related, in the Indian context, to modernity and liberal conceptions of statehood, sovereignty and personhood. In discussing everyday phenomena such as piety and religious authority, gender and childraising, and political and professional pursuits in Mumbai, I demonstrate that the ostensibly ‘religious’ domain of Islam is not necessarily the only, or even primary, basis for achieving a self-consciously ethical selfhood for even those who identify as observant and devout Muslims. I argue that the religious domain of Islam in this context is defined as such and intersected by discourses and practices of the self as a political and economic agent defined largely in terms of political modernity.     

Pluralistic Ignorance and Political Correctness: The Case of Affirmative Action

The pressure to appear politically correct can have important consequences for social life. In particular, the desire to appear politically correct, and to avoid being seen as racist, sexist, or culturally insensitive, can lead people to espouse publicly support for politically correct issues, such as support for affirmative action, despite privately held doubts. Such discrepancies between public behavior and private attitudes, when accompanied by divergent attributions for one's own behavior and the identical behavior of others, can lead to pluralistic ignorance. Two studies investigated pluralistic ignorance with respect to affirmative action among undergraduates. Their survey responses indicate that people overestimate their peers' support for affirmative action and underestimate their peers' opposition to affirmative action, that people's ratings of the political correctness of supporting affirmative action are correlated with their overestimation of support for affirmative action, and that people view their own attitudes toward affirmative action as unique.     

Hebrew Healing: Jewish Authenticity and Religious Healing in Canada

This paper describes a Jewish healing group, referred to as ‘Yehi Ohr’, and discusses strategies for constructing religious authenticity employed by Yehi Ohr's leader and the rabbis who have assisted in leading Yehi Ohr's service. A discussion of the participants in the healing service follows, with an outline of their criteria for authenticity and a focus on the range of their healing experiences. By demonstrating the centrality of these strategies for achieving authenticity in the work of Yehi Ohr, the paper points to the importance of issues of authenticity to the success of this religious healing group and proposes that authenticity may well be central to the work of other healing groups in pluralistic, postmodern settings.     

Biases in the perceived prevalence and motives of severe acute respiratory syndrome prevention behaviors among Chinese high school students in Hong Kong

In two studies conducted in Hong Kong during and immediately after the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), participants displayed several social cognitive biases when they estimated the prevalence of and inferred the motives underlying SARS preventive behaviors. First, participants who practiced preventive behaviors (practicers) consistently estimated that more people practiced such behaviors than did non-practicers (false consensus bias). Second, for some preventive behaviors, participants believed that their own behaviors were more motivated by prosocial concerns (relative to self-interest) than were other practicers (pluralistic ignorance). Finally, non-practicers underestimated the importance of prosocial concerns underlying some preventive behaviors (actor-observer bias). We discussed the relevance of these social cognitive biases to health education and to Hong Kong people's psychological reactions to SARS.     

Three paradoxes of medical diagnosis

Sadegh-zadeh [23] has proposed a theory of the relativity of medical diagnosis in terms of the time at which a diagnosis is accepted, the patient to whom the diagnosis applies, the physician who renders the diagnosis, the medical knowledge used, the diagnostic method applied, and the set of patient observations. Use of classical formal logic as the ‘diagnostic method’ may result in three paradoxes: the paradoxes of consistency, completeness, and justifiable ignorance. These paradoxes may be resolved by the addition of two non-classical operators, the ‘certainty’ and ‘effort’ operators, akin to the non-classical operators of modal logic.     

Effects of Group Status and Victim Sex on Male Bystanders’ Responses to a Potential Party Rape

This study examined male bystanders’ responses to risk for party rape. Undergraduate men (N = 77) imagined attending a party (either alone or with 3 friends) where a sober man led an intoxicated potential victim (either a man or woman) into a bedroom. After random assignment to 1 of these 4 conditions, participants completed measures of behavioral inaction and barriers to action. Bystanders in groups were more inactive than lone bystanders. Compared to bystanders who saw a woman at risk, bystanders who saw a man at risk reported greater inaction and greater barriers to action, including risk uncertainty, lack of responsibility to help, and skills deficits. Results highlight social factors that inhibit male bystanders’ prosocial responses to high-risk situations.     

Meaning of Social Inclusion to Young People Not in Employment,Education or Training

The ‘social inclusion’ of young people, particularly those who are ‘not in education, employment or training’, is a contemporary concern in policy discourses. However, it has been argued that the term ‘social inclusion’ is defined by adults and imposed on young people, and there is little understanding of what ‘social inclusion’ means to young people themselves. Using a participatory methodology, this study investigated what ‘being included’ meant to young people. A qualitative approach with a thematic analysis was used to explore the accounts of 11 participants and yielded three main themes. ‘“Acceptance”—the building blocks of inclusion’ reflected the power of interpersonal acceptance in determining young people's sense of inclusion. ‘“Learning why I don't matter”—when power and discourse shape inclusion’ illustrated how social discourses and power dynamics influenced young people's experience of inclusion. ‘“Keeping up or falling behind”—internalising the discourse of inclusion’ reflected how young people internalised some of these societal definitions of inclusion and responded to them. Those who felt ‘accepted’ or ‘included’ in a ‘mainstream’ sense articulated a sense of agency and hope. For those who did not, it appeared that agency dissolved as did a sense of hope for the future. Although the participants negotiated their ‘inclusion’ through close, trusting relationships with others, the application of the societal discourses of inclusion such as productivity, independence and career mindedness had the potential to leave them feeling excluded, isolated and distressed. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.