While evolution has been largely established in the scientific community, it is still a topic of debate among the general public. Some people accept it, some don't, and research has shown that the decision to do so is affected by cognitive mechanisms.
In a study published in the journal Cognition, psychologist Will Gervais conducted two surveys involving hundreds of undergraduates from a large Kentucky university and found a connection between cognitive style and a subject's beliefs regarding evolution, which affected whether or not an individual believed evolution to be real.
A common task was used to measure the extent at which people engaged in cognitive styles that were more intuitive versus those that were more analytic. More intuitive cognitive styles involved immediate, intuitive judgments while more analytic cognitive styles led to more explicit deliberations and had the tendency to override intuitive responses.
In both surveys, Gervais discovered a statistically significant relationship involving the extent that a subject manifested a more analytic cognitive style and an endorsement of evolution. More importantly, the relationship stayed significant even after variables predicting beliefs about evolution were controlled. These variables included political conservatism, religious upbringing and belief in God.
Gervais' work also replicated prior research done that found an association between evolutionary and religious beliefs and between religious disbelief and cognitive style. Participants who held more analytic cognitive styles were less likely to accept the evolutionary process as real but were also less likely to believe in God.
The findings are consistent with several possibilities: everyone intuitively rejects evolution but some can "override" this response with reflective or analytic thinking; some people manifest stronger intuitive responses, causing them to have a tendency for purposive thinking, an aversion to uncertainty and an affinity for cognitive preferences that go against the idea of evolution; and the effects of an individual's cognitive style is affected by cultural input.
While these possibilities cannot be considered mutually exhaustive or exclusive, they show just how elaborate human belief can be. More research has to be done to uncover the other intricacies of cognitive styles and how they affect what people believe in. Results will offer a lot further, not just in the area of science education but also in terms of policies enforced in society.
Gervais is affiliated with the University of Kentucky's Department of Psychology.
Photo: Hayden Petrie | Flickr
