Filter Bubbles and Echo Chambers – The Biology and Environment of Politics

How Filter Bubbles and Echo Chambers Can Exploit Convictions

Our beliefs and convictions are important aspects of our identity. This is why we defend them so vigorously and why changing someone’s mind is so difficult.

In order to open ourselves up to new perspectives, it is necessary to consider how much our convictions are based on biology and the environment. As well as how they are exploited by technology.

Biology & Environment: Why You Believe What You Believe

In his book Pleased to Meet Me: Genes, Germs, and the Curious Forces That Make Us Who We Are¹, Dr. Bill Sullivan explores human behavior through the lens of genetics, microbiology, psychology, neurology, and family history.

He covers everything from why some people think cilantro tastes like soap to the considerably more layered (and difficult) subject of political leanings.

On Biology

There is a biological aspect to political belief. Studies show that political beliefs are more closely aligned between identical twins than fraternal twins. More remarkable, identical twins separated at birth and raised in different environments still found themselves in agreement on political issues when reunited.

Sullivan introduces the reader to the studies of Political Scientist John Hibbing² of the University of Nebraska. Hibbing’s work suggests conservatives and liberals react differently to unpleasant images or startling sounds.

Subjects who were jumpier in response to threatening sounds and images favored defense spending, capital punishment, patriotism, and war. Whereas those that were not so jumpy favored foreign aid, liberal immigration policies, pacifism, and gun control.

Sullivan also delves into the work of Neuroscientist Geraint Rees³ of University College London. In his studies the party participates supported could be predicted with 72% accuracy by looking at a brain scan. Conservatives tended to have a bigger amygdala, Liberals a larger anterior cingulate cortex (the region involved in critical analysis of instinctive thoughts).

On Environment

It should be kept in mind how environment shapes biology. Luther Burbank, a pioneer of agricultural science, said: “Heredity is nothing but stored environment”. Or there is the old joke about how a liberal is just a conservative who has never been mugged.

Robert Sapolsky’s book, Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst, cites a study which found that of 1,100 judicial rulings, prisoners were granted parole at about a 60% rate when judges had recently eaten and at essentially a 0% rate just before judges ate. As Sapolsky put it, “Justice may be blind but she’s sure sensitive to her stomach gurgling”.⁴

Sullivan is cautious regarding the assumptions such research can produce and stresses that these findings amount to differing skill sets. “Conservatives are excellent at detecting possible threats, and liberals are excellent at threat assessment. In a collaborative society, these complementary skill sets provide a prudent means for civilization to progress.”

Heredity is nothing but stored environment.

~Luther Burbank

Epistemic Bubbles and Echo Chambers: Threats to Progress

Our ability to progress as a collaborative society seems less likely as political polarization becomes more extreme. This is where Epistemic Bubbles and Echo Chambers come in.

Though similar, Epistemic Bubbles and Echo Chambers are not the same. An Epistemic Bubble is a social structure in which the members aren’t exposed to all the right information. The Epistemic Bubble is not limited to social media and has deep roots in human history. It has however been spoken of as an online behavior in the past few years. Eli Pariser’s work, The Filter Bubble, lays out how this looks online; you chose your friends on social media and they all share your politics. So you are always exposed to arguments for your side. Rarely do you hear the arguments and evidence on the other side.

Echo Chambers are social structures that manipulate who their members trust. Here we see more of what can turn into online (and then real-world) extremism. As our tendency towards confirmation bias is exploited.

What Can Be Done?

As has been stated before, knowledge is an important part of understanding. Differences in the beliefs and values stressed by individuals will always exist in any society. But our ability to first respect the humanity of others involves seeing the dangers of echo chambers and knowing how algorithms can bolster Epistemic Bubbles, keeping us isolated and unable to see the other side.

Our online life should stress fact-checking sources. Certainly, it should stress fact-checking sources before sharing them. We need to demand more from our media sources, especially those purporting to be news, to present information and not sensationalism.

Offline, we must be willing to try new things and meet people to expand our perspectives and experiences. There are countless options for this in the form of meet-up groups, classes, and community organizations.

While this sounds like common sense it is difficult in a world polarized by extremism, and individuals increasingly unwilling or unable to distinguish between speaking on their own personal issues and speaking for the wider community.

It takes real and consistent effort, interest, and engagement.

---

---

Sources and Further Readings

1. Pleased to Meet Me by Dr. Bill Sullivan
2. John Hibbing
3. Geraint Rees
4. Behave By Dr. Robert Sapolsky
5. Epistemic Bubbles by C. Thi Nguyen
6. Group-Strapping by Social Epistemology Review
7. TED Talk by Eli Pariser
8. The Believing Brain by Dr. Michael Shermer