Fredrik Jansson

@fredrikjansson.bsky.social

Associate Professor in Mathematics interested in cultural evolution and connecting psychology, sociology and philosophy through modelling.

In a new paper, we find that judging facts by messenger rather than content leads to polarising belief packages (e.g. latte liberals, leftist support for wind power, rightist for nuclear). Worryingly, recommender algorithms use this strategy. No need to read the paper; you can just trust me on this.

The emergence of polarised groups through source filtering - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications - The emergence of polarised groups through source filtering

nature.com

How to convince others of what’s right and wrong: here is a popular-science press release presenting the findings from our latest paper. Arguments that don’t fit are filtered out, while those that connect to what already exists in your belief system get through and can force a reassessment.

Moral arguments about care and fairness persuade both liberals and conservatives

A new study in Public Opinion Quarterly shows that moral arguments appealing to care and fairness can persuade both liberals and conservatives in the United States. By contrast, arguments grounded in ...

eurekalert.org

Despite the current state of politics, moral views have become more progressive over time. Why? In an experiment we found that the arguments that make liberals more liberal also persuade conservatives, whereas the arguments that make conservatives more conservative don't persuade liberals.

Susceptibility to Moral Arguments Among Liberals and Conservatives

Abstract. An empirical result in Moral Foundations Theory is that liberals and progressives endorse the individualizing factors of care and fairness, while

academic.oup.com