Key Insight
Kahan reflects on finding empirical evidence that contradicts one of his prior claims, arguing that being proven wrong by data is one of the most intellectually rewarding experiences in empirical research.
This post documents a case in which Dan Kahan found empirical evidence that contradicted a prior claim he had made, and why he regards this as a positive rather than embarrassing outcome.
The specific case involved a prediction derived from cultural cognition theory about how a particular variable would affect risk perception. The prediction was clear, the theory well-developed, and the data carefully designed. The data did not support the prediction.
Finding that you were wrong means your empirical claims are falsifiable — which means they are genuinely scientific. A theory that cannot be falsified by any possible evidence is not a scientific theory; it is an ideology. The capacity to be wrong is what distinguishes science from cultural cognition.
This is directly connected to the Cultural Cognition Project's broader concerns about motivated reasoning. Identity-protective cognition operates precisely by making individuals resistant to disconfirming evidence. A scientist immune to disconfirmation is exhibiting the same epistemic pathology that produces cultural polarization in lay citizens.