The Caffeine Study & Self-Deception

We love to think that we're rational—that our take on the world is correct—and that if we were being dishonest with ourselves... we'd know. However, there's good reason to think that we're nowhere near as honest with ourselves as we think we are.

Researchers wondered about this and they tried a test. Give subjects evidence that there is a correlation between heavy caffeine consumption and breast cancer. Then, they were asked how convincing they thought that evidence was.

The responses were interesting. As Gregg Ten Elshof writes:

In the female population, heavy consumers of caffeine were significantly less convinced than were those who consumed less.

The male population was significantly more convinced than were the female heavy consumers, and there was little difference between heavy and light caffeine consumers in the male population.

It's not that the men were more rational than the women. Instead, "those for whom the hypothesis was bad news were least likely to be convinced by the evidence."

He goes on to note:

Related studies reveal that we often spend more time scrutinizing evidence for a view if we find it threatening than if we find it benign.

This is especially true if we’re presented with the evidence in public. Apparently, we’re more likely to scrutinize evidence for opposing views if we think we’ll be called on to answer for that evidence. If we believe we’ve been presented with the evidence in private, we’re less likely to give it much attention.

The issue is much weightier than a made-up link between coffee and cancer. The more entrenched and divisive we become in our political opinions, the harder it is for both sides to actually honestly evaluate the facts.

And also, when it comes to faith — how easy would it be to brush off the gospel if it meant you had to give up the sins that have captured your heart?

Gregg A. Ten Elshof, I told me so: Self  Deception and the Christian Life, Eerdmans, 2009.