Can Education Save Us From Ourselves? Three Psychological Challenges to Democracy

This review brings social science literature into conversation with education to understand how three psychological challenges—motivated reasoning, misinformation, and conspiracy theories—have been studied in educational research. After describing the challenges, how they function, and how they contribute to democratic backsliding, the authors explore the frequency, orientation, and proposed interventions to these challenges in 59 educational research articles published between 2016 and 2022. We categorize approaches to the challenges as Rational, Affective, or Blended Rational/Affective to describe their framing in educational research. Rational frameworks were the most common, while few studies used Affective frames. The few studies featuring an educational intervention emphasized rational thinking over affective or motivational processes. We suggest ways to bolster understanding of problems created by motivated reasoning, misinformation, and conspiratorial thinking and argue for increased attention to the affective and political nature of these challenges in educational research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Review of Educational Research
Published
2024-11-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241288245
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Educator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.13
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can Education Save Us From Ourselves? Three Psychological Challenges to Democracy

Christopher H. Clark, Mardi Schmeichel
1 citations
Review of Educational Research
Educator Training and Historical Pedagogy
1.13
article

Can Education Save Us From Ourselves? Three Psychological Challenges to Democracy

Christopher H. Clark, Mardi Schmeichel
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This review brings social science literature into conversation with education to understand how three psychological challenges—motivated reasoning, misinformation, and conspiracy theories—have been studied in educational research. After describing the challenges, how they function, and how they contribute to democratic backsliding, the authors explore the frequency, orientation, and proposed interventions to these challenges in 59 educational research articles published between 2016 and 2022. We categorize approaches to the challenges as Rational, Affective, or Blended Rational/Affective to describe their framing in educational research. Rational frameworks were the most common, while few studies used Affective frames. The few studies featuring an educational intervention emphasized rational thinking over affective or motivational processes. We suggest ways to bolster understanding of problems created by motivated reasoning, misinformation, and conspiratorial thinking and argue for increased attention to the affective and political nature of these challenges in educational research.

Review of Educational ResearchVol. 96(1)
University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US), University of North Dakota (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Educator Training and Historical Pedagogy
1.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.