An Exploration of the Relation between Naive Realism and Likability Amongst Disagreeing Individuals

Abstract

Previous research on the topic of naive realism has established the difficulty that our engagement in this tendency places on our ability to recognize fallacies and biases in our thinking relative to that of others. This phenomenon presents additional adversity in resolving conflict with a disagreeing individual, whom a naive realist would view as uninformed, lazy, or biased. This study examines the relationship between the extent to which likability is associated with an individual’s tendency to engage in naive realism. Forty-six undergraduate participants completed questionnaires which assessed their beliefs on topics of social interest and were asked to participate in a brief discussion with a partner, whom unbeknownst to them, was someone who held discrepant views on the topic of discussion. Participants then answered questions that assessed their level of naive realism, their perception of their partner’s naive realism, the extent to which they found their partner to be likable, and a personality inventory. As hypothesized, greater naïve realism was associated with perceiving one’s partner as less likable. However, those who showed greater naive realism were not perceived by their partner to be less likable. These findings allows for speculation on the influence both naive realism and likability have on conflict resolution.