People who are less confident in their beliefs are more reluctant than others to seek out opposing perspectives, researchers said today.

The findings, which are based on a review of more than 90 studies, shed light on the debate over whether people intentionally steer clear of views conflicting with their own, or whether they are just exposed more often to ideas that conform to their own.

The former seems to be the case. Another recent study revealed that college students gravitated toward news that fit their views.

While it's not news that like-minded people often flock together, the new review suggests we actively keep our blinders on when opposing views are nearby. The review is detailed this month in the journal Psychological Bulletin.

Some more so than others …

Overall, the studies suggested people are about twice as likely to cherry-pick information that supports their own viewpoints than to consider an opposing idea. Nearly 70 percent cherry-picked compared to about 30 percent who ponder the other side.

Close-minded individuals opted for information that went along with their views 75 percent of the time.

"Close-minded people are very certain and dogmatic in their views, and generally believe that there is a single correct point of view," said study researcher Dolores Albarracin, a psychology professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. "The implication is that you have a group of people who would only seek to confirm their points of view, resisting all evidence to the contrary via avoidance of exposure."

And since even a slight breeze could flatten a house of cards, the researchers found people with little confidence in their own beliefs are less likely to expose themselves to contrary views compared with their confident counterparts. In fact, another recent study showed that people with stronger party affiliation and greater interest in politics were more likely to read articles with opposing views.

The new study, however, found politics can prompt blinders: People are more reluctant to look at different viewpoints regarding political, religious or ethical values, the studies showed. Specifically, study participants stuck with their own ideas 70 percent of the time when it came to issues of moral values or politics, compared with 60 percent for other issues.

"If you are really committed to your own attitude - for example, if you are a very committed Democrat - you are more likely to seek congenial information, that is, information that corresponds with your views," Albarracin said.

Political and moral views are more open to personal interpretation anyway, than for example some scientific concept. "Political and moral issues are more inherently a personal judgment," Albarracin told LiveScience. "There is no risk of experiencing the effects of being inaccurate as you have in science. Hence people are free to seek information that confirms their attitudes pretty exclusively."

When you need the opposition

Sometimes you can't avoid the opposition, and it can even benefit you. The researchers found that politicians and others who need to publicly defend themselves are motivated to learn about opposing ideas.

For practical matters, different viewpoints are also necessary. "If you're going to buy a house and you really like the house, you're still going to have it inspected," Albarracin said.

Similarly, even if you trust your surgeon, you are likely to seek out a second opinion regarding a major operation, she added.

对自己的观点缺乏信心的人，会更倾向于回避对立意见，研究者们今日发布消息说。

这项发现是在总结了90多份研究成果的基础上得出的。该发现无疑对于解决长久以来的争论--人们到底是有意识地屏蔽相抵触的观点，还是仅仅更经常接触到相似观点--具有启发性的意义。

正确的似乎是前者。近日的另一项研究也表明，大学生更倾向看符合自己观点的新闻。

尽管此类消息并非关于"物以类聚，人以群分",然而，新的发现的确表明：当我们碰到对立观点，会有意地视而不见。该发现的内容详见本月《心理学公报》。

哪种人更固执？

总的来说，据调查显示，人们筛选出符合己见的信息的概率约为考虑相左观点的两倍--前者占近70%,而后者约占30%.

思想保守者尤甚。他们75%的时候都选择性地只看相似观点。

"保守的人对自己的观点很确信，也很固执。他们通常都相信有唯一正确的答案存在。" 研究调查者之一、伊利诺伊大学香槟分校的心理学教授，道罗瑞斯·阿尔芭瑞熙（ Dolores Albarracin）,如此评说道。"这就意味着，有那么一群只固执自己观点的人，他们对于所有指向相反观点的证据，一律采取视而不见的方法加以抵制、拒绝。"'

如同"纸牌堆砌的房子，一缕微风就可以吹倒"所揭示的一样，研究者们发现，对于己见动摇者比自信的人更倾向于回避相左的观点。事实上，近日另一份研究表明，入党人士和对政治感兴趣的人，会较多阅读对立观点的文章。

然而，最近这项新发现却表明，政治也可能加厚人们的有色眼镜：在政治、宗教和伦理问题上，人们尤其回避与自己不同的观点。具体来说，若讨论的是道德或政治，人们70%的时间会仅仅固守自己观点；而若讨论其他问题，这一概率则降至60%.

"如果你真的对自己的想法坚定不移--比如说，你是个坚定的民主党员--那么你确会更倾向于搜寻与自己相宜的信息，即与自己的观点相一致的信息。"阿尔芭瑞熙说。

确实，不管怎么说，政治和道德的观点均是依据个人的理解而定，不比其它--如科学概念。"政治、道德问题本身就是基于个人的判断。" 阿尔芭瑞熙告诉"生活科学"网说。"毕竟，讨论科学问题你可能出错，讨论政、道问题却没有这种风险。因此人们可以自由地筛选出只与他们态度相符合的观点。"

你什么时候需要对立意见？

有时候你无法回避对立面--它可能甚至于你有益。研究者们发现，政治家们以及其他需要当众维护个人观点的人，往往因此而受激励得去了解相反意见。

在日常实际问题中，不同的意见也不可或缺。"如果你要买房，你已经看上了一幢自己很中意的房子，你也依然需要叫上其他人帮你参考。"阿尔芭瑞熙说。

她又补充道，同样地，即使你十分相信你的外科医生，也需要在动一个大手术前多多听取第三方意见。