Being open-minded about controversial issues and willing to take other perspectives can help reduce political polarization. We investigated the use of perspective taking through the construction of causal models of conflicting viewpoints, aiming to enhance traits associated with an open-minded mindset and reduce aspects of polarization. In a randomized classroom quasi-experiment, 1,479 students in introductory courses at two US universities completed measures of open-mindedness at the beginning and end of the semester. Students in the treatment condition (N = 636) completed three assignments modeling opposing perspectives on controversial issues. While participants in the control condition exhibited declines in perspective-taking, open-minded cognition, and intellectual humility, those in the treatment condition did not. Treatment participants were more likely to perceive attitudinally dissimilar others as rational. These findings suggest students may experience declines in open-mindedness over a semester, but modeling different perspectives may help prevent this, with implications for reducing polarization.

This data was collected in introductory courses in economics, environmental studies, and psychology at Oberlin College and Michigan State University in the 2021 - 2022 academic year.  Class instructors informed students that they had chosen to participate in a “research effort to identify the most effective ways to help students think about complex problems.” Students who chose to participate completed a pre-survey at the beginning of the semester and a post-survey at the end. The surveys measured perspective taking, intellectual humility, and open-mindedness as well as attitudes on three controversial issues. Class sections were either assigned to the control or the treatment condition. In the treatment group, participants were additionally presented with three Mental Modeler assignments during the semester and answered brief surveys directly after turning in each assignment. 

Each assignment was focused on a controversial topic: the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food production, the restriction of price gouging in situations of crises, and the psychological effect of social media usage on juveniles. Each assignment asked participants to first read two positions on the topic, one in favor and one against. These positions were written in the first-person perspective, adopted a conversational tone, and were balanced in terms of length and number of arguments. After reading each position, participants in the experimental group were asked to create two mental models using the Mental Modeler software—one representing the pro position, and one representing the con position. 

We used the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) (Davis, 1980, 1983) to measure perspective taking; the Intellectual Humility Scale (IHS, Keart et al., 2017), and the Open-Minded Cognition General (OMC-G) scale (Price, Ottati, Wilson, & Kim, 2015) measured at the beginning and end of the semester as our primary dependent variables. All participants also completed a set of political polarization questions relevant to the three topics that made up the intervention: their attitude, on a 6-point scale ranging from “I am totally against it” to “I am totally in favor of it” on each issue;  a measure of their moral absolutism on the issue; how rational they perceived people who held a position in opposition to their own; and their moral conviction about the issue.

The files were created in SPSS, but have been exported to csv format.