The Hofstadter hypothesis revisited: The nature of evidence in politically “paranoid” discourse

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
This study explores the evidentiary character of politically “paranoid” and “non‐paranoid” discourse. The data suggest that the two types differ with regard to the types of references they make, but do not differ significantly in terms of accuracy or distortion. The results affirm the existence of an evidence‐inference dichotomy and suggest that political “paranoids” are able to construct their unique arguments without distorting evidence about their environment.

This publication has 2 references indexed in Scilit: