Individual Differences in Stances Toward Societal Meta-Narratives

Meta-narratives, our often-implicit group stories of who we are and where we are collectively headed, are an important component of worldviews, helping us make sense of the larger world and our potential roles in it. Leaders and others seeking to influence our behavior can offer us new meta-narratives, which we may accept or reject. Previous research on message acceptance has focused on the evaluation of scientific findings, policies, and other empirically based judgments, whereas meta-narratives are interpretive frameworks as well as empirically informed beliefs, and multiple frameworks may be equally valid. This literature review presents a new model of individual stances toward societal meta-narratives: a full immersion in a worldview (as in a "bubble" or "echo chamber"), reflective immersion involving a more thoughtful evaluation of alternatives, and cynical detachment. Predictors of stances are reviewed at three levels: structural factors, stable individual differences, and specific situational encounters. As Alexander Hamilton noted in 1787, democracy requires "reflection and choice," and a better understanding of its facilitation may be vital to our future.