Antoine Marie PhD
@a-marie-sci.bsky.social
🇫🇷 political psychologist @SciencesPo Paris. I study how people reason and communicate about divisive political topics 🔥
https://www.antoinemariesci.com
ANR Access ERC Nominee
@InstitutNicod @AarhusUni_int @ENS_Ulm
Don’t hate what you don’t understand.
https://www.antoinemariesci.com
ANR Access ERC Nominee
@InstitutNicod @AarhusUni_int @ENS_Ulm
Don’t hate what you don’t understand.
it's possible to nudge people towards placing a higher emphasis on policy efficiency.
Efficiency-neglect is then completely *absent*: people will support the more efficient policy much more, and stop prioritising good intentions.
Efficiency-neglect is then completely *absent*: people will support the more efficient policy much more, and stop prioritising good intentions.
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
it's possible to nudge people towards placing a higher emphasis on policy efficiency.
Efficiency-neglect is then completely *absent*: people will support the more efficient policy much more, and stop prioritising good intentions.
Efficiency-neglect is then completely *absent*: people will support the more efficient policy much more, and stop prioritising good intentions.
Experiment 3 (N = 800) finds that when providing the right sort of *context* and *qualitative appraisals* of the policy’s impact and cost (e.g., the "efficiency of this policy is colossal" + it is contextualised as being equal to the state's budget for the environmental transition),
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
Experiment 3 (N = 800) finds that when providing the right sort of *context* and *qualitative appraisals* of the policy’s impact and cost (e.g., the "efficiency of this policy is colossal" + it is contextualised as being equal to the state's budget for the environmental transition),
Another interesting finding is that decisions made by public ministers get judged more harshly than CEO's, presumably because French people don't expect the latter to try to protect the environment.
Now a bit of HOPE:
Now a bit of HOPE:
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
Another interesting finding is that decisions made by public ministers get judged more harshly than CEO's, presumably because French people don't expect the latter to try to protect the environment.
Now a bit of HOPE:
Now a bit of HOPE:
Lay people don’t response easily to large quantitative contrasts in policy efficiency when described in the abstract.
Further, people seem even less sensitive to policy efficiency when they *moralise* the issue highly: they'll support almost any policy scenarios aiming to reduce CO2 emissions...
Further, people seem even less sensitive to policy efficiency when they *moralise* the issue highly: they'll support almost any policy scenarios aiming to reduce CO2 emissions...
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
Lay people don’t response easily to large quantitative contrasts in policy efficiency when described in the abstract.
Further, people seem even less sensitive to policy efficiency when they *moralise* the issue highly: they'll support almost any policy scenarios aiming to reduce CO2 emissions...
Further, people seem even less sensitive to policy efficiency when they *moralise* the issue highly: they'll support almost any policy scenarios aiming to reduce CO2 emissions...
high efficiency policies at least 40 times more impactful than low efficiency policies--and hugely profitable by a hundred million euros rather than costing this amount--received only a bit more support than low efficiency policies.
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
high efficiency policies at least 40 times more impactful than low efficiency policies--and hugely profitable by a hundred million euros rather than costing this amount--received only a bit more support than low efficiency policies.
For instance, Experiment 2 (N = 1105) showed that in the absence of any information on the policy maker’s motivations,
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
For instance, Experiment 2 (N = 1105) showed that in the absence of any information on the policy maker’s motivations,
And that they value good intentions and punish selfish ones in ways that, arguably, should have secondary importance given we are dealing with one-off policy decisions in market societies.
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
And that they value good intentions and punish selfish ones in ways that, arguably, should have secondary importance given we are dealing with one-off policy decisions in market societies.
What did we find?
First, that respondents aren't swayed at all by large contrasts in policy efficiency, at least when described with numbers and %.
First, that respondents aren't swayed at all by large contrasts in policy efficiency, at least when described with numbers and %.
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
What did we find?
First, that respondents aren't swayed at all by large contrasts in policy efficiency, at least when described with numbers and %.
First, that respondents aren't swayed at all by large contrasts in policy efficiency, at least when described with numbers and %.
We also varied whether the CEO or minister reported "altruistic" or "selfish" motivations when deploying the policy (e.g., helping the environment vs. getting a good reputation)
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
We also varied whether the CEO or minister reported "altruistic" or "selfish" motivations when deploying the policy (e.g., helping the environment vs. getting a good reputation)
We manipulated whether the environmental policy had a high positive impact in reducing CO2 emissions + low financial cost (= high efficiency), vs. a very low impact + high financial cost (= low efficiency).
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
We manipulated whether the environmental policy had a high positive impact in reducing CO2 emissions + low financial cost (= high efficiency), vs. a very low impact + high financial cost (= low efficiency).
We presented naïve French respondents to policy scenarios in which a CEO or minister deployed a public policy meant to reduce CO2 emissions through carbon capture and storage technology.
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
We presented naïve French respondents to policy scenarios in which a CEO or minister deployed a public policy meant to reduce CO2 emissions through carbon capture and storage technology.
Upshot: the impact and cost of environmental policies must be described intuitively, in qualitative terms, to be more compelling in political communication.
November 19, 2025 at 8:59 AM
Upshot: the impact and cost of environmental policies must be described intuitively, in qualitative terms, to be more compelling in political communication.
- Nous anticipons mal les effets en chaîne de nos actions collectives (ex. une interdiction bien intentionnée peut devenir un carburant pour la radicalisation).
November 16, 2025 at 9:17 AM
- Nous anticipons mal les effets en chaîne de nos actions collectives (ex. une interdiction bien intentionnée peut devenir un carburant pour la radicalisation).
🔹 Deux biais majeurs compliquent le vivre-ensemble :
- Nous sommes mauvais pour “lire” les motivations des autres camps ; chacun se pense moralement motivé, et tant qu’on n’intègre pas cela, on ne comprend rien à la conflictualité.
- Nous sommes mauvais pour “lire” les motivations des autres camps ; chacun se pense moralement motivé, et tant qu’on n’intègre pas cela, on ne comprend rien à la conflictualité.
November 16, 2025 at 9:17 AM
🔹 Deux biais majeurs compliquent le vivre-ensemble :
- Nous sommes mauvais pour “lire” les motivations des autres camps ; chacun se pense moralement motivé, et tant qu’on n’intègre pas cela, on ne comprend rien à la conflictualité.
- Nous sommes mauvais pour “lire” les motivations des autres camps ; chacun se pense moralement motivé, et tant qu’on n’intègre pas cela, on ne comprend rien à la conflictualité.
🔹 Polarisation : le désaccord n’est pas le problème
🔹 Sommes-nous plus polarisés qu’avant ?
🔹 Trouver un objectif commun (sans fabriquer un ennemi)
🔹 Le “paradoxe du paradoxe de la tolérance”
🔹Comment parler à ces mascus qui détestent les femmes?
🔹 Nos angles morts cognitifs
🔹 Sommes-nous plus polarisés qu’avant ?
🔹 Trouver un objectif commun (sans fabriquer un ennemi)
🔹 Le “paradoxe du paradoxe de la tolérance”
🔹Comment parler à ces mascus qui détestent les femmes?
🔹 Nos angles morts cognitifs
November 16, 2025 at 9:17 AM
🔹 Polarisation : le désaccord n’est pas le problème
🔹 Sommes-nous plus polarisés qu’avant ?
🔹 Trouver un objectif commun (sans fabriquer un ennemi)
🔹 Le “paradoxe du paradoxe de la tolérance”
🔹Comment parler à ces mascus qui détestent les femmes?
🔹 Nos angles morts cognitifs
🔹 Sommes-nous plus polarisés qu’avant ?
🔹 Trouver un objectif commun (sans fabriquer un ennemi)
🔹 Le “paradoxe du paradoxe de la tolérance”
🔹Comment parler à ces mascus qui détestent les femmes?
🔹 Nos angles morts cognitifs
Substack est LA plateforme sur laquelle suivre l'actualité scientifique et politique.
On y aborde les questions suivantes :
On y aborde les questions suivantes :
November 16, 2025 at 9:17 AM
Substack est LA plateforme sur laquelle suivre l'actualité scientifique et politique.
On y aborde les questions suivantes :
On y aborde les questions suivantes :
Ok. A counter point to this socio constructionist perspective could be the 2016 reedition of Pinker's Blank slate, I think.
October 27, 2025 at 4:59 PM
Ok. A counter point to this socio constructionist perspective could be the 2016 reedition of Pinker's Blank slate, I think.
Yes, with anger management. But women do struggle too, with other neg emotions. I'm curious if you know research on this comparing sexes.
October 27, 2025 at 3:44 PM
Yes, with anger management. But women do struggle too, with other neg emotions. I'm curious if you know research on this comparing sexes.
We’ll do best when we think in ways that don’t fall into these common and socially reinforced ways of being. We’ll do our best not as women and not as men, but as scouts."
October 27, 2025 at 3:23 PM
We’ll do best when we think in ways that don’t fall into these common and socially reinforced ways of being. We’ll do our best not as women and not as men, but as scouts."
"I sometimes hear that the perfect world—in academia, law, and business—is a combination of the male and female styles, keeping the best of both. I used to believe this too, but now I think it’s wrong.
October 27, 2025 at 3:22 PM
"I sometimes hear that the perfect world—in academia, law, and business—is a combination of the male and female styles, keeping the best of both. I used to believe this too, but now I think it’s wrong.
Stimulating discussion between
@herandrews compactmag.com/article/the-gr…
and
@paulbloomyale
open.substack.com/pub/paulbloom/
I'd be inclined to think that both gendered psychologies have advantages and drawbacks for science.
As Bloom puts it:
@herandrews compactmag.com/article/the-gr…
and
@paulbloomyale
open.substack.com/pub/paulbloom/
I'd be inclined to think that both gendered psychologies have advantages and drawbacks for science.
As Bloom puts it:
https://compactmag.com/article/the-gr…
October 27, 2025 at 3:22 PM
Stimulating discussion between
@herandrews compactmag.com/article/the-gr…
and
@paulbloomyale
open.substack.com/pub/paulbloom/
I'd be inclined to think that both gendered psychologies have advantages and drawbacks for science.
As Bloom puts it:
@herandrews compactmag.com/article/the-gr…
and
@paulbloomyale
open.substack.com/pub/paulbloom/
I'd be inclined to think that both gendered psychologies have advantages and drawbacks for science.
As Bloom puts it: