The MEVIR 2 framework innovates and improves how we understand trust decisions in our polarized information landscape. Unlike classical models assuming ideal rationality, MEVIR 2 recognizes that human trust emerges from three interacting foundations: how we process evidence procedurally, our character as epistemic agents virtue theory, and our moral intuitions shaped by both evolutionary cooperation MAC model and cultural values Extended Moral Foundations Theory. This explains why different people find different authorities, facts, and tradeoffs compelling. MEVIR 2's key innovation introduces "Truth Tribes" TTs-stable communities sharing aligned procedural, virtue, and moral epistemic profiles. These arent mere ideological groups but emergent clusters with internally coherent "trust lattices" that remain mutually unintelligible across tribal boundaries. The framework incorporates distinctions between Truth Bearers and Truth Makers, showing disagreements often stem from fundamentally different views about what aspects of reality can make propositions true. Case studies on vaccination mandates and climate policy demonstrate how different moral configurations lead people to select different authorities, evidential standards, and trust anchors-constructing separate moral epistemic worlds. The framework reinterprets cognitive biases as failures of epistemic virtue and provides foundations for designing decision support systems that could enhance metacognition, make trust processes transparent, and foster more conscientious reasoning across divided communities. MEVIR 2 thus offers both descriptive power for understanding polarization and normative guidance for bridging epistemic divides.

翻译：MEVIR 2 框架创新并改进了我们对极化信息环境中信任决策的理解。与假定理想理性的经典模型不同，MEVIR 2 认识到人类信任产生于三个相互作用的基石：我们处理证据的程序性方式、我们作为认知主体的德性特质（德性理论），以及由进化合作（MAC 模型）和文化价值观（扩展道德基础理论）共同塑造的道德直觉。这解释了为何不同人群会被不同的权威、事实和权衡取舍所吸引。MEVIR 2 的核心创新在于引入了“真相部落”（Truth Tribes, TTs）——即共享一致的程序性、德性与道德认知特征的稳定社群。这些并非单纯的意识形态群体，而是具有内部一致的“信任格”的涌现性集群，其信任结构在部落边界之间往往相互难以理解。该框架整合了“真理承载者”与“真理制造者”的区分，表明分歧常源于对现实哪些方面能使命题为真持有根本不同的观点。关于疫苗强制接种与气候政策的案例研究表明，不同的道德配置如何导致人们选择不同的权威、证据标准和信任锚点，从而构建出各自分离的道德认知世界。该框架将认知偏差重新诠释为认知德性的缺失，并为设计决策支持系统提供了理论基础。这类系统可增强元认知能力，使信任过程透明化，并在分裂的社群间促进更审慎的推理。因此，MEVIR 2 既为理解极化现象提供了描述性解释力，也为弥合认知鸿沟提供了规范性指引。