I was recently wondering if this changed with age: when talking with older ppl, I sometimes think they prefer hearing what they want to hear - or maybe rather, what they predict I would say? And it can be challenging to get theough to them with novel concepts.
If the concept of the Bayesian brain - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_approaches_to_brain_f... - is roughly right, it's plausible that as you get older you might build up a pretty unassailable statistical model of the world which would need very significant evidence to the contrary to change in a short timeframe.
But I think there are probably other, more human, effects dominating like the one you suggest - only listening to evidence that backs up your existing points of view, and that happens from a pretty young age! That would actually be against the idea of the Bayesian brain, which should accept new evidence and update the statistical model appropriately. Much as I find the general approach of the Bayesian brain useful, in many domains humans aren't really particualarly optimal in statistical terms...
I don't think that's necessarily proof against the Bayesian brain. It seems reasonable that the brain is also using its statistical models to assess the relevance of new evidence. So it's not just "new evidence, I need to update" but more like "new evidence, how likely is this true? I'll update according to the magnitude of the likelihood."
Anecdotally, when we get older our ability to assess new evidence weakens, or the weights get rusted into place.
Being friends with an immortal vampire would be a chore. "Blood tasted so much better in Sumeria", "There's nothing wrong with clay tablets for a diary, it never crashes or needs an update."
