I think one important factor that you didn't address is what I would dichotimize as religious thinking vs. scientific thinking. Religious thinkers believe the truth is something to be revealed by and received from a deity, and then should be accepted without thinking. Many people with such a mind set then also allow their political leaders or media pundits to be lower level deities, feeding truth to them. They don't care about rationality or logic or evidence because those are all irrelevant to accepted truth.

Scientific thinkers want to know what facts support an idea, and what other possible explanations there might be. Logical inconsistencies matter to such people. They are open to having one set of assumptions overthrown if new information shows it to be false.

An open letter, that Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett signed on to in 2015, exemplifies this religious mindset : "We see the teachings of the Church as truth—a source of authentic freedom, equality, and happiness for women." (https://eppc.org/synodletter/ ) Once you believe this, the strictures, inequality and misery placed on women by current Catholic teachings become immaterial, because they don't really exist.

It might be less polemical to have described these two styles of arriving at "truth" as believers vs. thinkers. There are certaintly some religious people who are thinkers, and many irreligious people who are believers.