Confirmation Bias
The Misconception: Your opinions are the result of years of rational, objective analysis.
The Truth: Your opinions are the result of years of paying attention to information which confirmed what you believed while ignoring information which challenged your preconceived notions.
Source: EIL
Have you ever had a conversation in which some old movie was mentioned, something like “The Golden Child” or maybe even something more obscure?
You laughed about it, quoted lines from it, wondered what happened to the actors you never saw again, and then you forgot about it.
Until…
You are flipping channels one night and all of the sudden you see “The Golden Child” is playing. Weird.
The next day you are reading a news story, and out of nowhere it mentions forgotten movies from the 1980s, and holy shit, three paragraphs about “The Golden Child.”
You see a trailer that night at the theater for a new Eddie Murphy movie, and then you see a billboard on the street promoting Charlie Murphy doing stand-up in town, and then one of your friends sends you a link to a post at TMZ showing recent photos of the actress from “The Golden Child.”
What is happening here? Is the universe trying to tell you something?
No. This is how confirmation bias works.
Since the party and the conversation where you and your friends took turns saying “I-ah-I-ah-I want the kniiiife” you’ve flipped channels plenty of times; you’ve walked past lots of billboards; you’ve seen dozens of stories about celebrities; you’ve been exposed to a handful of movie trailers.
The thing is, you disregarded all the other information, all the stuff unrelated to “The Golden Child.” Out of all the chaos, all the morsels of data, you only noticed the bits which called back to something sitting on top of your brain.
A few weeks back, when Eddie Murphy and his Tibetan adventure were still submerged beneath a heap of pop-culture at the bottom of your skull, you wouldn’t have paid any special attention to references to it.
If you are thinking about buying a new car, you suddenly see people driving them all over the roads. If you just ended a long-time relationship, every song you hear seems to be written about love. If you are having a baby, you start to see them everywhere.
Confirmation bias is seeing the world through a filter, thinking selectively.
The examples above are a sort of passive version of the phenomenon. The real trouble begins when confirmation bias distorts your active pursuit of facts.
Punditry is a whole industry built on confirmation bias.
Rush Limbaugh and Keith Olbermann, Glenn Beck and Arianna Huffington, Rachel Maddow and Ann Coulter – these people provide fuel for beliefs, they pre-filter the world to match existing world-views.
If their filter is like your filter, you love them. If it isn’t, you hate them.
Whether or not pundits are telling the truth, or vetting their opinions, or thoroughly researching their topics is all beside the point. You watch them not for information, but for confirmation.
“Be careful. People like to be told what they already know. Remember that. They get uncomfortable when you tell them new things. New things…well, new things aren’t what they expect. They like to know that, say, a dog will bite a man. That is what dogs do. They don’t want to know that man bites a dog, because the world is not supposed to happen like that. In short, what people think they want is news, but what they really crave is olds…Not news but olds, telling people that what they think they already know is true.”
Terry Pratchett through the character Lord Vetinari from his novel, “The Truth: a novel of Discworld
Check any Amazon.com wish list, and you will find people rarely seek books which challenge their notions of how things are or should be.
During the 2008 U.S. presidential election, Valdis Krebs at orgnet.com analyzed purchasing trends on Amazon.
People who already supported Obama were the same people buying books which painted him in a positive light. People who already disliked Obama were the ones buying books painting him in a negative light.
Just like with pundits, people weren’t buying books for the information, they were buying them for the confirmation.
Krebs has researched purchasing trends on Amazon and the clustering habits of people on social networks for years, and his research shows what psychological research into confirmation bias predicts: you want to be right about how you see the world, so you seek out information which confirms your beliefs and avoid contradictory evidence and opinions.
Half-a-century of research has placed confirmation bias among the most dependable of mental stumbling blocks.
Journalists looking to tell a certain story must avoid the tendency to ignore evidence to the contrary; scientists looking to prove a hypothesis must avoid designing experiments with little wiggle room for alternate outcomes.
Without confirmation bias, conspiracy theories would fall apart. Did we really put a man on the moon? If you are looking for proof we didn’t, you can find it.
“If one were to attempt to identify a single problematic aspect of human reasoning that deserves attention above all others, the confirmation bias would have to be among the candidates for consideration. Many have written about this bias, and it appears to be sufficiently strong and pervasive that one is led to wonder whether the bias, by itself, might account for a significant fraction of the disputes, altercations, and misunderstandings that occur among individuals, groups, and nations.”
- Raymond S. Nickerson
In a 1979 University of Minnesota study by Mark Snyder and Nancy Cantor, people read about a week in the life of an imaginary woman named Jane. Throughout the week, Jane did things which showcased she could be extraverted in some situations and introverted in others.
A few days passed. The subjects were asked to return.
Researchers divided the people into groups and asked them to help decide if Jane would be suited for a particular job. One group was asked if she would be a good librarian; the other group was asked if she would be a good real-estate agent.
In the librarian group, people remembered her as an introvert. In the real-estate group, they remembered her being an extravert. After this, when they were asked if she would be good at the other profession people stuck with their original assessment, saying she wasn’t suited for the other job.
The study suggests even in your memories you fall prey to confirmation bias, recalling those things which support your beliefs, forgetting those things which debunk them.
An Ohio State study in 2009 showed people spend 36 percent more time reading an essay if that essay aligns with their opinions.
Another study at Ohio State in 2009 showed subjects clips of the parody show “The Colbert Report,” and people who considered themselves politically conservative consistently reported “Colbert only pretends to bejoking and genuinely meant what he said.”
“Thanks to Google, we can instantly seek out support for the most bizarre idea imaginable. If our initial search fails to turn up the results we want, we don’t give it a second thought, rather we just try out a different query and search again.”
- Justin Owings
A popular method for teaching confirmation bias, first introduced by P.C. Wason in 1960, is to show the following numbers to a classroom: 2, 4, 6
The teacher then asks the classroom to guess the teacher’s secret rule by offering up three numbers of their own. The teacher will then say “yes” or “no” if the order matches the rule. When the student thinks they have it figured out, they have to write it down and turn it in.
Students typically offer sets like 10, 12, 14 or 22, 24, 26. The teacher says “yes” over and over again, and the majority of people turn in the wrong answer.
To figure out the rule, students would have to offer sets like 2, 2, 2 or 9, 8, 7 – these, the teacher would say, do not fit the rule. With enough guesses playing against what the students think the rule may be, students finally figure out what the original rule was (three numbers in ascending order).
The exercise is intended to show how you tend to come up with a hypothesis and then work to prove it right instead of working to prove it wrong. Once satisfied, you stop searching.
You seek out safe havens for your ideology, friends and coworkers of like mind and attitude, media outlets guaranteed to play nice.
Whenever your opinions or beliefs are so intertwined with your self-image you couldn’t pull them away without damaging your core concepts of self, you avoid situations which may cause harm to those beliefs.
“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.”
- Francis Bacon
Over time, by never seeking the antithetical, through accumulating subscriptions to magazines, stacks of books and hours of television, you can become so confident in your world-view no one could dissuade you.
Remember, there’s always someone out there willing to sell eyeballs to advertisers by offering a guaranteed audience of people looking for validation. Ask yourself if you are in that audience.
In science, you move closer to the truth by seeking evidence to the contrary. Perhaps the same method should inform your opinions as well.
If you buy one book this year…well, I suppose you should get something you’ve had your eye on for a while. But, if you buy two or more books this year, might I recommend one of them be a celebration of self delusion? Give the gift of humility (to yourself or someone else you love). Watch the trailer.
Order now: Amazon - Barnes and Noble - iTunes - Books A Million
Links:
Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises
Research in Amazon Buying Patterns
Research into Book Buying Patterns During an Election
The Complete Text of The Truth: A novel of Discworld
Ohio State Study Showing People Prefer Read Like-Minded Essays
Ohio State Colbert Report Study
Confirmation Bias and Perceived Sexual Double Standards
Justin Owings on Confirmation Bias
Finding Subversives with Amazon Wishlists
Like this:
Trackbacks
- About Confirmation Bias | Richard Yoo's Weblog
- Confirmation Bias « You Are Not So Smart « Netcrema – creme de la social news via digg + delicious + stumpleupon + reddit
- Science is not normal « Reasoning with Uncertainty
- Know How Confirmation Bias Colours Your Decisions | Lifehacker Australia
- Top Posts — WordPress.com
- isambard » Quote of the week (21 June)
- Confirmation Bias – its threat against the church « Noah's Notes
- Kemstone's Online Journal » Confirmation Bias
- Teams innovation – cognitive bias and overestimation « Intuinovare
- Friday Link Roundup #5 | No Forbidden Questions
- Angry Sascha is angry.» Blog Archive » Men listening to fleas that break wind.
- The Far Edge » Blog Archive » Know How Confirmation Bias Colors Your Decisions [Mind Hacks]
- Teams innovation – cognitive bias and over-optimism « gabriel catalano | in-perfección
- Confirmation Bias (via You Are Not So Smart) « Expanding The Proscenium
- Confirmation Bias (via You Are Not So Smart) | Advocatus diaboli
- Tell You What You Want To Hear
- Telling You What You Want To Hear – The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan « Firesaw
- Social Game Design » Blog Archive » Social Games Equal Falling in Love
- Am I really right? « Surely, Shirley will…
- Are They Really Buying Your Product for the Information It Contains? | Gwen Tanner's Product Creation Blog
- You Are Not So Smart « Kissaki Blog
- Telling You What You Want To Hear - 25 Popular Blogs - Popular Bloggers.com
- On Becoming Vegan « tim gier
- mrclay.org » Archive » You Are Not So Smart
- Today I am reading… Confirmation Bias | Blog, by Shannon
- Does caffeine work?
- How I learned to like gays and country music « The connection
- On and nom « Kiwimartini
- Made-to-Order Econ Justifications | The Long Game
- Munchkin Killer, He’ll Stab You In Your Ass While You Poop « We are nerds, with benefits
- links for 2010-07-21 | James A. Arconati
- The prepared mind vs having context when learning new ideas at Mark Needham
- You’re Not That Smart « Findsen Law
- Not a good week..... - INGunOwners
- You Are Not So Smart « Piedmonthudson’s Weblog
- I swear twice a day when I look at a clock...
- July 9th | Yesterday on the Internet
- Who Cares How Homeopathy Works? « VaguelyScience
- Top 10 Ways Your Brain Is Sabotaging You (and How to Beat It) [Lifehacker Top 10] | ReviewBox
- Top 10 Ways Your Brain Is Sabotaging You (And How To Beat It) | Lifehacker Australia
- Top 10 Ways Your Brain Is Sabotaging You (and How to Beat It) « Diego Gonzalez Algara
- Belief « Life, etc.
- helveticampbell : blog
- For Your Own Good: Suffering & the Delusory Origins of Gratitude « Don't Call Me Sybil
- Welcome to Lifehacker - - The BB and Iphone Zone
- The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy « You Are Not So Smart
- Un beau métier? Architecte des étoiles! « La BI ça vous gagne!
- Verifiability and Repeatability : The Two Dead Ends for Religion « Rectilinear Redemption
- Ohio State Buckeye sports blog, Talking Jim Tressel, Thad Matta and more » Sexy Seven is not so smart in Week 5 -- Uweekly.com
- cw4 | Blog | porn again
- How to fight the confirmation bias | Game-Changer
- Our malfunctioning brain « Imaginationland
- I don't even...
- The Truth About Sugar (The Truth: It’s all bad for you) « lowcarbnorthwest.com
- » Blog Archive » Little green men.
- kyachris & unseenstrings in conversation « Unseenstrings's Blog
- El prejuicio de la confirmación « PsyNep
- Technical Fossilization
- You Find What You Look For (Confirmation Bias) | Barron Family Adventures
- Technology Short Take #7 - blog.scottlowe.org - The weblog of an IT pro specializing in virtualization, storage, and servers
- Slow Down, Cowboy! How BI Users can Avoid the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy « Mike Urbonas – Product Marketing/Personal Branding/Business Intelligence Blog
- Quote – David McRaney Confirmation Bias | Trisha McNamara
- tim gier » Blog Archive » On Becoming Vegan
- Can you spot the female geek? « Restructure!
- Marijuana legalization Kung Fu: Confirmation Bias — ShadyHousePub.Com
- “绿坝娘”就在你脑中
- Informing Learning
- Tricked Into Believing – The Skill Paradoxon, Destroyer of Dreams – The Frakinator, Bilian Must Not Wrathful Gladiator – Challenge!
- IF « Irreverently timed – Year Three.
- Recommended Reading: You Are Not So Smart - College Bound
- Confirmation Bias
- » Deprivation, Deception and Memorization Psychology Pig
- Confirmation Bias « Bob's Shop
- The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy | The Easy Life
- Don't Confuse Them With Facts - Page 6 - Sherdog Mixed Martial Arts Forums
- Confirmation Bias, Satire, and Stephen Colbert | Social Psychology Eye
- Al-Qaida confirms bin Laden's death - Page 7 - Sherdog Mixed Martial Arts Forums
- Al-Qaida confirms bin Laden's death - Page 8 - Sherdog Mixed Martial Arts Forums
- De Filter Bubble | julesj | blog
- [INFJ] INFJs: When someone just pops into your head, out of the blue
- liyana
- Cognitive Biases.
- Everyone who is sane happens to agree with me! « The Great American Desert
- How Lies Survive and Spread | Free Everything
- Auch Gottlose leben nicht vom Brot allein | Evidenz-basierte Ansichten
- Предвзятость подтверждения « По секрету всему свету
- Sånt du tror du vet: Del 2 – minnesmysterier - Skepchick.se
- “绿坝娘”就在你脑中 « 随意门
- » On Confirmation Bias Total Asshole Diet
- The Benjamin Franklin Effect « You Are Not So Smart
- The Benjamin Franklin Effect « Darin R. McClure – The Good Life In San Clemente
- The Ben Franklin Effect « Flexible Reality
- The Benjamin Franklin Effect | David McRaney
- defining the status quo « Learning: Theory, Policy, Practice
- Предвзятость подтверждения | реальный мир
- Weekly Annotations Round-up (weekly) | Creative Destruction
- Websites and Books That Will Make You Smart(er) - or at least, Make You Think | Boredom Relief Blog and Forum | BlifalooD.com
- Change blindness « Later On
- Library « Faistiq
- The 3 Characteristics of an Educated Man | Appenheimer
- This book has done a good job marki… | Zygote.Me
- Engaging in Community and Complexity | The Zyp Family
- It never fails! | Caity Makes ...
- The 3 Characteristics of an Educated Man « Gangs Goons and Gunz
- Y U NO WALK FASTER? | Wyspa na Pacyfiku
- Dog Diet - info for all - Page 4 - Basset Hounds: Basset Hound Dog Forums
- The Sovereign Debt Crisis and Confirmation Bias | Credit Writedowns
- All This ChittahChattah | Innovation for Introverts
- Mainstream Factual Science
- How to Know When You’re Wrong (and What You Can Do About It) (from: www.lifehacker.com) | LifeofDre.com
- How To Know When You’re Wrong (And What You Can Do About It) | Lifehacker Australia
- News Mash: It’s OK to change your mind about an idea you have! | Anguished Repose
- How to Know When You’re Wrong (and What You Can Do About It) | The Odyssey Blog
- How To Know When You’re Wrong (And What You Can Do About It) | Women's Weekly
I suppose you only pick research that confirms the opinion you already have.
It is a danger I try to avoid, but at which I can’t say I always succeed.
ok so im sitting in my room, questioning all my ideas and world veiws and shit, but tell me this
how do i know if this article isnt some reinforcement of some other idea, were is truth, how do i know if this page isnt just designed to get me to question, and starting only believing in questioning???
think of it this way, The world of information is a magician, the information is the tricks, and this article exposes the secret of the tricks (an eye and mind opener if you’d like to call it). And it’s not trying to make you “believe in questioning,” (or what I would call paranoia) but it’s designated to get you to seek informtion that challenge your initial beliefs not only those that confirm it. Doing that would help get you out of extemities.. if you’ve learned something from this article you would apply it in all life circumstances where you have to use judgement, like in politics for example, you won’t be a straight-ticket voter ( that votes for only one party regardless the candidate’s potential) but instead, you are going to deeply analyze the agendas of all parties’ candidates and then choose one.
The first half of your post would probably more appropriately be an example of the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon
My favorite psychology joke:
Man, once you hear about confirmation bias, you start seeing it everywhere!
For some reason xkcd hasn’t done that one yet…
I just read (well, re-read) that Pratchett quote yesterday, as I started re-reading The Truth. Is it a coincidence that it showed up here? I think not ;)
> In science, you move closer to the truth by seeking evidence to the contrary. Perhaps the same method should inform your opinions as well.
I hope nobody minds if I bring up an XKCD comic: XKCD 701 “Science Valentine”
This essay totally confirmed my biased world view! In fact, this whole site is filled with essays that confirm my understanding of human behavior: that we are irrational beings driven by emotion. So is that good or bad?
This is a very interesting post.
Confirmation Bias comes up quite a bit when you’re attracted to someone of the opposite sex, especially when that attraction is of the “unrequited” variety. You start to misinterpret seemingly meaningless actions for destiny. And rather than “ask the person out” to confirm/deny your impressions, you continue your Confirmation Bias to continue the fantasy.
Confirmation Bias often comes up when making a medium to large purchase, especially one you can’t afford. You will make a case to yourself about why you should buy this item even though you can’t really afford it. You will rationalize any information that will back-up your decision making and dis-regard any information that contradicts your desire to purchase the item.
Confirmation Bias also come up quite a bit in a sport like baseball. Statistics like a pitchers’ win/loss record and a batter’s Runs Batted In have been proven to be extremely overrated and unreliable statistics. Unfortunately because they are so ingrained in baseball history, the baseball world refuses to reduce their importance. So rather than baseball changing their mind-set about these two statistics they do the contrary and use Confirmation Bias to back up their claims.
This was rather enlightening!
I’m not so keen on admitting I’m also in this group, but if I recall I’ve done it plenty of times. For example my standpoint on religion is now shattered because I never bothered to read the Bible in full… (I’m not Christian or anything I’m more of a Humanist) I took the words people fed me and just strengthened my opinion around that…
Not that I’ll suddenly start reading the bible beause honestly I’m not of the kind to read a lot and when I do i’d rather read something i’m sure I’ll like. Another piece of evidence that i’m Confirmation Biased.
Aah the cruelty of it all!
I wonder who exactly suffers from confirmation bias. I am sure we all do to a certain extend, but… I for one love learning new things. I love debates because they constantly make sure I can justify my position and that I do not make assumptions that I cannot explain.
Besides, there is also a thing about knowledge. If I know that something is true, of course I will disregard people with no credentials taking objection to it. They most probably do not understand. It happens a lot in the evolution creationism debate or in Climate denialism. Conformation bias is not necessarily a bad thing.
I recently wrote a (very short) article on how skepticism works, and I explain that only claims that do not fit your world view have to be justified. Which is normal. If someone tells me they ate a sandwich, I have no trouble believing that. If someone tells me he can fly, I do take objection. There is a confirmation bias in that all things that do not confirm my belief take extra evidence. But no position is so sacred it will have to be held.
Also, ever since I painted my new house, I am noticing all the errors in paint jobs all around me. Having acquired new information, I now am able to notice things that I did not notice before.
>_> I am so going to get killed for this…
Excellent post on a very relevant subject. Critical thinkers are familiar with this phenomenon, but many people have never heard of it or considered it. Confirmation bias is also a root cause of persistent social stereotyping, such as that associated with racism. Only the examples that confirm the stereotype are noted, while those that defy it are ignored or attributed to some other exception.
My dear sweat brother Noompsi!
A great dumb movie! Oh and interesting article. I’ll have to pay more attention to this.
That above comment should read
“sweet” not “sweat”. Damn typos! :D
That is true unless you are a software tester, then you have a very different mind set.
A tester looks for patterns and especially anything that brake’s the pattern.
good post.
Not so fast, this bias is most prevelant concerning emotional issues. A software tester is usually not emotionally involved in the results of a test. But talk to that person about something he feels close or strongly about and you will find that his mindset changes. For instance ask him whether to judge his work or testing method compared to others and you will likely see the bias.
It’s funny, this is my first time seeing this blog and the only reason I clicked the link was because my friends were talking about “The Golden Child” the other day. I’m this close to putting it into my Netflix queue.
Holy crap, I was watching the Golden Child just the other night. Everything you say must be true.
The search for the “right” belief is the culprit here. I work to find the belief that is most helpful to me, rather than the one I believe to be true.
If I believe the universe is trying to tell me something by putting “The Golden Child” in my path, the key point is what I learn from that movie or anything else I think of as significant about the experience of seeing it everywhere.
This principle lets me keep an open mind, since it’s much easier to let a belief go away if I continually evaluate it for helpfulness rather than objective truth. Once it turns sour, it’s time to find a new way to look at things.
Did you pick that particular movie intentionally, knowing that Eddy Murphy’s picture in the poster has an uncanny resemblance to guy in your logo at the top of the page?
Fantastic article. And the comment above me (Saranicole) highlights a really troubling perspective on reality. So much to think about!
“The teacher says “yes” over and over again, and the majority of people turn in the wrong answer.”
Isn’t that the right answer? Maybe I don’t understand.
The pattern is correct 12,14,16. But the principle-their answer-is wrong. The priniple is 3 ascending numbers. Their answers were probably ascending even numbers or, every second number etc. They were biased to confirm what they thought was the right answer.
I am one of these people too!
Just learning the very hard way not to have such biases..
@Mark
Good eye! I can’t beleive that I didn’t spot that one.
One thing I find funny is that the quotes inserted in this post are another example of confirmation bias on the fact that confirmation bias is bad. Irony.
This is true, JRod37.
Well it depends on your view point and accomplishment. Confirmation Bias is in fact bad if you are looking for truth. It good if you are looking for confirmation. It also good from a evolutionary stand point. The more certain you are about something the quicker and more reliably you are to act. Also, the brain cannot accept all information so it requires a method of filtering out most data.
So yes there is a positive reason that it seems to exist. the problem is that much what it is needed for is when we were just other animals. Its also had limits in the wild as experience would often correct the confirmation bias if it got to far from reality. In todays world and especially in the information age it has run amoke and there really is no natural correction. A person can go there whole life believing in something false and due to comfort and the abilitiy to grasp onto any doubt (valid or invalid) these days. This become a big problem when those that embrace confirmation bias most tightly have power. Two things seems to strengthen Confirmation Bias very significantly the “emotional” attachment tot he subject and the “responsibility” factor. To put it simply. The more you are emotionally atached or involved on the subject and the more things and decisions you’ve made (or make) based upon the belief the more intense it is.
Like light waves or light particles, you find what you look for. The real question is: does objective truth exist? I think there is a difference between facts and truth: Facts are statements that you “know”, prove by scientific method, i.e. conclusions: “If I throw something off the roof, then it will fall to the ground”. Truths are statements that you “believe”, accept by choice or will (unproveable), i.e. presuppositions: “God exists”. This does not begin to address emotional attachments, but cut them out and you kill the human. Great article: I need to forward this to several folks!
I don’t agree. Truth is not opinion which is what belief is. Truth is outside perception. The question is whether we can ever see the truth due to our filtered view of things around us. This is the same as saying there is no truth only belief. The other problem with grasping the truth is that until you have all the information you don’t ahve the truth, likewise, if one of the variables change then so would the truth, so what maybe true that one time is not necessarily true the next. this is why science focuses more on probability. Its so we can predict outcomes most likely to happen when certain factors are present.
Sorry to pick them out but Pm dH is a perfect example of Bias even in their post. A couple questions to ask…did they ask random people or only people that would confirm their bias? Did they attribute the results to the group based on what they wanted to believe or how close they were to their thinking rather than just happen to notice the results seemed to have correlation (ie making the coorelation stronger in one group and lesser in another)? Their statement seems to be a good example of how confirmation bias works not only in result but in the method they used to get the bias confirmed. One big give away is the conclusion without evidence that
“enforced behavior modification versus a more rational approach such as “pollution is for losers”. (A similar slogan would ruin the tobacco industry: “smoking is for losers.)”
They are making a judgement right of the bat that something is more rational but fail to describe the basis (likly because they already know what basis they are using and assume other should agree so offer no validation only assumption). They also, are predicting that not only would something they believe have a certain effect but state that it would be at least as effective without anything to back it up. Thanks for the perfect example of confirmation bias and how it is often used. They seem to embrace confirmation bias and likely believe in subjective reality.
If you’re studying confirmation bias and believe it is important, you must only pick research that confirms the opinions you already have. :)
I don’t own an xB, but I saw few on the road before I was considering one for a business car (wound up with a Corolla). I note that people who want to believe the mainstream news plug their ears and say “la-la-la” whenever they hear the name of Beck or Limbaugh. I have also found that their listeners often know more about both sides of the story than those who listen to NPR (for example: ask both “what’s the name of the oil rig that’s causing the mess, and who owns it?”) Same goes for the fairy tale of the “settled science” of “man-made global warming” and enforced behavior modification versus a more rational approach such as “pollution is for losers”. (A similar slogan would ruin the tobacco industry: “smoking is for losers.)
Well, you’ve read this far. Does that affirm any bias? :)
Postmoderm Man
I recently eBay’d a talking Ann Coulter doll, but I think confirmation bias torpedoed her marketability since when someone mentions her name, they almost immediately think of her pre-filtering the world to match existing world-views that she embraces.
Then again, maybe I, myself, am biased by my preconceived notions of Ann’s popularity based upon my own take on their negativity.
I got just one bid, however, despite several hundred views on the auction page, so perhaps some empirical evidence is better than none!
Your theory is based, it seems to me, that the human brain can only carry on one train of thought at a time. Between the time I saw “Golden Child” and noticed some reference to it, I saw “The Fifth Element” and noticed that some driver’s license looked like a multipass. I also read a book and spotted elements from that book in real life, and remembered reading “The Prince” years ago while watching some recent political ads.
The human brain is not a sieve it is more like a giant HEPA filter. Sure we are biased, but that isn’t news to anyone. However, there are instances in science everyday that disprove your theory. In fact the very nature of of the scientific method belies your stance.
Well explain the 22 22 phenomenon.
C’mon, own up all those who see this on digital clocks and everywhere.
@Matt
““The teacher says “yes” over and over again, and the majority of people turn in the wrong answer.”
Isn’t that the right answer? Maybe I don’t understand.”
I believe what David was saying is that the students were offering up sets of numbers that ascended by 2, so their sets of numbers did fit the “rule” just fine, but they did not find out that a set such as 1,9,47 would also be correct because the actual “rule” was three ascending numbers.
@Chromodynamix
Are we talking about military issue digital clocks here? Otherwise I assume you’re referring to 11:11?
So you’re saying that Keith Olbermann, Arianna Huffington, and Rachel Maddow AREN’T flaming A-holes?
Interesting.
Does this work hand-in-hand with opposites do not attract from earlier this month? We want a partner who doesn’t compromise our already-formed opinions and ideas about the world… or something?
Also, does this affect politics when politicians adamantly oppose a view and are found out in their personal lives to support that view? I get so upset when people still stand by their favorite politicians when they are found to be frauds. Blago, for instance.
Confirmation Bias is one of the key ingredients in religion. You think there’s a god watching over you, so when things happen you start attributing them to “him.”
On the flip side, when I see religious people doing things that irritate me, I find articles like this to confirm how I’ve risen above such nonsense :P
From time to time you read a post that makes you go “Yeah! Thats what I always think”. This is one of those.
Just THIS WEEK I had a confirmation bias concerning a certain unfamiliar car that I was forced to rent and did not enjoy. WHen I explained it to my wife, one of them went by, and then I started to see them everywhere!
And the term “confirmation bias” is itself an example – because objectively incorrect conclusions in the face of evidence are not examples of brains being biased away from correctly-reasoned conclusions. They are examples of brains who’s reasoned conclusions were not capable of provided a strong enough emotion signal to overcome the emotion signals (pleasant feelings) that come from having our existing beliefs confirmed.
Our “rational brain” does not direct our behavior. It’s is a recently evolved coprocessor that tags rational conclusions with emotion signals that go to our behavior control circuits. But those emotion signals must compete with a host of other signals that are constantly coming in from other circuits such as instincts and memories of similar situations in the past (experience and habit). We may follow our “reason” or not depending on how strong an emotional vote it can muster for its candidate – and especially if it is reinforced by those other circuits.
Dutchgirl had it right. Our behavior is driven by emotion – or more accurately, by emotion signals that constantly compete for control. “Reason” is just another source for those emotion signals. It’s often a very unreliable source and so our brain learns to be skeptical of its conclusions.
“…a recently evolved coprocessor,” I like that. Great comment.
Check the documentary about public relations on http://www.dam-age.com (second page)
We get f$cked by psychology every day
Since reading your blog, I have lost faith in any ounce of individuality I thought I might have. I don’t know what to believe anymore.
It’s not that bad, Drew. Think of it this way: Just because optical illusions exist doesn’t mean you can’t trust your eyes at all.
Nice.
No more s***. All posts of this quailty from now on
What if you’re like me and hate all political pundits? Do I have no opinions because I don’t like any of them?
That mathematical sequence thing does seem somewhat flawed. If you think about it, there’s plenty exercises that young kids have to do where the assignment is “complete this sequence: …”. Which has biased them towards finding the quickest/simplest rule to continue the sequence.
Well it’s some form of bias at least. Actually, the study itself could be measuring the confirmation bias of its authors, not of its subjects.
@wds: As the parent of little ‘uns, I can say that most of those elementary “find the pattern” activities are either intended to lay the groundwork for multiplication (e.g. “count by threes” is the predecessor to “multiply 3 by 7″) or to identify developmental problems (we are, as our host as amply pointed out, mechanical beings that excel at certain functions, especially categorization and finding patterns).
There’s an interesting article on early child development in Scientific American this month. It turns out that little kids are actually much better at identifying novel patterns than adults are. wds, I would say you’re spot-on: the oversimplified pattern exercises are actually betraying the confirmation bias of the test creators, not the test takers.
Thank you for putting into words for me what confused me so much about so many people. I like the fact that there is an explanation for why we see things the way that we do. For a lot of people their thought pattern has become a security blanket of sorts and its the only thing that they know. If they can find a way to get others to agree or find enough information to back up how they feel then everything is right in their world. I will keep this explanation in mind the next time I find myself in a situation where there is a difference of opinion involved.
“Rush Limbaugh and Keith Olbermann, Glenn Beck and Arianna Huffington, Rachel Maddow and Ann Coulter – these people provide fuel for beliefs, they pre-filter the world to match existing world-views.
If their filter is like your filter, you love them. If it isn’t, you hate them.”
Ah yes, let’s compare a liberal blowhard with a tiny audience (Olbermann) to a hypocritical drug addict who expresses the belief that half the country wants to steal and destroy from the other half , and who is heard by millions(Limbaugh). Let’s compare a sarcastic, left-leaning opinion-show host (Maddow) to a woman who says that half the country is dumb, treasonous garbage that should be rounded up and placed into camps (Coulter).
Maybe next your article can be on “false equivalencies”. You are not so smart, youarenotsosmart.com.
There is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary of confirmation bias in that article.
“Is the universe trying to tell you something?”
Where is evidence showing this is not the case?
It is possible the universe may indeed be trying to tell you something through the holy conduit of Eddie Murphy’s “The Golden Child.” I did not explore this avenue.
You sir are a life saver! i just started a research that hinges on this, its applied to something entirely different, but this is the foundation..i’m glad to have come across this blog through the Duchenne smile post.
Cheers
Cool. Please don’t use me as a primary source; branch out and go to the original research. Thanks for reading.
Haha, this happened to me just today. I saw a video where they mentioned Morgan Freeman. I didn’t know who he was, because here in Finland he isn’t such a big name, so I checked it out. Now I have read or heard about Morgan Freeman 3 times since then in a matter of hours. I was like what’s going on? This explains.
how about those that don’t go nor right nor left, but are rather impartial, and study both sides of the coin with same interest? turn a cube upside-down, round, check all it’s faces and even tear it down to bits? (analyze)
Ever since I read this I’ve been noticing confirmation bias everywhere. :)
Zing!
This reminds me of the movie Shawshank Redemption with Morgan Freeman. I always see that movie on TV and it’s a pretty good one too.
Hilariously, 5 minutes after reading your post I found this link on a completely unrelated website: A website dedicated to people posting thoughts and checking how many people agree with them!
http://www.amirite.net/
So why is everybody talking about confirmation bias all of a sudden?
I fully appreciate your work here to enumerate common bugaboos of bad epestemology. However, in this case, you commit a rather serious transgression yourself–that of false equivalency.
Rush Limbaugh/Keith Olbermann is probably fair, but Glenn Beck/Arianna Huffington and Ann Coulter/Rachel Maddow are farsical comparisons.
I understand the desire to do so, and we see it all over the mainstream media. A “debate” show will pit someone who supports the theory of anthropogenic global warming against someone who does not. After three minutes of them talking over each other, the host will chime in with, “Well, it’s a fascinating debate!”. No, it isn’t. Or, at least, it is not accurately represented by having one person on each side.
In this case, you want to make the right/left comparison to demonstrate to those on both sides that they suffer from confirmation bias. While your larger point is true, the desire to show it leads you to false equivalency. The fact is, there really isn’t a left-wing equivalent to Ann Coulter. That is, there is no one nearly as strident who regularly gets exposure in the mainstream news media on the left. Here’s a great treatment of precisely such an invalid comparison:
http://www.thudfactor.com/false-equivalency
But while we on the left are clearly prone to confirmation bias as everyone else, sometimes there are real distinctions between things.
I am sure that many will see this post as nothing more than my own confirmation bias, but I challenge anyone who thinks that to do a thought experiment:
Try to imagine Glenn Beck running a blog with many different contributors and open comments, appearing on panels to argue points with political opponents, or interviewing a politician with whom he disagrees. Then imagine Rachel Maddow organizing a gathering at the Lincoln Memorial on the anniversary of the most famous MLK speech, and claiming that it will be talked about 200 years from now as the moment America woke up. Or Arianna Huffington saying that a cohort of conservative protesters were enjoying their loved ones’ deaths.
Oy…that should be “epistemology”, of course.
I had a boss who referred to this as the “White New Yorker Effect.” The company had a white, Chrysler New Yorker. I’d never seen one before. He talked about the WNY Effect, and to prove it, sent me to lunch at the local mall with the company car. When I came back to the parking lot, I couldn’t find it. He’d moved it and it seemed like there were dozens of white New Yorkers parked all over the lot.
I had a similar experience with Ford Festivas. I’d never seen one until Matthew Broderick drove one in “Election.” For weeks afterwards, I saw them everywhere.
The responses to this article are funny. When one thinks he/she is not influenced by confirmation bias, or sees it COMPLETELY in all those OTHER fools, it is revealing more than that person realizes! Especially those complaining about the comparisons you made. Hilarious!
So, A.C., I’m assuming you’re referring to my post. If not, please disregard.
Three questions:
1. Did I claim that I don’t suffer from confirmation bias?
2. Does the existence of confirmation bias render all comparisons valid (i.e.–do you not acknowldege that a false equivalence fallacy exists)?
3. Did you perform the thought experiment I suggested?
this is something we already know it not new or news it just is
Theres a screet about your post. ICTYBTIHTKY
It’s interesting how some can become irritated over discussions of human nature. I know my ideas irritate some folks. As I mentioned before I see the brain as a behavior control computer driven by emotion signals – and reason/intellect as a lately evolved co-processor, not the CPU. The emotion signals come from “beliefs” of various kinds, some are instincts, some are learned – but they all provide the signals that drive behavior. I think most folks buy in to the cognition-driven model of human behavior where intellect guides our choices. And so my views violate their beliefs at the non-conscious level. And they will then use their intellect to discredit those views as some are doing here to Eric’s views – and I suspect for the same reasons.
This will irritate. The brain does not use reason to establish beliefs. It may use reason to find candidates. But beliefs are established in human brains the same way they are in all animals – by repeated testing in the real world that produces beneficial results – a non-conscious, process. i.e. we hold beliefs because our brain recognizes a successful pattern from trying them – cautiously at first – and then using them successfully to drive behavior choices over an extended time.
Brains always search for patterns that may be significant for survival – and they give themselves (us) an emotional reward when they find one. Confirmation bias could be seen as the brain’s response to its need to find meaningful patterns in our environment. The fascinating part is how our intellect struggles to explain it like I am doing. ;-)
@Ray in Seattle
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. It’s just like how children are easily indoctrinated into religious beliefs, because there is no previous established basis on how they view the world around them. They soak in the dogma, and that becomes their basis for their reality.
Eric,
First, I’ll just say that I’m out of my league here in discussing most of this. I wasn’t just discussing your response, but simply observing (not just about you, and probably not very well) that what we believe hugely influences what we view, what we hear, and what we seek to confirm in ourselves, even after we read an article about confirmation bias. Myself included! I think it is good to laugh at ourselves about our humanness.
But no, you did not outright claim to not suffer from c.b. And I wouldn’t call it suffering! I would call it part of who we are. We all need confirmation in our thinking. I think it’s a part of our desire to be a part of a community. Nothing wrong with that.
I do think it is interesting that the article you picked, though, (probably?) confirmed your own beliefs toward that wretch Ann Coulter and the conservative base as a whole. Would that be correct? The article doesn’t prove what you are saying, if you take c.b. into account, b/c any conservative could pull out lots of reasons why the comparison didn’t work, blah, blah, blah because of what they believe. What we believe influences how we view that article. Know what I mean?
Anyway, I can’t do your last test b/c I don’t know any of those people. I keep my head in other sand and don’t watch or keep up with either pundits on either side. I would say, though, I’m not sure that that is a valid test. Imagining what people would or wouldn’t do isn’t really valid for proving or disproving a real theory, but I could be completely misunderstanding what you were proposing.
Cheers!
A.C.–Sorry about my defensiveness. I just didn’t want my post to be interpreted as a comically self-unaware case of confirmation bias, but I realized that it could be.
Really, my post is a tangent, and is not meant in any way to cast doubt or aspersions on David’s most excellent efforts here to describe the biases and fallacies that affect our thinking.
And, yes, I am on the political left, so any evaluation on my part of political pundits will be rife with biases of several varieties, and should be taken (especially by me) with lots of salt.
My intent was only to point out false equivalency, and what I thought to be an example of it.
Good point about “suffering”. I suppose I mean that our ability to be objective observers “suffers” from biases, including the confirmation bias. But we aren’t machines, and we probably shouldn’t strive to be.
In all fairness this entire blog is the opinion of the author, and therefore subject to being supported very strongly in his mind by his own confirmation bias. In other words according to his reasoning it is just as probable that everyone else in the world bases their opinions on genuine research and facts except for him because saying the opposite of that is simply a bias he has.
It should also be noted that by his own reasoning everyone who reads this article and agrees with it is simply confirming their personal bias.
In other words, it’s circular reasoning… Allthough this is just my opinion-so it may very well be an attempt to confirm my bias
It comes up when you should be pursuing your passions as well. Discoveing first what they are: This is the absolute truth you once believed in, and the activities you truly enjoy without hurting someone/thing else-your passions.
Every individual must seek his/her own passions out; and the abscense of this creates every distortion and crime we have.
When you have one thing, nothing else matters.
Of course, first you must lay down your own life for the world. Then look for your work.
Isn’t that what Eddie said?
Believing oneself capable of objective experience in reality, is assuming solipsism. Denying subjective experience denies others in that sense of their own creations in their own singularly created ideas, of their own objective experience, and subjective experiences within another overminded reality as one is responsible beyond individual cognition by its many superlative selves. Not only does one deny the experiences of a slave, but they deny the experiences of that slave’s master in favor of “them” i.e., the owner of a possibly incomplete perception or perfect ( just so much as they can prove themselves perfect to the original in the ideas of subsequent participants and or creations of that of the first mover) thus creating a theory for objectivity on perfect grounds that denies the possibility of a first mover within the original thesis. One can only assume from the information provided that the solipsistic motive prevails us as ideas instead of free willing individuals capable of an individualistic subversion….that many consciousnesses in simultaneous pre-arrangement deny any other possibility….meaning that democracy of mindless participation funds belief?
Confirmation Bias proves that I am never right, and also never wrong.
Good description. I notice this in myself all the time. Excellent example is that I quickly noted and stored that “Minnesota” came up in your post because I was thinking about it yesterday and it is in my mind. But you could have written “Idaho” or “Colorado” 5 times and I couldn’t tell you without re-reading the article. It can be amazing to note in yourself though. Like your Golden Child example, I’ll suddenly notice really obscure things in sets and it is all too easy to ascribe cosmic coincidence to it rather than confirmation bias, even when you know that you are doing it. Sneaky little self-deceptions.
Confirmation Bias are boring! :P
As social creatures, humans tend to seek out ways to belong to a group. This is easily achieved by looking to groups that hold our own general views to start with. Couple that with our tendency to accept, as truth, things that we agree with and you have a recipe for a self-deceiving public. We cannot blame the Becks and Maddows of the world for putting out product, we have only ourselves to blame for accepting such tripe without daring to look behind the curtain and see the wizard for what he really is.
Personally, I love to play the devil’s advocate, even on positions I do not believe. I never fail to learn from it.
Confirmation bias, self serving bias, hypocrisy, a need to belong, and so on, these are all part of the human condition, human nature. We are what we attend to. Knowing and understanding this is one step toward reducing the empathy deficit that exist in our world today. And that is the absolute truth!!!!!
Question every thing, especially your own beliefs and premises.
Listen closely to others and ask lots of questions.
Trust me. I know I’m right about this!!!!
To David McRaney and Ron Ronan — Heavens to Murgatroyd! Be easy bros… I have never read a blog posting and been slapped by it through the computer screen and then start reading the comments and get back-handed as well. I gotta start wearing safety equipment when I get online. Don’t want my head to explode from all this back and forth. Whew! Anyone else need to get away from it all…
Man, this article confirmed EXACTLY what I believed about people’s bias. Err, wait – does that invalidate the truth claims of this article simply because I believe it to be true? What’s a post-modernist to do?
When everything seems to tell you “You’re wrong!” then you must actually be right.
I read about that in the BLACK SWAN writed by NASSIM NICHOLAS TALEB, allright?
Since the party and the conversation where you and your friends took turns saying “I-ah-I-ah-I want the kniiiife” you’ve flipped channels plenty of times; you’ve walked past lots of billboards; you’ve seen dozens of stories about celebrities; you’ve been exposed to a handful of movie trailers.
The thing is, you disregarded all the other information, all the stuff unrelated to “The Golden Child.” Out of all the chaos, all the morsels of data, you only noticed the bits which called back to something sitting on top of your brain.
This explanation isn’t quite convincing. Back the the party where we had the conversation about “The Golden Child.” We talked about lots of things at the party. How come the 3 others movies, 2 novels, 4 celebrities and the old friend from high school we talked about aren’t popping up on cable TV, movie trailers, billboards and magazines?
parse, You raise an interesting question.
I think it’s because the brain operates on emotion signals – and the discussion about “The Golden Child” and probabaly your experience of seeing it – was more emotionally compelling than the other conversation topics – in some significant way. I’d suggest that emotion signals accompanying that topic were strong enough to create a memory trace in the brain that lasted for a while – like maybe a few days.
I suspect the brain responds emotionally to such traces when associated events and mental images are then encountered – because the brain is very good at recognizing patterns – especially patterns that would be significant for our survival or well-being.
How does the brain know they are significant? Not by reasoning but because of the strength of the emotion signals with which they were recorded. The movie industry learns to create films that our brain will find compelling in that way – that is, emotionally significant to our sense of survival – because then we’ll enjoy it more and we’ll tell our friends.
I wonder if Dutchgirl agrees with this. I’d like to hear more of Dutchgirl’s reasons for her belief that the brain is driven by emotion.
So we know about confirmation bias, yet it’s built into our brains and we aren’t really sure what to do about it. Sure, it’s great for marketers and used car sales men, but how could the average person take this knowledge and really do something with it? Apart from asking a Buddhist monk what it all means, of course.
I’m a conservative, and I decided to read Obama’s biography Dreams from My Father to get to know him better. I didn’t read it to confirm what I thought about Obama; that he was not qualified, that he didn’t know much about economics, etc, etc. I read it to form a more complete picture of him. I always try to seek opposing views ‘cos they allow me to see the bits of truth each of them may have.
I enjoyed the article, as I do most of the articles on this site. I would like to point out, however, that the biases that are referred to in the article do not form by chance. Instead, your (anyones) opinions on anything tend to be based on actual experiences in your own life. You are not observers in life, my friends, you are participants.
Regardless of your feelings on taxation, the role of government, 1980′s Murphy vs 2000′s Murphy, or if it makes a difference whether you wash your butt or face first in the shower, you still are and must be preoccupied with the business of staying alive. That of course means eating, crapping, staying warm/cool, drinking, and seeking out sex/social interaction.
In order to evaluate the reliability of your own biases ask yourself, do your opinions reflect what actually happens? Or do they reflect what you would LIKE to happen? Your opinions on anything are neither valid nor invalid except in regards to the relative level with which they comport with what actually happens in the world, both in your immediate circle of influence and outside of it.
A bias forms on anything based on your exposure to it, or similar circumstances, in your own life. Therefore the further away anything is from what actually happens to you personally, the less reliable that bias is, and therefore in order to have an informed (by what means?) opinion on anything you necessarily have to rely on the opinions of others who may or may not be closer to the subject than you are. And you are forced to evaluate the logic of what someone else is opining about based on your own experience and whatever other information you have been exposed to.
Hey, that post leaves me feielng foolish. Kudos to you!
uL08if cvnresfjvplt
This is ridiculous. Confirmation bias exists because I was looking for ways to confirm its existence. It’s a closed looped system that is always correct within its own parameters.
In the example given with the teacher asking what the rule was from a subset of 3 numbers, the numbers students gave were technically NOT wrong. They complied to the rule even if the rule was something else. I don’t know the specifics other than what was written in the article but I it appears that each student only had one chance to write down their answer. If they only had one chance to write their own number then clearly they would go for the most obvious answer which is one that follows the 3 numbers.
There is a related phenomenon my father used to call the dolphin syndrome. There are all these stories about dolphins push shipwrecked sailors towards land. But maybe dolphins just push sailors in a random direction, and we only HEAR about the ones that make it to land.
Everyone should come see me at church…..
I just have to say this is hilarious because i first heard about the movie “the golden child” a few days ago and now i stumble this article? is someone trying to tell me something?
This is great! My wife and friends routinely argue and accuse me of blindly being contrary for the simple fact that I like to debate. I love being the devil’s advocate as it forces us to think differently.
I blame confirmation bias for much of the perpetual race, class and religious bias’ and stereotypes we have today. I find avoiding such things as heavy consumption of new broadcasts and even newspapers help combat confirmation bias. Yet it’s human nature and we all fall subject to it at times.
Even through general conversations with out peers. Surround yourself with people who think differently from you on a regular basis. Never let your social circles become stagnant and you find that your everyday bias’ are challenged in a welcome way.
I find this amazing! I never thought that I would be interested in psychology, but now I can’t help but learn more.
These concepts can be explored further in buddhist teachings. Until recently I thought all humans suffered from extreme confirmation bias but I seemed to be the only one seeing it (not meaning at all that I was immune to my own biases). Then I realized that this was in itself a confirmation bias, which resulted in being taken out of that isolation and introduced to others who understand this concept/world view. Could the author of this blog be suffering partly or in full from the same bias?
@ greg. your old and smelly
@ Antoine Butler,
“I blame confirmation bias for much of the perpetual race, class and religious bias’ and stereotypes we have today. I find avoiding such things as heavy consumption of new broadcasts and even newspapers help combat confirmation bias. Yet it’s human nature and we all fall subject to it at times.”
To avoid confirmation biasing, you purposely go out of your way to avoid news broadcasting and newspapers? Let me get this straight, your way of avoiding confirmation bias is to be more ignorant?
Stereotypes we have today exists because they are mostly true. Just because you don’t fit into a stereotype doesn’t mean that it ISNT true for the majority. If you are black I’m going to say that you probably like to eat fried chicken. That opinion is based on a general consensus that I see a lot of black people eating fried chicken more than other races. Just cuz you don’t like fried chicken doesn’t mean that black people don’t like fried chicken.
Heh, just seeing the responses. My woefully late reply aside perhaps I wasn’t clear. *Insert confirmation bias based stereotype which is based on perceived historical evidence, comment here.
Do I avoid news in general? No. Do I avoid openly biased news which historically tells one sides opinions over others? Yes.
Back in April of 2010, I wrote on the subject of Racial Evolution – http://rabidlogic.com/axioms-and-pearls/racial-evolution/ You’ll see I agree for the most part with your sentiment. These sometimes unfortunate (or not so unfortunate) truths aside I’d argue isn’t enough to base decisions upon.
From a marketing perspective, maybe, depends on how you follow the money. Though I wouldn’t blindly assume you like green bean casserole, love country music, and are intimidated by a black guy wearing anything other than a suite. Because well, my experience and personal evidence aside, your probably not any of those things.
@lol: although I completely agree with you that avoiding newspapers and information is an aweful way to go to combat confirmation bias and in fact I believe can reinforce it, I’m completely in disagreement with your second paragraph:”If you are black I’m going to say that you probably like to eat fried chicken. That opinion is based on a general consensus that I see a lot of black people eating fried chicken more than other races.” This is a confirmation bias for yourself as you are assuming that the whole of the black people you have been exposed to represent the majority. How can you be sure of that? What is the bias of those who are giving you this “general” statement? Out of all the black people I’ve ever known, none were into fried chicken. If I used your logic, I would say that the majority of black people don’t eat fried chicken. You obviously don’t know “ALL” black people personally, therefore, it is impossible to make the statement beyond the shadow of a doubt about the eating preferences of the majority of this group of people.
Certainly there is a level of confirmation bias in the perpetuation of gender/race/religious stereotypes, but that doesn’t mean that many “specific generalizations” (to coin an oddly-oxymoronic term) are wrong. For example, not ALL black people are into friend chicken…but I can say from firsthand experience that the vast majority of black people in the Southeastern United States are crazy for the stuff. Some people call that prejudicial profiling. Advertisers call it “defining a market segment”. Billions of dollars are spent every year on the assumption that many stereotypes can be documented and proven scientifically and analytically–not just through casual observations the last time you walked into KFC.
Nice article. I am interested in knowing opposite of confirmation bias..what I mean is:
We see similar pattern but try to justify they they are not similar.
—–”Without confirmation bias, conspiracy theories would fall apart.”—–
So you’re saying that all claims of conspiracy are invalid? If so, then it looks like confirmation bias is stronger in yourself than you know. Regardless, great article on an often overlooked issue in psychology.
Well done. I used to say “thought transcends matter” in relation to this phenomenon. But finally, I have intellectual ammunition for such a time when I am cornered by a conspiracy theorist.
But why is confirmation bias a bad thing? You could spend all your life trying to “untangle” your biases and look at everything with the cold frankness of a machine. Or you could understand the phenomena of how the mind works and use it to your advantage instead of fighting to change it.
Accept confirmation bias as true. We see/seek out things that support the opinions we have formed. I.e., we notice things that we have decided are important. Okay. What if my opinion is: “making $100,000 a year is easy.” Or: “I am a healthy, fit person.”
What happens when I start noticing things that support *these* opinions?
:)
Strange I would randomly come across this after having recently been made fun of for having never seen or heard of the movie…. But I still don’t know…. I think the universe may be trying to tell me something. :)
This piece of pop culture has either avoided me all together or somehow remained un-remarked in my otherwise “normal” childhood. So imagine all the objects, or situations we encounter every day that will be left un-remarked since it plays no active part in any coincidence yet.
I guess after reading this, we should all raise our coincidence threshold.
The funniest thing about this article is that it displays confirmation bias in the way it analyzes confirmation bias.
if im just looking for information to validate my opinions, why did i just read this article?
This confirms everything I’ve ever believed about confirmation bias.
Wait until GlaxoSmithKline develops a “cure” for Confirmation Bias. It’ll be in DSM V. Pretty soon thereafter, MSNBC will start covering the “epidemic,” hippies will blame it on vaccines, kids will be sent home from school with terse notes from their Guidance Counselors to seek family therapy (because it’s genetic, you know), and then some newspaper will win the Pulitzer Prize for uncovering the truth: Biasnot actually causes Confirmation Bias in the elderly. AARP will lobby for the drug to be recalled. You can write the rest of the story. You’re smart enough.
Quote from ad man David Ogilvy regarding how people are likely to use research:
…… they use it as a drunkard uses a lamp post – for support, rather than for illumination.
Guess you and Carl Jung disagree on this point.
This seems all tied in with things like anchoring, character and opinion of self, very interesting.
Reading this article and the comments in reply has been most entertaining.
Filters, we all have them. Prisms is also a good word. Its fun to play with streams of light and make rainbows. Patterns are interesting. The logic to how we come to recognize patterns is fun to think about. Does confirmation bias mean all the patterns we see are false??? Obviously not, since our science has evolved from recognizing patterns. So how do we distinguish which patterns are real??? A commenter replied that we should see how this view plays out in our actual life and not assume it to be true (science/physics). Another added that we need to remember that in our lives we do not meet everyone that encompasses a race ( or a given thought/mindset ) so we need to be careful of assuming a larger truth from a smaller, regional one (metaphysics). The U.S. of A has 50 state governments & God know how many subsets of government, all of which are practicing patterns of administration/policy (sociology). Do you think we’ll ever agree on one pattern for the whole country??? planet??? I agree with the commenter that compared our mind to that of a circuit board. Yes, we are human, but history has shown we can be programmed to a certain extent (marketing). As another commenter mentioned, programming us is a billion dollar industry. The question is this – now that you know you are under constant bombardment by forces that are trying to direct your thoughts through media, what do you intend to do about it??? As for conspiracy theories, the more outlandish the lie, the easier it is for people to believe. “How could they lie about something like that?”
Yes, we all have our biases. The thing that most concerns me about people’s biases is the extent to which they allow them to be used to hurt other people/ or allow it. Kids will be kids is a bias to justify allowing bullies to exist in schools. Their are young women who are refusing to enter the math and science world because they are biased to think that it still is a man’s world. What biases do you see in yourself??? Are we capable of understanding all of our own biases??? So this article confirms the political realm is the place we go to debate all our biases and the realm of media is where we get and confirm them.
This is a very interesting post on a very relevant subject.
:)
In “Afterwards, You’re a Genius” author Chip Brown observes that we think that we know what we see when, in fact, exactly the opposite is typically true – we see what we know. Seeing isn’t believing; it’s the other way around – believing is seeing. Brown points out that our eyes aren’t cameras which take photographs for our optical cortex to develop. Rather, together, in concert with our memories and our assumptions about the world, we actively and continually create the world we know, the world which is familiar to us both individually and collectively.
As Canadian educator, author, and communication theorist Marshall McLuhan quipped, “I wouldn’t have seen it if I hadn’t believed it.”
As I just sat here making a list of everything I believe – I got disheartened at the thought of seeking out information to the contrary, because I could already feel the Backfire Effect warming up in my brain. Frustrating. So I figured I will learn how to be balanced sometime next week.
It’s like Steve Maraboli’s quote “Your agreement with reality defines your life.” Great article thanks :) xox
Whatever it is I think I see, becomes a tootsie roll to me.
Reblogged this on Scientific Awakening and commented:
A wonderful exposition of the confirmation bias. “You want to be right about how you see the world, so you seek out information which confirms your beliefs and avoid contradictory evidence and opinions.”
Indeed! Seek and ye shall find evidence for your preconceived notions, unless you understand and actively fight the confirmation bias in your own mind. The first step toward fighting back is realizing that it’s not your fault. The confirmation bias is wired into your unconscious mind, but your conscious mind, now made aware of this normally subconscious flaw, needs to fight back!