Supporters of one party often see only their side's good policies, ignoring other aspects, leading to confrontations.
Have you ever wondered why such a significant contradiction occurs between the two sides? It happens because confirmation bias is in charge and not just political disagreements.
Confirmation Bias Is the Contradiction’s Reason
Confirmation bias is a psychological phenomenon where people tend to seek evidence to support their beliefs. Also, it is known as "myside bias," which literally means a strong belief in the ideas of the group to which an individual belongs. This bias is more obvious in large groups where people encourage one another.
How does confirmation bias harm us? It blinds us to objectively consider facts, especially when they disprove or contradict our beliefs. As a result, we become irrational and unaware of our flawed thinking.
Confirmation bias manifests in three dimensions: information-seeking bias, interpretive bias, and memory bias. All of these contribute to our misjudgments in different ways:
1. Information-Seeking Bias - The One-Sided Test
Information-seeking bias refers to people's tendency to test their hypotheses in a one-sided manner. Put another way, we only look for data that supports our presumptions. Numerous experiments have verified this phenomenon.
For example, participants in a study were asked to evaluate another person's introversion and openness on a scale based on their performance in an interview. They were provided with a list of interview questions to choose from. Interestingly, when the interviewee was introduced as an introverted or open person, the participants selected questions that resembled their own personality, which gave the interviewee little room to justify their behavior. This subtle choice of questions unintentionally reinforced the belief that the interviewee was introverted or open. This behavior is unconscious.
2. Interpretive Bias - Interpreting Information to Support Our Beliefs
Also, we think with confirmation bias by interpreting some information in a way that supports our beliefs. People with opposing opinions may interpret the same evidence very differently, even when it is presented to them.
During the 2004 presidential elections, a study was conducted on voters who had strong opinions toward the candidates. They received contradictory statements written by a Republican party supporter, a Democratic party supporter, and a politically neutral figure. Even with the same evidence, the participants were more likely to assess the political personality of the opposing party in a contradictory way despite the logical contradiction.
3. Memory Bias - Selective Recall to Support Beliefs
This effect is also known as “selective retrieval,” meaning people selectively remember specific details of information to reinforce their beliefs. This bias is explained by two theories: one contends that it is simpler to store and retrieve information that is consistent with prior expectations. At the same time, the other emphasizes that unexpected information sticks out and is not easily forgotten. Studies have confirmed the validity of both viewpoints, with neither clearly superior to the other. However, what is certain is that we're all selective rememberers.
In one study, participants were asked to recall a job applicant's characteristics. When informed that the applicant was seeking a librarian position, they remembered introverted traits more. Conversely, when told the applicant was applying for a real estate sales representative position, they recalled more open traits.
Confirmation Bias Reinforces Our Misbeliefs
We now recognize that our minds are biased, but how does this affect us?
From a scientific perspective, we often seek causal relationships. If confirmation bias is at play, we are likely to fall into traps that confirm our misbeliefs. Researchers are often accused of confirmation bias when conducting experiments or framing their data in ways that support their theories. Also, it is common to see one event following another, such as illness after bad weather. However, does that always mean that there is a cause and effect?
Not necessarily, but researchers might mistakenly accept the relationship when trying to find it. It is extremely dangerous not to be objective when making business decisions. However, people often overlook the importance of information that could significantly impact the decision they need to make, especially when that information contradicts what they had anticipated.
For example, when an executive team develops a new strategy, they are likely to magnify even the smallest evidence of success, overlook flaws and contradictory outcomes, or brush them off as exceptional instances that don't need much attention. These defects and selective blindness can seriously harm business decisions.
Let’s take a simple example from daily life: When you aim to lose weight, you choose a diet plan and follow it—accordingly, your weight changes. If your weight decreases as expected, you may conclude that it’s due to the diet's effectiveness. However, if your weight increases later, confirmation bias might falsely lead you to ignore it as a random fluctuation and continue believing that the diet is still working perfectly. In this case, confirmation bias can cause you to overlook crucial cues from your body.
Try These Practices to Overcome Confirmation Bias
Now that we know that each of us is affected by confirmation bias, how do we overcome it?
1. Self-Refutation
There is no perfect theory or model, but we can improve by identifying flaws. Therefore, look for evidence that is contrary to your viewpoint rather than for evidence that supports yours. Have the courage to find as much opposing evidence as possible, as it may reveal flaws in your current ideas.
2. Promote Constructive and Independent Thinking in Groups
Give each group member a chance to develop their ideas independently during collective decision-making. Create a safe space for constructive expression and eliminate assumptions that encourage groupthink. Welcome people with different perspectives rather than rejecting or confronting them. Why not exchange ideas and gain from each person's distinct perspective?
Having a wide variety of viewpoints within the group can lead to a clearer picture when making decisions. Abraham Lincoln exemplified this by inviting competing politicians to converse and debate despite their stark differences. A similar approach is used in police investigations, where witnesses are generally not allowed to speak with each other to prevent unintended or intentional influence and maintain unbiased testimony.
3. Expect Unexpected Results
Don't write off unexpected events or surprising results as being limited to "special" or "exceptional" cases.
Expect varying outcomes by outlining three potential causes. Three is the optimal number. According to research, having more hypotheses doesn’t necessarily improve problem analysis.
Add comment