Cognitive Biases
We develop our own judgments and opinions based on our experiences, beliefs and preconceptions. At times, we produce good judgments, but more often than not, we produce inevitable incoherent judgments known as cognitive biases. Wikipedia (2012) defines cognitive bias as “the human tendency to make systematic decisions in certain circumstances based on cognitive factors rather than evidence”. Huer Jr. (2007) suggests that the fundamental limitations on our mental processes cause us to utilize different simplifying processes and “rules of thumb to ease the burden of mentally processing information to make judgments and decisions”. These processes and rules of thumb essentially help us to cope with vagueness and complications, but they usually result to cognitive biases. Simply put, a cognitive bias is something that our minds usually do to distort our own view of reality.
Cognitive biases are pervasive ingredients of the research process. Generally, they are more damaging than helpful. However, there are many instances where cognitive shortcuts are very useful. For instance, cognitive biases are practical when making routine decisions especially when you are time constraint. There are times when conducting research on empirical evidence can be time consuming that it is better to base a decision on previous positive associations or experience.
The dangers of cognitive biases in a research process outweigh its advantage. Huer Jr. (2007) argues that specific cognitive biases affect the “evaluation of evidence, perception of cause and effect, estimation of probabilities and retrospective evaluation of report” negatively. He argues that although people are aware of their biases, they still, more often, rely on them, instead of the evidence, when making decisions. He claims “cognitive biases, therefore, are exceedingly difficult to overcome” (Huer Jr., 2007).
There are specific biases that affect the research process. Awati (2009) identifies some of them as “selective perception, representativeness, availability, anchoring, loss aversion and information bias”. Confirmation bias, one of the most widespread biases, can also affect the research process. The example given is a good case in point. These biases are considered risks because they can affect decisions and contaminate our ability to use rationality.
Looking at the example given in this assignment, I have already indicated that it is a good sample of confirmation bias, “a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one’s beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one’s belief” (Carroll, 2012). My friend, in the example, has already convinced herself that her answer to her dissertation is the right answer because she looked for information that supported her argument. By doing this, my friend, has immediately disregarded opposing information and sought out information that supported her preconceived notion. It might be because she doesn’t want to be wrong and therefore she surrounded herself with information that confirmed her belief. In this case, the result of the dissertation will be skewed and unreliable.
If we look at our own thinking, we may find that we are at the mercy of these biases. And we may never be able to resist some of them. However, it is important that we are aware how they influence us so that we can make more informed decisions based on evidence. A better understanding of how biases affect research processes should also help researchers, students and writers in achieving a more objective and effective research.
References
Arceneaux, K. (2012) Cognitive Biases and the Strength of Political Arguments. American Journal of Political Science, 56, pp. 271–285.
Awati, K. (2009) Cognitive biases as project meta-risks [blog entry]. [Accessed 3 June 2012]. Available at:
Carroll, R. T. (2012) Confirmation Bias [online]. [Accessed 3 June 2012]. Available at
Finucane, M.L., Alhakami, A., Slovic, P. and Johnson, S.M. (2000) The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(1), pp. 1-17.
Griffin, D. and Tversky, A. (1992) The weighing of evidence and the determinants of confidence. Cognitive Psychology, 24, pp 411-435.
Hertel, P.T., and Matthews, A. (2011) Cognitive Bias Modification: Past Perspectives, Current Findings, and Future Applications. Perspectives on Psychological Science [online]. 6, pp 521-536 [Accessed 3 June 2012]. Available at < http://pps.sagepub.com/content/6/6/521.abstract>.
Heuer Jr., R.J. (2007) Psychology of Intelligence Analysis [online]. [Accessed 3 June 2012]. Available at
Wikipedia (2012) Bias [online]. [Accessed 3 June 2012]. Available at
