Cognitive Biases: an Analysis of Confirmation Bias

A ubiquitous phenomenon, confirmation bias is the interpretation of evidence or inferences in ways that are partial to one’s existing beliefs. Prevalent with individuals who have ingrained and emotional views, this bias stems from the direct influence of embracing information intuitively. Within the spectrum of political views and debates the nation has struggled with, Americans are deeply split along ideological values–– this involves an individual searching, favoring, interpreting, and recalling information to support his or her claims. In essence, it is a form of self-deception that arises as one fails to interpret facts or evidence objectively. These cultivated beliefs may have developed years prior, without a rigorous review of the evidence, and they may remain unchallenged. Consequently, a person who ignores evidence that counters their cherished views leads to an argument lacking open-minded reasons or statements, affecting various domains in his or her life. An example of two areas where individuals are affected by confirmation bias is within politics and social media as well as medical diagnoses.

Confirmation bias reinforces certain information that supports an individual’s beliefs, establishing evidence that can diminish active open-mindedness. Oftentimes, students gravitate towards sources aligned with one’s partisan learnings and often limit their online or social media searches to find evidence that strengthens what they believe. Throughout the course of one’s education, classes provide endless opportunities to gather information and logically evaluate both sides of an argument. Yet, students deliberately find evidence that overlooks the opposing beliefs or facts and is not able to “actively search for why an initial idea may wrong” (Wikipedia). The perils of confirmation bias stem from a person’s lack of investment in alternate viewpoints, often leading to a biased interpretation of what the individual may be reading. Hence, devaluing specific opinions or ideas makes it difficult for individuals to cultivate a character strength of balanced viewpoints –– a trait necessary to counteract groupthink and make accurate decisions in life. Such a cognitive bias hinders a student’s ability to critically think and reflect by seeking all available information or evidence before forming an opinion. Thoroughly questioning one’s viewpoints and assumptions –– from politics and governmental issues to everyday debates in class –– broadens an individual's horizons.

Selectively gathering evidence allows people to shun credible messages and seek certain political information through media. Source credibility is relevant in modern election campaigns where most students acquire political information through the internet and television news. With confirmation bias influencing our news, our perceptions on various issues make us interpret evidence in the favor of a specific party, resulting in misinterpretation of imminent conflicts. Political polarization has hampered people’s ability to consciously expose themselves to evidence that challenges their deeply entrenched beliefs. The “filter bubbles” of the online world, an algorithmic bias customizing results individual users encounter online, make it difficult to change a person’s ideas. The combination of algorithmic editing or filter bubbles prevents people from forming “diverse viewpoints and information,” thus “degrading democracy […] as voters will be unable to make fully informed political decisions” (Wikipedia). This hindrance makes students vulnerable to false claims that reverberate familiar evidence, further exacerbating one’s beliefs on bigotry, racism, or sexism. Hence, people who review findings validating their own preconceived opinions around politics from social media cloud their better judgment.

An individual who gives greater credence to information that supports their beliefs and values influences health-related aspects, including the effectiveness of procedures. Numerous people tend to focus on research reports and news stories that affirm their lifestyle choices, yet dismiss relevant stories conflicting with one’s health or behavior decisions. In the lifetime of a student’s mental and physical health, resistance to try new treatment methods and persisting with knowledge from their past experiences may be detrimental to their health. In turn, confirmation bias may cause doctors and physicians to accept and perform procedures due to multiple adamant patients. Elaborated by Wikipedia, “Biased assimilation is a factor in the modern appeal of alternative medicine,” implying that most individuals are swayed by anecdotal evidence and evaluate the scientific evidence on a hypocritical level (Wikipedia). Because diagnostics tend to generate smaller sets of hypotheses early on, it decreases the likelihood that an alternate hypothesis will be considered if the one in hand fails to generate a correct one. This leads to a faulty diagnosis in studies that increases the likelihood of people reinforcing negative outlooks.

Bolstering evidence that promotes one’s inclinations is a cognitive shortcut. It prevents students from viewing situations objectively when they select information consistent with their existing beliefs, a disadvantageous habit. Individuals who are unable to consider all possible and credible data constraint their own open-mindedness, leading to poor choices that cloud one’s judgment within different aspects of politics and medicine. Evidence that strengthens and corroborates an individual’s beliefs or opinions, despite their validity, affects the perspective of a student in a negative manner. Therefore, awareness becomes crucial to consider various situations from alternative perspectives and process new information in a conscious manner.