Skip to main content

Danilo Díaz Granados read: Good News For Science, Bad News For Humanity – The “Bias Blind Spot” Just Replicated (“Everyone Else Is More Biased Than Me”)

GettyImages-1092016748.jpgBy Matthew Warren

Psychology’s replication crisis receives a lot of airtime, with plenty of examples of failed replications and methodological issues that cast doubt on past research findings. But there is also good news: several key results in cognitive psychology and personality research, for example, have been successfully replicated.

Now researchers have reproduced the results of another highly-cited study. Back in 2002, Emily Pronin and colleagues first described the “bias blind spot”, the finding that people believe they are less biased in their judgments and behaviour than the general population – that is, they are “blind” to their own cognitive biases. And while that study kick-started a whole line of related research, no one had attempted to directly replicate the original experiments.

But in a preregistered preprint published recently to ResearchGate, Prasad Chandrashekar, Siu Kit Yeung and colleagues report reproducing the original study, first in a small group of Hong Kong undergraduates, and then in two larger samples of 303 and 621 Americans who completed online surveys. 

Each group was given detailed descriptions of eight cognitive biases such as “hostile media bias” (where people view neutral media reports as hostile towards their own point of view) and “self-serving bias” (where people take responsibility for their successes but not failures). They were also given descriptions of three visible “personal shortcomings”, like procrastination and fear of public speaking.

The participants rated the extent to which they thought they exhibited these biases and shortcomings, before rating how much other people generally show these tendencies. Consistent with Pronin’s original result, across all three studies participants thought that their own susceptibility to biases was lower than that of others. 

When it came to rating personal shortcomings, the results diverged from the original study. While Pronin had found no difference in how people rated their own and others’ shortcomings, the new research found that participants rated their own shortcomings as less severe. However, this difference was small, suggesting that people are more “blind” to their cognitive biases – which remain invisible – than to personal weaknesses which may have much more obvious effects (e.g. being late to hand in an assignment due to procrastination).

Chandrashekar’s team also added a new spin to the original study by investigating whether participants’ blind spot bias was influenced by their belief in free will (rated by their agreement with statements like “I am in change of the decisions I make”), which is known to affect how people judge themselves and others.

Participants with a stronger belief in free will had a greater blind spot when it came to personal shortcomings. That is, the gap between how they rated their own and others’ shortcomings was larger than the gap for people with a weaker belief in free will. The authors suggest that this is because people who believe more strongly that someone’s behaviours and decisions are completely under their own control are less likely to see such shortcomings in themselves: for them, such an admission would imply they have some innate weakness that can’t be overcome through their own choices. Belief in free will did not have any effect on the blind spot for cognitive biases, however. 

The authors write that their results “provide reasonable support” for the findings of the original study, suggesting that the bias blind spot is a robust phenomenon. But it’s perhaps surprising that it is reportedly the first direct replication of a piece of research that is more than 15 years old and has received nearly 1,000 citations. Hopefully, the new effort is a sign that the field is increasingly recognising the value in well-designed replication attempts – something the authors themselves acknowledge. “The study contributes to the recent call for systematic, large-scale, and preregistered replication and validation studies,” they write.

—Agency and self-other asymmetries in perceived bias and shortcomings: Replications of the Bias Blind Spot and extensions linking to free will beliefs

Matthew Warren (@MattbWarren) is Staff Writer at BPS Research Digest



View Source

Popular posts from this blog

Danilo Díaz Granados read: “Skunk” Cannabis Disrupts Brain Networks – But Effects Are Blocked In Other Strains

By Matthew Warren Over the past decade, neuroimaging studies have provided new insights into how psychoactive drugs alter the brain’s activity. Psilocybin – the active ingredient in magic mushrooms – has been found to reduce activity in brain regions involved in depression , for example, while MDMA seems to augment brain activity for positive memories . Now a new study sheds some light into what’s going in the brain when people smoke cannabis – and it turns out that the effects can be quite different depending on the specific strain of the drug. The research, published recently in the Journal of Psychopharmacology , suggests that cannabis disrupts particular brain networks  – but some strains can buffer against this disruption. Cannabis contains two major active ingredients: tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD). THC is responsible for many of the drug’s psychoactive effects, such as the feeling of being stoned and the anxiety that people sometimes feel, as well as ...
Read more

Danilo Díaz Granados read: Beyond the invisible gorilla – inattention can also render us numb and anosmic (without smell)

By Emma Young It’s well-known that we can miss apparently obvious objects in our visual field if other events are hogging our limited attention. The same has been shown for sounds: in a nod to Daniel Simons’ and Christopher Chabris’ famous gorilla/basketball study that demonstrated “inattentional blindness”, distracted participants in the first “inattentional deafness” study failed to hear a man walking through an auditory scene for 19 seconds saying repeatedly “I am a gorilla”. Now, two new studies separately show that a very similar effect occurs in relation to touch ( inattentional numbness ) and to smell   ( inattentional anosmia ).   Sandra Murphy and Polly Dalton (a co-author on the inattentional deafness paper) at Royal Holloway, University of London report in the journal Cognition on inattentional numbness. They wanted to go beyond the way we rapidly tune out ongoing tactile stimulation, like the sensation of our clothes, and explore what happens when we’re tou...
Read more

Danilo Díaz Granados read: A New Study Has Investigated Who Watched The ISIS Beheading Videos, Why, And What Effect It Had On Them

By Emma Young In the summer of 2014, two videos were released that shocked the world. They showed the beheadings, by ISIS, of two American journalists – first, James Foley and then Steven Sotloff. Though the videos were widely discussed on TV, print and online news, most outlets did not show the full footage. However, it was not difficult to find links to the videos online. At the time, Sarah Redmond at the University of California, Irvine and her colleagues were already a year into a longitudinal study to assess psychological responses to the Boston Marathon Bombing, which happened in April 2013. They realised that they could use the same nationally representative sample of US adults to investigate what kind of person chooses to watch an ISIS beheading – and why. Their findings now appear in a paper published in American Psychologist .   By late spring 2013, the researchers had recruited 4,675 adults online, and assessed their mental health, TV-watching habits, demographics,...
Read more