Site icon

Confirmation bias—when you can’t see the forest for the trees

A path in a forest with trees on the lest and right of it. Green grass is down front and the path looks to have brown leaves scattered on it.

Imagine that one day a student approaches you in class and tells you that he or she cannot use the assigned textbook for the class because the author is presenting information in a way that they do not like. It seems that portraying a person or an act correctly can cause some to feel both threatened and intimidated. It would be more accurate though to say that these students are suffering from confirmation bias. I explain to my students when I encounter this situation that critical thinkers are skeptics, but they are open minded skeptics. We must look objectively at the information, even when it challenges a deeply held belief. As critical thinkers, we make our decisions and form opinions after we have looked at the information and the corroborating information. If we find the information is not correct, we can discount it. If we find that it is accurate, then we have to examine our own views to make changes. It sounds easy, but in practice it can be very difficult.  

Bias is dangerous to our thinking because it sets a person up to interpret information incorrectly. According to Massey (2021), biases

“are beliefs and perspectives that operate
at a much deeper intellectual and emotional level, involving ethics,
morality, self-identity, personal values, and issues like social justice
and civic responsibility. Biases typically persist unacknowledged or
unrecognized at the core of our highly complex belief system and
often emerge as unsound judgment laced with self-justification and
denial.” (p. 122)

The nature of Confirmation bias, as an error in thinking, will not simply appear in a vacuum and as suggested above is difficult to recognize because of how ingrained our beliefs can be. It will often appear with barriers to thinking like

  1. Denial– exemplified by the student looking at information and denying that it is accurate or that it could possibly apply to the person or position they hold
  2. Anger—exemplified by the student reviewing the information and then getting angry rather than taking to time to perform a close review.
  3. Fear—exemplified by a response close to anger. Students become defensive of their positions and do not allow the new information to be processed or reconciled with the position they currently hold.
  4. Conformity—exemplified by the stubborn resistance to information that disagrees with the view of their “group” or “affiliation.”
  5. Absolutism—exemplified by the inability to see the information as even credible because it does not fit their world view.
  6. Rationalization—exemplified when the student will try to explain away any information that does not fit the viewpoint being presented.

And this is not even an exhaustive list, but just a few of the barriers. These are the things that we can help our students to explore as they encounter information that might not agree with what they believe. But as Wittebols (2016) points out “The challenge to educators is to disrupt that process by having students
confront their tendency to engage in bias confirmation without an authority figure preaching at them.

What complicates things more is how confirmation bias and barriers to thinking also lead to the use of faulty thinking and things like fallacies in an attempt to prove a point of view. Some common fallacies that we encounter are the Ad Hominem attack like “this person cannot be right because they are part of a ‘woke’ mob” or “you can’t trust anything they say because they supported Donald Trump”. In both of these cases there is an opportunity to help the student step back and explore the fallacy they are using and ask for better reasoning.

Another common fallacy is the “Alternative truth.” Students will use this fallacy in an attempt to justify a view they hold. Vaccines are a perfect example and also highlight how confirmation bias plays into this process. They go to the interent, blogs, and social media sites looking for sources that agree with their point of view. Then they claim they have done their research and have the “real” facts. And this is problematic because they have sought out what they were looking for and are attempting to deny the new information that does not agree. Wittebols (2016) suggests that

“An individual experiencing this dissonance can deal with it in one of two ways: reject the new source of information and reinforce the existing worldview, or weigh the truth value of the competing viewpoints and determine if the closely-held views should be revised. The former we have identified as confirmation bias, which does not challenge the reader to resolve the contradiction. The latter approach is more demanding on learners, but opens the possibility of changing one’s views” (p.2).

It is this possibility that we have to work for and encourage because it is not a matter of telling a student that they are wrong and then the student makes a correction. If we approach the situation “heavy handed” then this may create resistance and more barriers to deal with.

And so, what do we do? Wittebols (2016) suggests that we allow the student to process and make corrections and this seems like a good idea in theory, but in application it can mean that a student can be left with the same barriers to thinking and no real resolution. It might be better to provide a framework for students to explore their own bias so that they can gain insight into how they view the world and how this tempers their decision-making. This can include such things as exploring opposing viewpoints on issues, role play that allows the students to take a position that is not their own on an issue, research it and argue it, and identifying biased or misleading information related to their own positions. Perhaps Massey (2021) sums it up best with

“Genuine research and learning require
asking deeper questions, like “why?” and “what does that mean?” and
“where did that come from?” It is possible to listen with genuine
interest, to read with discernment, and to think logically. But change in
perspective typically cannot be forced by debate or argumentation. No
one can convince a closed-minded person of anything. Each individual
has to shoulder responsibility for asking questions, challenging
assumptions, and engaging in bona fide research outside the box of
personal bias and belief” (p.130)

If we can get the students to think outside the box, then they can begin to at least approach other viewpoints and develop some empathy. As I think back to the students I used as examples above, I wonder if my expectations for them were a bit too optimistic. It is not a short journey with a moment of illumination where we see that light come on. Instead, if we can simply help them on the path, we have to trust that they can continue until they are ready to see their bias and understand how it is affecting their understanding. It is, after all, going to depend on how they choose to see the world.  

References

Massey, L. F. (2021). Confirmation Bias: An American Political, Religious, and Personal Dilemma. Pennsylvania Literary Journal (2151-3066), 13(1), 121–130.

Wittebols, J. H. (2016). Empowering Students to Make Sense of an Information-Saturated World: The Evolution of “Information Searching and Analysis.” Communications in Information Literacy, 10(1), 1–13.

Exit mobile version