D. Mandel, Robert N. Collins, A. C. Walker, Jonathan A. Fugelsang, Evan F. Risko
{"title":"Hypothesized drivers of the bias blind spot—cognitive sophistication,\n introspection bias, and conversational processes","authors":"D. Mandel, Robert N. Collins, A. C. Walker, Jonathan A. Fugelsang, Evan F. Risko","doi":"10.1017/s1930297500009475","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Individuals often assess themselves as being less susceptible to common\n biases compared to others. This bias blind spot\n (BBS) is thought to represent a metacognitive error. In this research, we\n tested three explanations for the effect: The cognitive sophistication\n hypothesis posits that individuals who display the BBS more strongly are\n actually less biased than others. The introspection bias hypothesis posits\n that the BBS occurs because people rely on introspection more when assessing\n themselves compared to others. The conversational processes hypothesis\n posits that the effect is largely a consequence of the pragmatic aspects of\n the experimental situation rather than true metacognitive error. In two\n experiments (N = 1057) examining 18\n social/motivational and cognitive biases, there was strong evidence of the\n BBS. Among the three hypotheses examined, the conversational processes\n hypothesis attracted the greatest support, thus raising questions about the\n extent to which the BBS is a metacognitive effect.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500009475","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Individuals often assess themselves as being less susceptible to common
biases compared to others. This bias blind spot
(BBS) is thought to represent a metacognitive error. In this research, we
tested three explanations for the effect: The cognitive sophistication
hypothesis posits that individuals who display the BBS more strongly are
actually less biased than others. The introspection bias hypothesis posits
that the BBS occurs because people rely on introspection more when assessing
themselves compared to others. The conversational processes hypothesis
posits that the effect is largely a consequence of the pragmatic aspects of
the experimental situation rather than true metacognitive error. In two
experiments (N = 1057) examining 18
social/motivational and cognitive biases, there was strong evidence of the
BBS. Among the three hypotheses examined, the conversational processes
hypothesis attracted the greatest support, thus raising questions about the
extent to which the BBS is a metacognitive effect.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.