Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Cause and Effect01:53

Cause and Effect

While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the brain can only use...
Confirmation Biases01:31

Confirmation Biases

The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Have you ever fallen prey to the confirmation bias, either as the source or target of such bias?
Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is called the fundamental attribution...
Unrealistic Optimism Bias01:30

Unrealistic Optimism Bias

Unrealistic optimism bias is the tendency to overestimate the likelihood of positive outcomes. This cognitive bias makes individuals believe they are less likely to experience failures, setbacks, or risks and more likely to succeed than others. For example, people may assume they are less prone to health issues, accidents, or financial struggles than their peers, even when they share similar risk factors.One key component of this bias is the above-average effect, where individuals perceive...
Magical Thinking01:29

Magical Thinking

Magical thinking encompasses the belief in assumptions that defy logical reasoning yet appear intuitively convincing. It is a common psychological phenomenon that persists across various cultural and individual contexts. While these assumptions contradict empirical evidence and scientific laws, they often serve meaningful psychological roles in promoting emotional resilience and a sense of control, especially under stress or uncertainty.Thought-Action Fusion and the Law of SimilarityA key...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Targeting Siglec-engaging immunosuppressive sialoglycans to suppress prostate cancer bone metastasis.

British journal of cancer·2026
Same author

An Exploratory Assessment of Associations Between Serum Estrogen to Progesterone Ratio and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Size, Biomechanics, and T2* Relaxation Time in the Porcine Model.

Journal of biomechanical engineering·2026
Same author

Tissue Damage in Rheumatoid Arthritis Is Genetically Linked to Low Peptidylglycine Alpha-Amidating Monooxygenase Activity in Synovial Fibroblasts.

Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.)·2026
Same author

Intramedullary Threaded Nail Versus Dorsal Plate and Screw Fixation of Comminuted Metacarpal Shaft Fractures: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Study.

Journal of hand surgery global online·2026
Same author

Did Australian policy prepare for a harmful algal bloom with significant human health impacts? Analysis and lessons from South Australia.

Health promotion international·2026
Same author

Age-Related Increases in Graft Tendon Size and Stiffness During Skeletal Growth Enhance Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft Function and Joint Stability in an Early Adolescent Porcine Model.

Journal of biomechanical engineering·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 13, 2026

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation
06:53

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation

Published on: March 1, 2017

The illusion of argument justification.

Matthew Fisher1, Frank C Keil1

  • 1Department of Psychology, Yale University.

Journal of Experimental Psychology. General
|March 20, 2013
PubMed
Summary

People overestimate their ability to justify their arguments, an effect known as the illusion of argument justification. Strong emotional investment in an issue worsens this bias, but considering counterarguments can help.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Social Psychology

Background:

  • Argumentation is crucial for understanding, but strong emotional investment can cause bias.
  • Previous research indicates emotional investment influences argumentation, potentially leading to biased reasoning.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the "illusion of argument justification," where individuals overestimate their ability to justify a position.
  • To examine how emotional investment (care) influences this illusion.
  • To explore whether considering counterarguments mitigates the effect of emotional investment.

Main Methods:

  • Participants rated their ability to justify a position before and after constructing an argument.
  • Studies 1 and 2 manipulated emotional investment and framing/priming effects.
  • Study 3 introduced a condition where participants considered counterarguments.

More Related Videos

The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
05:48

The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients

Published on: June 12, 2020

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task
06:08

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task

Published on: July 22, 2025

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 13, 2026

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation
06:53

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation

Published on: March 1, 2017

The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
05:48

The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients

Published on: June 12, 2020

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task
06:08

Exploring the Role of Deontic Reasoning and World Knowledge in Wason´s Selection Task

Published on: July 22, 2025

Main Results:

  • A significant "illusion of argument justification" was observed, with participants overestimating their justification ability.
  • The strength of this illusion correlated with the level of care for the issue.
  • Emotional investment effects persisted despite framing/priming, but considering counterarguments reduced the illusion.

Conclusions:

  • Individuals exhibit an "illusion of argument justification," overestimating their argumentative prowess.
  • Emotional investment exacerbates this illusion, impacting self-assessment of reasoning.
  • Explicitly considering counterarguments can neutralize the influence of emotional investment on justification assessment, highlighting potential benefits for group reasoning.