Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Hindsight Biases

Hindsight Biases

Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now?

Confirmation Biases

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?

Motivational Bias

Motivational Bias

Cognitive bias results from limitations in thinking and information processing, leading to systematic errors in judgment. Conversely, motivational bias stems from personal desires or emotions, causing distortions in perception to align with self-interest. Motivational bias influences how individuals perceive and attribute causes to events, often shaped by personal needs, goals, and self-esteem preservation. This bias can distort judgment, leading to inaccurate assessments of success, failure,...

Correspondence Bias

Correspondence Bias

Correspondence bias, also referred to as the fundamental attribution error, describes the tendency to attribute another person’s behavior to internal characteristics rather than situational influences. This cognitive bias leads individuals to overlook external factors that may be influencing actions, thereby fostering potentially inaccurate assessments of others’ intentions and dispositions.Empirical Evidence for Correspondence BiasResearch has consistently demonstrated the...

Bias

Bias

Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...

False Memories

False Memories

False memories represent a cognitive distortion in which individuals recall events that did not happen, or remember them in an altered form. This phenomenon highlights the brain's constructive nature in processing and recalling memories, emphasizing that memory is not a perfect representation of past events but rather a dynamic reconstruction influenced by various factors.
One primary source of false memories is misattribution, where individuals incorrectly associate external information...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by

Same author

Conspiracy Beliefs and Monothematic Delusions: A Case for De-pathologizing.

Erkenntnis·2026

Same author

Malfunction defended.

Synthese·2020

Same author

Biased by our imaginings.

Mind & language·2020

Same author

The epistemic innocence of clinical memory distortions.

Mind & language·2018

Same author

The role of emotions and values in competence.

Journal of medical ethics·2016

Same author

Introduction. Costs and benefits of imperfect cognitions.

Consciousness and cognition·2015

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 20, 2026

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime

Published on: May 3, 2016

Implicit bias, confabulation, and epistemic innocence.

Ema Sullivan-Bissett¹

¹Department of Philosophy, ERI Building, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, United Kingdom.

Consciousness and Cognition

|December 4, 2014

Summary

Confabulatory explanations for actions driven by implicit bias, despite epistemic costs, offer unique epistemic benefits. These explanations can be epistemically innocent, providing otherwise unobtainable insights.

Keywords:

Confabulation Epistemic benefit Epistemic evaluation Imperfect cognitions Implicit bias

More Related Videos

The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling

The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling

Published on: April 6, 2018

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

Published on: January 31, 2017

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 20, 2026

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime

An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime

Published on: May 3, 2016

The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling

The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling

Published on: April 6, 2018

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

The Deese-Roediger-McDermott DRM Task: A Simple Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate False Memories in the Laboratory

Published on: January 31, 2017

Area of Science:

Cognitive Science
Philosophy of Mind
Social Psychology

Background:

Implicit bias influences actions, often leading to explanations that misrepresent the true cognitive processes.
Confabulation, the fabrication of explanations, is common when individuals lack conscious access to their motivations.

Purpose of the Study:

To explore the epistemic nature and benefits of confabulatory explanations for actions guided by implicit bias.
To introduce and analyze the concept of 'epistemic innocence' in relation to confabulation.

Main Methods:

Conceptual analysis of confabulation and implicit bias.
Examination of epistemic costs and benefits of confabulatory explanations.
Introduction of 'epistemic innocence' as a framework for evaluation.

Main Results:

Confabulatory explanations can yield significant epistemic benefits not otherwise accessible.
These explanations may possess 'epistemic innocence' when benefits outweigh faults and alternatives are unavailable.

Conclusions:

Confabulatory explanations for implicit bias-driven actions warrant a richer epistemic evaluation.
Contextual factors are crucial in assessing the epistemic value of such explanations.