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

Halo Effect01:27

Halo Effect

The halo effect is a cognitive bias in which an individual's overall impression influences judgments about their specific traits. This psychological phenomenon leads people to associate positive characteristics with those they perceive as generally good and negative characteristics with those they view as bad. This effect is particularly influential in social perception, professional evaluations, and decision-making processes.The Psychological Basis of the Halo EffectThe halo effect is rooted...
Groupthink01:34

Groupthink

When in group settings, we are often influenced by the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors around us. Groupthink is another phenomenon of conformity where modification of the opinions of members in a group aligns with what they believe is the group consensus (Janis, 1972). In such situations, the group often takes action that individuals would not perform outside the group setting because groups make more extreme decisions than individuals do. Moreover, groupthink can hinder opposing trains of...
The Representativeness Heuristic02:13

The Representativeness Heuristic

The representative heuristic describes a biased way of thinking, in which you unintentionally stereotype someone or something. For example, you may assume that your professors spend their free time reading books and engaging in intellectual conversation, because the idea of them spending their time playing volleyball or visiting an amusement park does not fit in with your stereotypes of professors.
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?
First Impression01:09

First Impression

First impressions play a crucial role in social perception, shaping how individuals assess others in professional, academic, and interpersonal contexts. Psychological research highlights the significance of cognitive biases, such as the primacy and recency effects, which influence how people interpret and recall information.The Primacy Effect and Cognitive AnchoringThe primacy effect describes the tendency for initial information to impact judgment disproportionately. When individuals encounter...
Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination02:55

Stereotypes, Prejudice, and Discrimination

Humans are very diverse and although we share many similarities, we also have many differences. The social groups we belong to help form our identities (Tajfel, 1974). These differences may be difficult for some people to reconcile, which may lead to prejudice toward people who are different. Prejudice is a negative attitude and feeling toward an individual based solely on one’s membership in a particular social group (Allport, 1954; Brown, 2010). Prejudice is common against people who are...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Framing effects from misleading implicatures: an empirically based case against some purported nudges.

Journal of medical ethics·2024
Same author

A disanalogy with RCTs and its implications for second-generation causal knowledge.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2023
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 14, 2026

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses
06:42

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Published on: September 28, 2018

Respectful Debiasing in Democratic Deliberation.

Shang Long Yeo1,2

  • 1Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.

Bioethics
|July 13, 2026
PubMed
Summary

This study explores methods to improve the reliability of public ethical judgments in health policy deliberation. It evaluates three respectful debiasing strategies to mitigate cognitive and affective biases while upholding democratic ideals.

Keywords:
biasdebiasingdemocratic deliberationethical judgmentsframing effectsidentified victims

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 14, 2026

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses
06:42

Continuous Theta Burst Stimulation of the Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex to Experimentally Reduce Ideological Threat Responses

Published on: September 28, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Bioethics
  • Political Science
  • Public Health Policy

Background:

  • Public ethical judgments are crucial for health policy deliberation.
  • These judgments can be unreliable due to cognitive biases, framing effects, self-interest, and emotions.
  • Addressing bias is essential for democratic health policy discussions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To explore and evaluate methods for debiasing public ethical judgments in health policy.
  • To assess strategies that mitigate bias while respecting moral and political deliberation ideals.
  • To enhance the reliability of public input in health policy decision-making.

Main Methods:

  • Outlining three distinct debiasing methods.
  • Evaluating the effectiveness and respectfulness of each method.
  • Focusing on improving elicitation conditions, voluntary debiasing, and applying public standards for bias.

Main Results:

  • The paper presents three methods: improving elicitation, suggesting debiasing, and applying public standards.
  • Each method aims to reduce bias while maintaining respect for individuals and deliberation.
  • The evaluation focuses on balancing reliability with democratic principles.

Conclusions:

  • Respectful debiasing methods can enhance the reliability of public ethical judgments in health policy.
  • Careful consideration of cognitive and affective biases is necessary for informed deliberation.
  • These strategies offer a path toward more trustworthy public input in health policy.