心理机制是数字科学证据的偏见解释的基础
Clint McKenna1, David Dunning1
1Department of Psychology, University of Michigan.
Journal of experimental psychology. General
|December 16, 2024
概括
人们选择性地解释科学证据以与他们的政治观点保持一致,一种态度共效应. 这种偏见持续不论统计专业知识或认知努力,导致偏见的结论,即使有正确的推理.
科学领域:
- 认知心理学 认知心理学
- 行为经济学是一种行为经济学.
- 科学推理 科学推理
背景情况:
- 有动机的计算理论表明,个人选择性地使用统计专业知识.
- 以前的研究探讨了认知能力如何影响证据评估.
研究的目的:
- 调查统计专业知识是否导致对科学证据的偏见评估.
- 检查态度相似性在激励数学的作用.
- 在证据解释中区分真正的理性和表达式的理性化.
主要方法:
- 三项研究 (N=2,799) 涉及参与者解释枪支控制干预研究中的数值数据.
- 评估的态度相似性,数值能力 (数值能力) 和认知力度.
- 分析了用于得出结论的理由的有效性.
主要成果:
- 当数据与政治偏好一致时,参与者更喜欢准确的结论 (态度相似效应).
- 这种偏见独立于计算能力和认知力度.
- 参与者经常以无效的理由 ("表达式合理化") 来得出正确的结论,而不是真正的统计理解.
结论:
- 态度相似性,而不是统计专业知识,推动了有偏见的证据评估.
- 个人可能会用方便的,虽然无效的论点来合理化他们喜欢的结论.
- 统计学培训并没有减轻这种态度的共性偏差.
相关概念视频
Bias
3.7K
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...
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...
3.7K
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
153
Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:
153
Regression Toward the Mean
6.3K
Regression toward the mean (“RTM”) is a phenomenon in which extremely high or low values—for example, and individual’s blood pressure at a particular moment—appear closer to a group’s average upon remeasuring. Although this statistical peculiarity is the result of random error and chance, it has been problematic across various medical, scientific, financial and psychological applications. In particular, RTM, if not taken into account, can interfere when...
6.3K
Cause and Effect
10.9K
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?
10.9K
The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic
7.2K
In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the...
7.2K
Fundamental Attribution Error
12.8K
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...
12.8K


