People Claim Objectivity After Knowingly Using Biased Strategies

People tend not to recognize bias in their judgments. Such “bias blindness” persists, we show, even when people acknowledge that the judgmental strategies preceding their judgments are biased. In Experiment 1, participants took a test, received failure feedback, and then were led to assess the test’s quality via an explicitly biased strategy (focusing on the test’s weaknesses), an explicitly objective strategy, or a strategy of their choice. In Experiments 2 and 3, participants rated paintings using an explicitly biased or explicitly objective strategy. Across the three experiments, participants who used a biased strategy rated it as relatively biased, provided biased judgments, and then claimed to be relatively objective. Participants in Experiment 3 also assessed how biased they expected to be by their strategy, prior to using it. These pre-ratings revealed that not only did participants’ sense of personal objectivity survive using a biased strategy, it grew stronger.

[1]  N. Epley,et al.  The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic the Adjustments Are Insufficient , 2006 .

[2]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  The Flexible Correction Model: The Role of Naive Theories of Bias in Bias Correction , 1997 .

[3]  Matthew B. Kugler,et al.  Valuing thoughts, ignoring behavior: The introspection illusion as a source of the bias blind spot , 2007 .

[4]  Geoffrey L. Cohen,et al.  Constructed Criteria. Redefining Merit to Justify Discrimination , 2005 .

[5]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  Constructing reality and its alternatives: an inclusion/ exclusion model of assimilation and contrast effects in social judgment , 1992 .

[6]  E. Pronin,et al.  Chapter 1 The Introspection Illusion , 2009 .

[7]  K. Stanovich,et al.  Cognitive sophistication does not attenuate the bias blind spot. , 2012, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Immune Neglect: A Source of Durability , 1998 .

[9]  C. Goldin,et al.  Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of "Blind" Auditions on Female Musicians , 1997 .

[10]  L. Ross,et al.  The Bias Blind Spot: Perceptions of Bias in Self Versus Others , 2002 .

[11]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Mental contamination and mental correction: unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  L. L. Martin,et al.  Set/reset: use and disuse of concepts in impression formation. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Flexible correction processes in social judgment: the role of naive theories in corrections for perceived bias. , 1995, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  The Smell of Bias: What Instigates Correction Processes in Social Judgments? , 1998 .

[15]  Eric Luis Uhlmann,et al.  "I think it, therefore it's true": Effects of self-perceived objectivity on hiring discrimination. , 2007 .

[16]  C. Frantz,et al.  I AM Being Fair: The Bias Blind Spot as a Stumbling Block to Seeing Both Sides , 2006 .

[17]  Thomas Gilovich,et al.  Peering Into the Bias Blind Spot: People’s Assessments of Bias in Themselves and Others , 2005, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[18]  Samuel R. Sommers,et al.  On the Many Impacts of Inadmissible Testimony: Selective Compliance, Need for Cognition, and the Overcorrection Bias , 2001 .

[19]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Immune neglect: a source of durability bias in affective forecasting. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  Thomas Gilovich,et al.  Do people really believe they are above average , 2008 .

[21]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Mental contamination and the debiasing problem. , 2002 .

[22]  Peter H. Ditto,et al.  Motivated Skepticism: Use of Differential Decision Criteria for Preferred and Nonpreferred Conclusions , 1992 .

[23]  L. Ross,et al.  Objectivity in the eye of the beholder: divergent perceptions of bias in self versus others. , 2004, Psychological review.