Sentences with phrase «with confirmation bias»

One would think that a skeptic, and not a «skeptic» would bend over backward to control for confirmation bias — but instead what we have here are self - described «skeptics» ignoring any potential for motivated reasoning — to be absolutely certain of conclusions that just happen to be consistent with confirmation bias.

Instead they double down and go on with their confirmation bias, completely unfazed by these little tipoffs that a lot more work is necessary before they have aced the exam.

The Millionaire Next Door is a flawed book rife with confirmation bias (it's obvious that a certain kind of millionaire would best respond to the authors» incentives), but you should still read it, even for the inspiration factor alone.

They are lazy takes that create a bias and then double it down with confirmation bias.

-- Still, same story persists about earnings growth and economic backdrop (problem is that no one knows how to model in impact of tariffs)- many are still afflicted with confirmation bias and narrow vision

Not exact matches

A wave of confirmation bias, combined with an inattention to evidence of weakness in Clinton's support, mixed in with too much coverage of irrelevant sideshows like the Clinton email «scandal.»

Confirmation bias occurs when you're faced with something that you don't want to be true, so part of your brain actually shuts down and comes up with all of the reasons this can't be true.

«Cognitive dissonance» and «confirmation bias» often pair with hot - hand fallacy, and can cause investors to ignore information that might refute their desire to maintain a previously successful strategy and cause them to instead selectively focus on incoming data that seems to support the status quo.

With so many media - savy fundies predicting the crash and all their ego - massaging confirmation bias articles and neatly chosen «expert opinions», we may not get more than a handful of 10 % corrections for another decade and every time they happen, we will be told the sky is falling!

Confirmation bias all the way with all of your scenarios.

Reblogged this on myatheistlife and commented: Here's a good bit of fun... statistics for the whole family with a family sized heaping of confirmation bias to go along side it.

Post by Iroy contains instances of confirmation bias and concludes with a form of the flawed argument known as Pascal's Wager.

The only thing I learned here is that scientists (well, engineers...) can be stricken with cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias too.

If people with this kind of extreme confirmation bias could be steered towards appropriate careers and then learn to recognize their own cognitive limitations they, and we, might all be a bit better off.

We knew little coming in, and anything we think we've learned so far is tainted with some combination of overreaction and confirmation bias, chances are.

Furthermore, because these traditional societies are dispersed throughout the globe and have no contact with one another (or often anyone except the visiting anthropologists) these societies offer a broad enough sample size to avoid the problem of confirmation bias.

But when we are presented with the same pattern over and over again it is easy to fall victim to what is known as confirmation bias, or coming to false conclusions because the evidence we use does not come from a broad enough sample.

The reason why everyone is worried about Iran has nothing to do with the relevant facts, it is the animosity between the US and Israel vs. Iran combined with cognitive biases like the Bandwagon effect, Confirmation bias etc. etc..

All these elements fit into what is known as the «confirmation bias» — our tendency to look for information that fits with what we already believe.

In a massive data set with 8,000 statistically significant correlations, even a smidgen of confirmation bias can cause someone to find a trend that isn't truly there.

Taste is now confused with what's been identified as «confirmation bias.»

To suggest these exultant visions of beauty constitute a reflexive confirmation of existing stereotypes of Los Angeles as a vacuum filled with pretty airheads speaks more to the biases of the accuser than to those of Malick.

But devaluing test data — combined with infrequent or cursory reviews — risks making what should be a dynamic and useful report to parents and teachers either static or a mere exercise in confirmation bias.

But while the Sentinel series can be forgiven for raising legitimate problems with a handful of facilities — issues that certainly merit discussion — the series also blatantly ignores facts that do not support its confirmation bias against the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship and its member schools.

OK, that's enough from me for now — hopefully this adds some interesting (& speculative) insights, both near term and / or long term, to my investment thesis: We're in a bull market, which just might transform itself into a bubble, and even ultimately become the mother of all bubbles... This is obviously an evolving thesis — which I must highlight, is designed to be constantly questioned and re-evaluated based on new data & developments, and certainly not a thesis to be simply adopted & defended to the death with all kinds of confirmation bias.

For value investors, with their focus on amassing tremendous detail and due diligence on single stocks, one insidious bias stands above all others: confirmation bias.

Kurt presents the «seven psychological death sins» you should be aware of in an attempt to downtone System 1 and advance System 2: 1) excessive self - confidence, 2) herd mentality, 3) blind orthodoxy, 4) denial, 5) confirmation bias, 6) deadlocked ideas and attitudes, 7) cognitive dissonance (the tendency to go with the thought that «feels best» when stuck with the choice between two contradicting ideas rather than investigating which is more rational).

With that being said, here are several ways to reduce and possibly avoid confirmation bias as a reviewer and as a reader of reviews.

(Of course I'm exhibiting confirmation bias in highlighting this line, given how it resonates with my notion that we're essentially going through «puberty on the scale of a planet.»)

These days I read his stuff with interest but I do think he could make his case more strongly by avoiding his own tendency to confirmation bias and being rather selective with his sources, to say the least.

Science is littered with examples of deliberate fraud, stupid mistakes and confirmation bias.

I should point out, however, that funding further study with the likes of the the hockey team seems to be a complete waste, since it seems to produce results ranging from bias confirmation, at best, to junk science, to outright corruption.

Confirmation biases would lead reviewers to work extra hard to find flaws with papers whose conclusions they dislike, and to be more permissive about methodological issues when they endorse the conclusions.

I also explained I don't have any real beefs with ice core data but if you want to state something specific I'm sure I can find something to cast doubt upon it as very little in this debate is writ in granite, confirmation bias is rampant, overconfidence abounds, the race to publish by inexperienced youngsters on the tenure track is heated, and pal review let's just about anything that supports the consensus view get published while simultaneously quashing anything contrary.

Confirmation bias is when we seek out or accept information that's in line with our existing beliefs and reject information that contradicts them.

I think that it is important to not presume a degree of bias, but to exchange openly with an open acknowledgement that we are all prone to biases — in particular confirmation bias, identity protection bias, and biases that result from inherent attributes of our cognitive processes, such as pattern recognition (which leads us to sometimes seeing patterns where they don't exist).

No doubt you have read me say, many times, that what's important is how people deal with their inherent inclination towards «motivated reasoning,» confirmation bias, etc..

Scientists try to avoid confirmation bias by exposing their work to peer review by critics with different views, but it's increasingly difficult for liberals to find such critics.

After wading through a hundred posts I can't help but suspect that if we are honest with ourselves, the vast majority of opinions here are merely expressions of confirmation bias: the majority of people posting or moderating are being skeptical or accepting based entirely on whether or not it agreed with their pre-existing model of the universe.

Many times these adjustments tend to come back and haunt you later, providing a reverse affect, at which point they are conveniently discarded by those with a bad case of confirmation bias.

Option C won't make it go away either because simulations are so massaged by confirmation bias that many reasonable people, understanding this, may tentitively choose option A. On the other hand, the problem of catastrophic global warming may well go away with additional data.

In this background, being convinced that one is right, with a feeling for the need for both do - good and feel - good actions, confirmation bias becomes a real danger I guess.

From my perspective, with this example it appears they have crossed the threshold from simple incompetence and confirmation bias into the realm of academic misconduct.

I believe you're suffering from confirmation bias, in that you want to believe the criminal was a UEA / CRU insider, because then you can soothe your conscience about profiting from the theft via your book with Fuller.

From the sidelines, we see: AGW promoters getting rich and / or building careers off of circular reasoning, confirmation bias and endless whitewashes, with a great deal of argument by arrogance tossed in.

Including it with interpolated data can only lead to confirmation bias.

When he communicates with other experts, the odds get even worse (bias confirmation).

I don't know whether Drs Spencer and Christy did this alignment out of an error of confirmation bias or as a deliberate «trick», but either way the graphs they presented with that 60 - month baselining are deceptive.

Since you and I probably exhibit confirmation bias and expectation bias and other forms of cognitive bias, I'd have a a group of intelligent, non - scientists with no knowledge or expectations look at the temperature trends.

The problem with the media was that, by and large, they failed to look at what was going on here with a sceptical (as defined in your paragraph 3) eye, and to certain sections of the media, the whole shoot simply appealed to their inbuilt tendency to view things, depending on the storyline, either with outright denialism or with confirmation - bias.