Talk:Confirmation bias

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Confirmation bias article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 90 days

Confirmation bias is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 23, 2010.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 29, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
May 24, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
July 6, 2010	Featured article candidate	Promoted
July 23, 2010	Today's featured article	Main Page
Current status: Featured article

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Skepticism FA‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Alternative Views FA‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Psychology FA‑class Mid‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Incorrect definition of the confirmation bias?

One issue with this article is the definition of the confirmation bias. Originally Wason intended it to mean only the biased search for evidence (i.e. the 2-4-6 task or the A K 4 7 Selection task). Biased assimilation and belief perserverance are related but fundamentally different. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffrotman (talk • contribs) 02:06, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In order to reflect up-to-date sources, we can't just rely on Wason's original definition. The definition used by the article comes from a recent university-level textbook. Other sources explicitly mention assimilation and perseverance as phenomena arising from conf. bias. MartinPoulter (talk) 14:12, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Explanations missing cognitive consistency

Hi, Excellent work with the article. However, I would argue that the most common explanation of the confirmation bias is cognitive consistency (e.g. cognitive dissonance, expectancy theory etc.) However, there is little discussion given to that topic in terms of the confirmation bias. Jeffrotman (talk) 23:58, 22 August 2011 (UTC) Jeff[reply]

The connection is mentioned fleetingly in the third para of the Explanations section, but maybe it could be expanded. What sources do you recommend? MartinPoulter (talk) 13:40, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guns and attitude

From the article: "For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes." Is this statement based upon an actual real-world study (which possibly should be referenced to if so; given the political nature of the decision) or is a hypothetical example to illustrate the point (which should also be labelled as so)?

If you read down a bit you come to the Confirmation_bias#Polarization_of_opinion section which explains and cites the relevant study. Please sign your posts. Thanks. MartinPoulter (talk) 13:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]