DOCSLIB.ORG

''I Think It, Therefore It's True'': Effects of Self-Perceived Objectivity on Hiring

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
''I Think It, Therefore It's True'': Effects of Self-Perceived Objectivity on Hiring Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 104 (2007) 207–223 www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp ‘‘I think it, therefore it’s true’’: Effects of self-perceived objectivity on hiring discrimination Eric Luis Uhlmann a,*, Geoffrey L. Cohen b a Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, 2001 Sherdian Road, Evanston, IL 60208, USA b Department of Psychology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309-0345, USA Received 28 July 2006 Available online 7 September 2007 Accepted by Scott Highhouse Abstract A sense of personal objectivity may prompt an ‘‘I think it, therefore it’s true’’ mindset, in which people assume that their own beliefs and introspections are, by definition, valid and therefore worthy of being acted on. In the present studies, priming a sense of personal objectivity increased gender discrimination, particularly among decision-makers who endorsed stereotypic beliefs or who had stereotypic thoughts made cognitively accessible through implicit priming. Implications for discrimination in organizational contexts, and for theories of attitude–behavior consistency, are discussed. Ó 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Hiring evaluations; Workplace; Discrimination; Objectivity; Naı¨ve realism Hiring discrimination persists despite societal, orga- women are less likely to be hired (Eagly & Karau, nizational, and personal ideals to judge job candidates 2002; Glick, Zion, & Nelson, 1988), are paid less on the basis of their merit rather than their group mem- (Jacobs, 1992; Jost, 1997), given less authority (Lyness berships. Egalitarianism is an important value in many & Thompson, 1997; Reskin & Ross, 1995), and pro- contemporary cultures, and the use of stereotypes pro- moted less often (Lyness & Judiesch, 1999) than their vokes social censure. Corporations, which recognize male colleagues. The factors that ‘‘disinhibit’’ discrimi- the importance of gender equality to the maximization nation in organizational contexts are not yet fully of human capital, spend millions of dollars each year understood. in efforts to reduce workplace discrimination. Addition- Identifying such disinhibitors of hiring discrimination ally, egalitarian ideals are often internalized, such that in organizational contexts is important at many levels. people feel self-critical and guilty when they exhibit ster- Most Americans are broadly committed to the ideal that eotypic biases (Devine, Monteith, Zuwerink, & Elliot, individuals should be judged based on their merits, not 1991). based on the social groups they happen to belong to But at the same time, studies document gender and (Sears, Henry, & Kosterman, 2000). As a result, discrim- racial discrimination in hiring decisions, both in the lab- inatory hiring evaluations sully the social reputation of oratory and in real-world job settings (Bertrand & Mul- the decision-maker and the organization in question. lainathan, 2004; Biernat & Kobrynowicz, 1997; Indeed, discriminating against an individual based on Rudman, 1998; Rudman & Glick, 1999; Sidanius & the perceived characteristics of his or her group is illegal Pratto, 1999). For traditionally male, high-status jobs, in many cases, and biased hiring evaluations leave orga- nizations vulnerable to legal action. There can also be * Corresponding author. major economic consequences of discrimination. For E-mail address: [email protected] (E.L. Uhlmann). example, companies that fail to hire qualified female 0749-5978/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.07.001 208 E.L. Uhlmann, G.L. Cohen / Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 104 (2007) 207–223 applicants may find themselves unable to compete with personal objectivity, they perseverate in their beliefs, dis- companies that enforce egalitarian social norms (Becker, missing belief-disconfirming evidence, accepting with lit- 1957). More generally, failure to provide women the tle scrutiny belief-confirming evidence (see Lord, Ross, same professional opportunities as men eliminates much & Lepper, 1979; Ross & Ward, 1996). Additionally, peo- of a society’s human capital and is highly correlated ple also see themselves as above average with respect to with poverty (World Bank., 2001). Identifying factors their susceptibility to common judgmental biases and illu- that increase hiring discrimination allows us to antici- sions (Armor, 1999; Epley & Dunning, 2000; Pronin, pate when decision-makers are most likely to discrimi- Kruger, Savitsky, & Ross, 2001; Pronin et al., 2002). nate, and further suggests interventions that managers For example, they accurately estimate that others will and other leaders can use to ensure that hiring evalua- show the hindsight bias (i.e., the tendency to decide after tions are fair and unbiased. the fact that one ‘‘knew it all along;’’ Fischhoff, 1975), but Contemporary theories propose that the ambiguity erroneously report that they themselves are relatively and subjectivity of the judgment-making situation facil- immune (Pronin et al., 2001; Pronin et al., 2002). itates discrimination (Crandall & Eshleman, 2003; Taken together, this research suggests that self-per- Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; Hodson, Dovidio, & Gaert- ceptions of objectivity increase people’s faith in the ner, 2002; Snyder, Kleck, Strenta, & Mentzer, 1979). validity of their beliefs and thoughts, and perhaps even Ambiguous, subjective contexts are those that contain in the validity of their feelings and intuitions (cf. Pronin incomplete or conflicting information. These can be con- & Kugler, 2007). A sense of objectivity might thereby trasted with objective contexts, in which considerable increase people’s confidence in the validity of stereotypic and non-conflicting information is available. In ambigu- beliefs, thoughts, and intuitions they have, and thereby ous contexts, stereotypes and prejudices are more likely increase their likelihood of acting on them. Research to color judgments and guide actions. For example, on attitude formation and change (Tormala & Petty, White students avoid sitting next to a Black confederate 2004; see also Brin˜ol, Petty, & Tormala, 2004; Petty, Bri- only under ambiguous contexts, for instance in contexts n˜ol, & Tormala, 2002) lends indirect support to our con- in which their preference can be attributed to having a ceptual analysis: People are more likely to act on an different movie preference (Batson, Flink, Schoenrade, attitude or thought when it is held with confidence or Fultz, & Pych, 1986; see also Snyder et al., 1979). certainty (see also Fazio & Zanna, 1978). This suggests We propose that an important disinhibitor of dis- that the conviction that one is objective (and by exten- crimination is decision-makers’ sense of personal objec- sion, that one’s beliefs and thoughts are as well) should tivity. When people believe that they are objective, they increase the likelihood that an individual will act on his feel licensed to act on biases whose influence they may or her stereotypic beliefs and thoughts. Additionally, have otherwise suppressed due to personal and social people confident in their own objectivity may overesti- inhibitions. Discrimination increases not only with the mate their invulnerability to bias (Pronin et al., 2004), ambiguity of the situation but also with decision-makers’ and thus fail to correct for the influence of stereotypic sense of their own personal objectivity and invulnerabil- biases that they might have otherwise been careful to ity to bias. A sense of personal objectivity, we suggest, monitor. gives rise to an ‘‘I think it, therefore it’s true’’ mindset: The foregoing analysis suggests that a sense of per- People assume that their thoughts and beliefs are, by vir- sonal objectivity should moderate the extent to which tue of being theirs, valid and therefore worthy of being people act on their stereotypic thoughts and beliefs in acted upon. To the extent that individuals harbor stereo- an employment setting. Specifically, when people feel typic thoughts and beliefs, as many do (Devine et al., objective, their hiring judgments should be relatively 1991), such a state of self-perceived objectivity may more influenced by stereotypic beliefs and thoughts. increase gender discrimination. Self-perceived objectivity seems particularly fruitful to Our theoretical contention dovetails with research on pursue as a moderator of discrimination, as many orga- naı¨ve realism (Robinson, Keltner, Ward, & Ross, 1995) nizational contexts seem to encourage a sense of per- the ‘‘bias blind spot’’ (Pronin, Gilovich, & Ross, 2004; sonal objectivity—e.g., through the use of impersonal Pronin, Lin, & Ross, 2002), and illusions of objectivity titles like ‘‘director’’ and ‘‘judge’’ that suggest that the (Armor, 1999; Pyszczynski & Greenberg, 1987). The gist individual in question is impartial. Indeed, by simply of this research is that people tend to see themselves as rel- advancing in the organizational hierarchy, people might atively objective and unbiased. Insofar as individuals acquire increasing faith in their good judgment, freedom believe themselves to be objective perceivers of the world, from bias and delusion, and objectivity in general. moreover, they view their beliefs as valid, and they per- To the extent that many people in America have ste- ceive those who hold different views as poorly informed reotypical biases favoring men over women in high-sta- or biased (Kenworthy & Miller, 2002; Pronin et al., tus careers, a
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking
    EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 51(1), 23–34, 2016 Copyright Ó Division 15, American Psychological Association ISSN: 0046-1520 print / 1532-6985 online DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2015.1125787 2013 THORNDIKE AWARD ADDRESS The Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking Keith E. Stanovich Department of Applied Psychology and Human Development University of Toronto, Canada The Nobel Prize in Economics was awarded in 2002 for work on judgment and decision- making tasks that are the operational measures of rational thought in cognitive science. Because assessments of intelligence (and similar tests of cognitive ability) are taken to be the quintessence of good thinking, it might be thought that such measures would serve as proxies for the assessment of rational thought. It is important to understand why such an assumption would be misplaced. It is often not recognized that rationality and intelligence (as traditionally defined) are two different things conceptually and empirically. Distinguishing between rationality and intelligence helps explain how people can be, at the same time, intelligent and irrational. Thus, individual differences in the cognitive skills that underlie rational thinking must be studied in their own right because intelligence tests do not explicitly assess rational thinking. In this article, I describe how my research group has worked to develop the first prototype of a comprehensive test of rational thought (the Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking). It was truly a remarkable honor to receive the E. L. Thorn- Cunningham, of the University of California, Berkeley. To dike Career Achievement Award for 2012. The list of previ- commemorate this award, Anne bought me a 1923 ous winners is truly awe inspiring and humbling.
    [Show full text]
  • Mitigating the Attraction Effect with Visualizations Evanthia Dimara, Gilles Bailly, Anastasia Bezerianos, Steven Franconeri
    Mitigating the Attraction Effect with Visualizations Evanthia Dimara, Gilles Bailly, Anastasia Bezerianos, Steven Franconeri To cite this version: Evanthia Dimara, Gilles Bailly, Anastasia Bezerianos, Steven Franconeri. Mitigating the Attrac- tion Effect with Visualizations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, Insti- tute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2019, TVCG 2019 (InfoVis 2018), 25 (1), pp.850 - 860. 10.1109/TVCG.2018.2865233. hal-01845004v2 HAL Id: hal-01845004 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01845004v2 Submitted on 22 Aug 2018 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVCG.2018.2865233, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics Mitigating the Attraction Effect with Visualizations Evanthia Dimara, Gilles Bailly, Anastasia Bezerianos, and Steven Franconeri Abstract—Human decisions are prone to biases, and this is no less true for decisions made within data visualizations. Bias mitigation strategies often focus on the person, by educating people about their biases, typically with little success. We focus instead on the system, presenting the first evidence that altering the design of an interactive visualization tool can mitigate a strong bias – the attraction effect.
    [Show full text]
  • Fixing Biases: Principles of Cognitive De-Biasing
    Fixing biases: Principles of cognitive de-biasing Pat Croskerry MD, PhD Clinical Reasoning in Medical Education National Science Learning Centre, University of York Workshop, November 26, 2019 Case q A 65 year old female presents to the ED with a complaint of shoulder sprain. She said she was gardening this morning and injured her shoulder pushing her lawn mower. q At triage she has normal vital signs and in no distress. The triage nurse notes her complaint and triages her to the fast track area. q She is seen by an emergency physician who notes her complaint and examines her shoulder. He orders an X-ray. q The shoulder X ray shows narrowing of the joint and signs of osteoarthrtritis q He discharges her with a sling and Rx for Arthrotec q She is brought to the ED 4 hours later following an episode of syncope, sweating, and weakness. She is diagnosed with an inferior MI. Biases q A 65 year old female presents to the ED with a complaint of ‘shoulder sprain’. She said she was gardening this morning and sprained her shoulder pushing her lawn mower (Framing). q At triage she has normal vital signs and in no distress. The triage nurse notes her complaint and triages her to the fast track area (Triage cueing). q She is seen by an emergency physician who notes her complaint and examines her shoulder. He orders an X-ray (Ascertainment bias). q The shoulder X ray shows narrowing of the joint and signs of osteoarthrtritis. He explains to the patient the cause of her pain (Confirmation bias).
    [Show full text]
  • Anchoring Effect" and “Blind Spot” Biases in Federal Sentencing: a Modest Solution for Reforming a Fundamental Flaw Mark W
    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 104 | Issue 3 Article 1 Fall 2014 Confronting Cognitive “Anchoring Effect" and “Blind Spot” Biases In Federal Sentencing: a Modest Solution For Reforming a Fundamental Flaw Mark W. Bennett Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation Mark W. Bennett, Confronting Cognitive “Anchoring Effect" and “Blind Spot” Biases In Federal Sentencing: a Modest Solution For Reforming a Fundamental Flaw, 104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 489 (2014). https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol104/iss3/1 This Criminal Law is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/14/10403-0489 THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY Vol. 104, No. 3 Copyright © 2014 by Northwestern University School of Law Printed in U.S.A. CRIMINAL LAW CONFRONTING COGNITIVE “ANCHORING EFFECT” AND “BLIND SPOT” BIASES IN FEDERAL SENTENCING: A MODEST SOLUTION FOR REFORMING A FUNDAMENTAL FLAW MARK W. BENNETT* Cognitive “anchoring effect” bias, especially related to numbers, like sentencing guidelines ranges, is widely recognized in cognitive psychology as an extremely robust and powerful heuristic. It is a cognitive shortcut that has a strong tendency to undermine judgments by “anchoring” a judgment to an earlier disclosed number, the anchor. Numerous studies prove anchoring bias produces systematic errors in judgment in wide-ranging circumstances, including judgments by experts—doctors, lawyers, real estate agents, psychologists, and auditors—as well as a variety of decisions by foreign and American federal and state judges.
    [Show full text]
  • Croskerry MD, Phd, FRCP(Edin)
    Clinical Decision Making + Strategies for Cognitive Debiasing Pat Croskerry MD, PhD, FRCP(Edin) International Association of Endodontists Scottsdale, Arizona June 2019 Financial Disclosures or other Conflicts of Interest None It is estimated that an American adult makes 35,000 decisions a day i.e. about 2200 each waking hour Sollisch J: The cure for decision fatigue. Wall Street Journal, 2016 Decision making ‘The most important decision we need to make in Life is how we are going to make decisions’ Professor Gigerenzer Is there a problem with the way we think and make decisions? 3 domains of decision making Patients Healthcare leadership Healthcare providers Patients Leading Medical Causes of Death in the US and their Preventability in 2000 Cause Total Preventability (%) Heart disease 710,760 46 Malignant neoplasms 553,091 66 Cerebrovascular 167,661 43 Chronic respiratory 122,009 76 Accidents 97,900 44 Diabetes mellitus 69,301 33 Acute respiratory 65,313 23 Suicide 29,350 100 Chronic Liver disease 26,552 75 Hypertension/renal 12,228 68 Assault (homicide) 16,765 100 All other 391,904 14 Keeney (2008) Healthcare leadership Campbell et al, 2017 Healthcare providers US deaths in 2013 • 611,105 Heart disease • 584,881 Cancer • 251,454 Medical error Medical error is the 3rd leading cause of death Estimated number of preventable hospital deaths due to diagnostic failure annually in the US 40,000 – 80,000 Leape, Berwick and Bates JAMA 2002 Diagnostic failure is the biggest problem in patient safety Newman-Toker, 2017 Sources of Diagnostic Failure The System 25% The Individual 75% Graber M, Gordon R, Franklin N.
    [Show full text]
  • Omission Neglect and the Bias Blind Spot: Effects of the Self-Other Asymmetry in Susceptibility to Bias and Responsiveness to Debiasing
    Omission Neglect and the Bias Blind Spot: Effects of the Self-Other Asymmetry in Susceptibility to Bias and Responsiveness to Debiasing A dissertation submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (PH.D.) IN THE DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING of the College of Business 2011 By Xiaoqi Han M.A., Marquette University Committee Chair: Frank R. Kardes, Ph.D. i ABSTRACT Omission Neglect and the Bias Blind Spot: Effects of the Self-Other Asymmetry in Susceptibility to Bias and Responsiveness to Debiasing By Xiaoqi Han Chair: Dr. Frank R. Kardes Research on the bias blind spot shows that people are less capable of identifying biases in their own judgment than in others. People generally believe that they are less susceptible to biases than their peers and average people. This dissertation investigates the self-other bias asymmetry with respect to omission neglect. Omission neglect refers to insensitivity to missing or unknown information. Results from bias blind spot research imply a potential relationship between the self-other asymmetry in bias belief and omission neglect. Research on bias correction suggests that people holding a higher degree of asymmetry in bias beliefs may be less likely to correct biases even when omissions are made noticeable. Ironically, consumers who believe that they are less vulnerable to omission neglect may be more susceptible to omission neglect. Consumers may be also less likely to correct their judgment even when omitted information is made noticeable. The goal of the dissertation is to develop debiasing techniques to debias omission neglect in order to improve consumer judgment and decision making.
    [Show full text]
  • Blind Spots: Why Smart People Do Dumb Things Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    BLIND SPOTS: WHY SMART PEOPLE DO DUMB THINGS PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Madeleine L. Van Hecke | 256 pages | 03 Apr 2007 | Prometheus Books | 9781591025092 | English | Amherst, United States Blind Spots: Why Smart People Do Dumb Things PDF Book After reading the blurb and subtitle "Why smart people do dumb things? Free with a day trial. By submitting you are joining the ORBITER email community and will receive a bi-monthly newsletter on the intersection of science and meaning. And she does not spare herself in selecting those examples. Made me think a lot about my decisions and have a lot of call to actions going forward. People of all levels of intelligence succumb to what's called the "bias blind spot. It''s called. Lists with This Book. Smart people develop overachieving personalities because things come so easily to them. Since money is the single most powerful tool we have for navigating this complex world we've created, understanding it is critical. None predicted hand held calculators that would displace slide rules. Lots of the advice here is very useful. You get the deal. By using the term dysrationalia , I wanted the field to realize it had been ignoring individual differences. The confusion derives from the inconsistencies of folk language. Smart people are more prone to silly mistakes because of blind spots in how they use logic. Thank you. Getty Images. Adding to library failed. Get A Copy. She didn't know what she didn't know. In his studies, Frederick gave people simple problems to solve, like this one:. He is often wrong, but never in doubt.
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitive Bias in Clinical Medicine ED O’Sullivan1, SJ Schofi Eld2
    J R Coll Physicians Edinb 2018; 48: 225–232 | doi: 10.4997/JRCPE.2018.306 REVIEW Cognitive bias in clinical medicine ED O’Sullivan1, SJ Schofi eld2 ClinicalCognitive bias is increasingly recognised as an important source of medical Correspondence to: error, and is both ubiquitous across clinical practice yet incompletely ED O’Sullivan Abstract understood. This increasing awareness of bias has resulted in a surge in Department of Renal clinical and psychological research in the area and development of various Medicine ‘debiasing strategies’. This paper describes the potential origins of bias Royal Infi rmary of Edinburgh based on ‘dual process thinking’, discusses and illustrates a number of the 51 Little France Crescent important biases that occur in clinical practice, and considers potential strategies that might Edinburgh EH16 4SA be used to mitigate their effect. UK Keywords: cognitive bias, diagnostic error, heuristics, interventions Email: [email protected] Financial and Competing Interests: No fi nancial or competing interests declared Introduction Cognitive bias can lead to medical error The human brain is a complex organ with the wonderful An important concept in understanding error is that of power of enabling man to fi nd reasons for continuing to cognitive bias, and the infl uence this can have on our decision- believe whatever it is that he wants to believe. making.10–12 Cognitive biases, also known as ‘heuristics’, are cognitive short cuts used to aid our decision-making. – Voltaire A heuristic can be thought of as a cognitive ‘rule of thumb’ or cognitive guideline that one subconsciously applies to a Cognitive error is pervasive in clinical practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Bias Blind Spot: Lesson Plan
    Bias Blind Spot: Oops Didn't See That - Cognitive Biases Series | Academy 4 Social Change Bias Blind Spot: Lesson Plan Topic A bias blind spot is when an individual is unable to see how biases affect their judgment and can ultimately affect their decision-making just like a blind spot affects drivers on the road. Furthermore, when attempting to make a compelling argument or speech, it is important to ensure the argument is logical. In order to present the best argument, be aware of potential biases that can affect your judgement and reasoning. Possible subjects/classes Time needed Psychology, Sociology, Economics, 30-35 minutes Business, Marketing, Civics Video link: https://academy4sc.org/topic/bias-blind-spot-oops-didnt-see-that/ Objective: What will students know/be able to do at the end of class? Students will be able to... ● Define the term bias blind spot. ● Identify specific instances where bias blind spot can be applied. ● Explain how the bias blind spot affects reasoning. Key Concepts & Vocabulary Bias Materials Needed Worksheet Before you watch Think-pair-share: 1. Have you ever made a decision and then later found out that you Bias Blind Spot: Oops Didn't See That - Cognitive Biases Series | Academy 4 Social Change misjudged a situation before making the decision? 2. Have you ever noticed someone else making a decision or judgement that you thought was based on that person’s biases rather than actual facts? While you watch 1. Define Bias Blind Spot. 2. What did the study by Pronin, Lee, and Ross discover about people’s beliefs about their own and others' biases? After you watch/discussion questions 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitive Bias and Reflexive Control
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by The University of Mississippi COGNITIVE BIASES AND REFLEXIVE CONTROL by Natalie Minton A thesis submitted to the faculty of The University of Mississippi in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College. Oxford May 2017 Approved by Advisor: Professor David W. Bath Reader: Professor Elicia C. Lair Reader: Professor Susan H. Allen © 2017 Natalie Minton ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT NATALIE MINTON: Cognitive Biases and Reflexive Control (Under the direction of Dr. David W. Bath) Manipulating an opponent is nothing new to warfare, but what is new is the understanding behind modern tactics, psychology, and the how the two intertwine under real world circumstances. One modern tactic, particularly used by the Russian government, is called reflexive control. This hybrid warfare tactic is used to manipulate an opponent into unknowingly making decisions benefiting the manipulator while harming the opponent. Though executed through many outlets, reflexive control is aimed at flaws within the opponent’s decision making process. Many such flaws are categorized as cognitive biases derived from mental shortcuts that can lead the brain to misjudge information. This paper begins research on the question: do cognitive biases make the United States vulnerable to Russia’s use of reflexive control? To answer this question, it must be determined if there is a correlation between cognitive biases and vulnerability to reflexive control. Finding this correlation could possibly provide a greater understanding of modern-day Russian reflexive control, and a narrower understanding of what makes the United States vulnerable to Russian hybrid warfare.
    [Show full text]
  • Preregistration: a Pragmatic Tool to Reduce Bias and Calibrate Confidence in Scientific Research
    PERSPECTIVE Preregistration: A pragmatic tool to reduce bias and calibrate confidence in scientific research Tom E. Hardwicke* & Eric-Jan Wagenmakers# Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam Scientific research is performed by fallible humans. Degrees of freedom in the construction and selection of evidence and hypotheses grant scientists considerable latitude to obtain study outcomes that align more with their preferences than is warranted. This creates a risk of bias and can lead to scientists fooling themselves and fooling others. Preregistration involves archiving study information (e.g., hypotheses, methods, and analyses) in a public registry before data are inspected. This offers two potential benefits: (1) reduce bias by ensuring that research decisions are made independently of study outcomes; and (2) calibrate confidence in research by transparently communicating information about a study’s risk of bias. In this article, we briefly review the historical evolution of preregistration in medicine, psychology, and other domains, clarify its pragmatic functions, discuss relevant meta-research, and provide recommendations for scientists and journal editors. * [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0001-9485-4952 # [email protected] ORCID: 0000-0003-1596-1034 “The mind lingers with pleasure upon the facts that fall happily into the embrace of the theory...There springs up...an unconscious pressing of the theory to make it fit the facts, and a pressing of the facts to make them fit the theory.” — Chamberlin (1890/1965)1 “We are human after all.” — Daft Punk (2005)2 1. Introduction Science is a human endeavour and humans are fallible. Scientists’ cognitive limitations and self-interested motivations can infuse bias into the research process, undermining the production of reliable knowledge (Box 1)3–6.
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitive Biases and Reflexive Control Natalie Minton University of Mississippi
    University of Mississippi eGrove Honors College (Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors Theses Honors College) 2017 Cognitive Biases and Reflexive Control Natalie Minton University of Mississippi. Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College Follow this and additional works at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis Part of the Defense and Security Studies Commons Recommended Citation Minton, Natalie, "Cognitive Biases and Reflexive Control" (2017). Honors Theses. 729. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/hon_thesis/729 This Undergraduate Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors College (Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College) at eGrove. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of eGrove. For more information, please contact [email protected]. COGNITIVE BIASES AND REFLEXIVE CONTROL by Natalie Minton A thesis submitted to the faculty of The University of Mississippi in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Sally McDonnell Barksdale Honors College. Oxford May 2017 Approved by Advisor: Professor David W. Bath Reader: Professor Elicia C. Lair Reader: Professor Susan H. Allen © 2017 Natalie Minton ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT NATALIE MINTON: Cognitive Biases and Reflexive Control (Under the direction of Dr. David W. Bath) Manipulating an opponent is nothing new to warfare, but what is new is the understanding behind modern tactics, psychology, and the how the two intertwine under real world circumstances. One modern tactic, particularly used by the Russian government, is called reflexive control. This hybrid warfare tactic is used to manipulate an opponent into unknowingly making decisions benefiting the manipulator while harming the opponent. Though executed through many outlets, reflexive control is aimed at flaws within the opponent’s decision making process.
    [Show full text]