Deliberation Enhances the Confirmation Bias in Politics

David L Dickinson

doi:10.3390/g11040057

Abstract

The confirmation bias, unlike other decision biases, has been shown both empirically and in theory to be enhanced with deliberation. This suggests that limited attention, reduced deliberation, or limited available cognitive resources may moderate this bias. We aimed to test this hypothesis using a validated confirmation bias task in conjunction with a protocol that randomly assigned individuals to one week of at-home sleep restriction (SR) or well-rested (WR) sleep levels. We also used a measure of cognitive reflection as an additional proxy for deliberation in our analysis. We tested the hypotheses that the confirmation bias would be stronger for WR participants and those higher in cognitive reflection on a sample of 197 young adults. Our results replicated previous findings, and both males and females separately displayed the confirmation bias. Regarding our deliberation hypotheses, the confirmation bias results were most precisely estimated for those having thought relatively more about the issue of gun control. Additionally, for the subset of individuals having thought relatively more about gun control, we found evidence that the confirmation bias was stronger for those higher in cognitive reflection and, somewhat less robustly, for those participants who were (objectively) well-rested.

Highlights

The confirmation bias has been well documented in the political domain [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]
Another study found that higher cognitive reflection and increased thought put into an issue predicted a stronger confirmation bias in both the political and religious domains, but one’s self-reported sleepiness did not significantly affect the bias [16]
These previous findings suggest that limited attention, thought, or reflection on an issue may lead to less confirmation bias if one considers a framework where deliberation is what promotes this bias

Summary

Introduction

The confirmation bias has been well documented in the political domain [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]. Recent neuroscience findings [12,13] suggest the confirmation bias may result from the anticipation of cognitive dissonance [11] and a desire to avoid regret (Nicolle et al, [14]). Another study found that higher cognitive reflection and increased thought put into an issue predicted a stronger confirmation bias in both the political and religious domains, but one’s self-reported sleepiness did not significantly affect the bias [16]. Overall, these previous findings suggest that limited attention, thought, or reflection on an issue may lead to less confirmation bias if one considers a framework where deliberation is what promotes this bias

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion