Natural myside bias is independent of cognitive ability
Thinking and Reasoning 13 (3):225 – 247 (2007)
| Abstract | Natural myside bias is the tendency to evaluate propositions from within one's own perspective when given no instructions or cues (such as within-participants conditions) to avoid doing so. We defined the participant's perspective as their previously existing status on four variables: their sex, whether they smoked, their alcohol consumption, and the strength of their religious beliefs. Participants then evaluated a contentious but ultimately factual proposition relevant to each of these demographic factors. Myside bias is defined between-participants as the mean difference in the evaluation of the proposition between groups with differing prior status on the variable. Whether an individual difference variable (such as cognitive ability) is related to the magnitude of the myside bias is indicated by whether the individual difference variable interacts with the between-participants status variable. In two experiments involving a total of over 1400 university students ( n = 1484) and eight different comparisons, we found very little evidence that participants of higher cognitive ability displayed less natural myside bias. The degree of myside bias was also relatively independent of individual differences in thinking dispositions. We speculate that ideas from memetic theory and dual-process theory might help to explain why natural myside bias is quite dissociated from individual difference variables. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,664 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJacquineau Azetsop & Tisha Joy (2011). Epistemological and Ethical Assessment of Obesity Bias in Industrialized Countries. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 6 (1):16-.
Dale Dorsey (2010). Preferences, Welfare, and the Status-Quo Bias. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (3):535-554.
James Friedrich (2004). The “Bias” Bias in Social Psychology: Adaptive When and How? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):335-336.
Janne Chung & Gary S. Monroe (2003). Exploring Social Desirability Bias. Journal of Business Ethics 44 (4):291 - 302.
Donna Torrens (1999). Individual Differences and the Belief Bias Effect: Mental Models, Logical Necessity, and Abstract Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 5 (1):1 – 28.
Jonathan Baron (1995). Myside Bias in Thinking About Abortion. Thinking and Reasoning 1 (3):221 – 235.
M. Anne Britt & Christopher R. Wolfe (2008). The Locus of the Myside Bias in Written Argumentation. Thinking and Reasoning 14 (1):1-27.
Christopher R. Wolfe & M. Anne Britt (2008). The Locus of the Myside Bias in Written Argumentation. Thinking and Reasoning 14 (1):1 – 27.
Richard F. West & Keith E. Stanovich (2008). On the Failure of Cognitive Ability to Predict Myside and One-Sided Thinking Biases. Thinking and Reasoning 14 (2):129-167.
Keith E. Stanovich & Richard F. West (2008). On the Failure of Cognitive Ability to Predict Myside and One-Sided Thinking Biases. Thinking and Reasoning 14 (2):129 – 167.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads3 ( #201,781 of 549,014 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,261 of 549,014 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
