title: Increased sensitivity to differentially diagnostic answers using familiar materials: implications for confirmation bias.
abstract: Researchers have recently pointed out that neither biased testing nor biased evaluation of hypotheses necessitates confirmation bias--defined here as systematic overconfidence in a focal hypothesis--but certain testing/evaluation combinations do. One such combination is (1) a tendency to ask about features that are either very likely or very unlikely under the focal hypothesis (extremity bias) and (2) a tendency to treat confirming and disconfirming answers as more similar in terms of their diagnosticity (or informativeness) than they really are. However, in previous research showing the second tendency, materials that are highly abstract and unfamiliar have been used. Two experiments demonstrated that using familiar materials led participants to distinguish much better between the differential diagnosticity of confirming and disconfirming answers. The conditions under which confirmation bias is a serious concern might be quite limited.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, MC 0109, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109, USA. cmckenzie@ucsd.edu
authors.forename: Craig R M
authors.initials: CR
authors.lastname: McKenzie
mesh_terms: D003933:Diagnosis; D006801:Humans; D011930:Reaction Time; D021641:Recognition, Psychology; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity