There is an recent interesting post at the Scientific American blog that delves deep into the underlying nature of human biases. There is a vast and robust literature of scientific social research findings detailing the many ways our introspective intuitions can lead us astray. A long time leading resercher in the field of human bias has been nobel prize winner Daniel Kahnemen. Kahneman summarizes much of his work over many years in his recent book 'Thinking Fast and Slow' which cover a multitude of these biases such as the confirmation bias, over-confidence bias, halo effects framing effects etc....... A good summary of the book can be found here.
The blog a Scientific American 'The Blindspot Bias' by Samuel McNerney can be found (here). McNerney points out an interesting phenomon that tends to occur when the research behind theses biases is presented to individuals.
"Here’s my worry. The same thing occurs when lay audiences read books about thinking errors. They understand the errors, but don’t notice the trick – that simply learning about them is not enough. Too often, readers finish popular books on decision making with the false conviction that they will decide better."
"The overlooked reason is that there are two components to each bias. The first is the phenomenon itself. Confirmation bias, for example, is your tendency to seek out confirmation information while ignoring everything else. The second is the belief that everyone else is susceptible to thinking errors, but not you. This itself is a bias – bias blind spot – a “meta bias” inherent in all biases that blinds you from your errors."Ok, then what is this 'blind spot bias and how can we avoid falling prey to it? According to McNerney:
"The problem is rooted in introspection. Biases are largely unconscious, so when we reflect on thinking we inevitably miss the processes that give rise to our errors. Worse, because we’re self-affirming spin-doctors, when we introspect, we only identify reasons for our infallibility. In this light, we see why mere exposure to biases compounds the problem: they actually make us more confident about how we decide."This presents a delemma for those who would like to apply a rational approach to objectively seeing the world more closely for how it is rather than for how it suits our current motivations. If the thoughts that unconsciously feed our introspection are themselves fraught with bias how does one avoid a cycle of rationalization? I think McNerney points us in the right direction by making a distinction between introspection and mindfulness.
One way to think about mindfulness is the training of our awareness to bring some objectivity into our normally subjectively dominated experience. Like any useful acquired skill mindfulness training requires consistent practice. We have a natural default mechanism which we are otherwise blind to."Mindfulness, in contrast, involves observing without questioning. If the takeaway from research on cognitive biases is not simply that thinking errors exist but the belief that we are immune from them, then the virtue of mindfulness is pausing to observe this convoluted process in a non-evaluative way. We spend a lot of energy protecting our egos instead of considering our faults. Mindfulness may help reverse this."
The leading researcher behind the blind spot bias is Emily Pronin of Stanford University. Pronin has identified that this bias is rooted in a fundamental asymmetry in the way we value our own introspections and behavoirs in comparison to the credence we apply to the behaviors and introspections of others. This is not just some researchers pet theory, these are robust findings validated across multiple studies.
We tend to define ourselves (usually in a favorable light) based on our own best intentions ( which are available on introspection) rather than on our own actual behaviors. When it comes to others, however, we have more access to their behaviors than we do regarding their intentions. This is why when others behave in ways that are hurtful to us we tend to believe they acted with intention to be hurtful, while when we ourselves act in hurtful ways we are more likely to credit some external factor. We might say 'That wasn't me, I don't do that kind of thing, it was because........', and then try to compose a coherent reason that casts us in a better light.
This asymmetry can go beyond our person to person interactions and can lead to very damaging effects on larger levels. For example we sometimes apply the same logical asymmetries to groups we see ourselves a part of, as compared to those groups we feel a separation from. This is a primary source of discrimination and helps explain the inability to understand and tendency to demonize other cultures.
Update: Some Wittgenstein qoutes from "On Certainty" that are relevant to the 'blind spot bias:
94. But I did not get my picture of the world by satisfying myself of its correctness; nor did I have it because I am satisfied of its correctness. No: it is the inherited background against which I distinguish between true and false.
97. The mythology may change back into a state of flux, the river-bed of thoughts may shift. But I distinguish between the movement of the waters on the river-bed and the shift of the bed itself; though there is not a sharp division of the one from the other.
253. At the core of all well-founded belief, lies belief that is unfounded.
For Wittgenstein we will always have some blindness regarding the origins of our beliefs. The stream of consciousness we experience is constrained by the river-bed of our unconsciously formed world views. Through a receptive nonjudgmental and mindful practice perhaps we can connect the narrow steams into a wider riverbed.
See also: This link for perspectives from Dewey and Zhaungzi
