Re: [SystemSafety] Fwd: Contextualizing & Confirmation Bias

From: Terry Hardy < >
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 05:11:56 -0800 (PST)

Second request: please remove me from this list. Thank you very much.
Terry Hardy

 From: Peter Bernard Ladkin <ladkin_at_xxxxxx
To: systemsafety_at_xxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 2:59 PM
Subject: Re: [SystemSafety] Fwd: Contextualizing & Confirmation Bias

On 2/5/14 10:02 PM, Derek M Jones wrote:
> I gave Millikan as an example because of his belief
> about what the value of the charge should, not that a
> smallest unit of charge existed.

Well, yes, quite so. A suggestion of confirmation bias, indeed any bias, does require one to state
the belief system of (a) the subject; (b) oneself; and (c) the intellectual environment which one
assumes. Two or more of which are often missing.

> The cognitive psychology books sitting on my shelf appear to use
> conformation bias in the Bertrand Russell Turkey sense.

Russell's turkeys fit my notion to a tee, as far as I can see.

> However, the "MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences"
> says (much to my surprise):
> "That is, subjects will conduct an experiment
> that will generate a result that is predicted by their hypothesis.
> This is known as confirmation bias"

Yes, well, that's what happens when people throw trendy terms around in papers. What's that I read
above, "MIT"? Why do I feel confirmation bias coming on? :-)

Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Faculty of Technology, University of Bielefeld, 33594 Bielefeld, Germany
Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319

The System Safety Mailing List

The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety_at_xxxxxx Received on Thu Feb 06 2014 - 14:15:05 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Jun 04 2019 - 21:17:06 CEST