I don’t think the expansion will be effective because researchers will still be going down blind alleys. With this expansion, researchers will perhaps be more successful in finding ways to counter confirmation bias and improve judgments. These are problems I have seen repeatedly. I see this expansion as a useful evolution, particularly the last three issues of framing, testing, and discarding. The physician does give the man a new prescription for a pain reliever and sends the man home-but because he was only looking for what he expected, he missed the subtle problem that required immediate surgery. The physician, believing this is just one more such visit, does a cursory examination and confirms that all of the man's vital signs are fine-consistent with what was expected. The staff suspects that the man is seeking prescriptions for pain medication. To demonstrate confirmation bias, Pines (2006) provides a hypothetical example (which I have slightly modified) of an overworked Emergency Department physician who sees a patient at 2:45 a.m.-a 51-year-old man who has come in several times in recent weeks complaining of an aching back. The bias degrades our judgments when our initial beliefs are wrong because we might fail to discover what is really happening until it is too late. Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for data that can confirm our beliefs, as opposed to looking for data that might challenge those beliefs.
0 kommentar(er)
