Reference no: EM133886574

Question

We have discussed a plethora of biases in this course, and you have learned a variety of ways in which people can be intentionally or unintentionally manipulated throughout the research process. You have also learned how to scrutinize research information which will be beneficial to you in many ways. Now that we have learned the fundamentals, it is important to discuss what is often regarded to as the most persistent and pervasive bias among decision makers: selective rigor. Selective rigor occurs when someone only scrutinizes information that challenges their beliefs, and often does so excessively. This usually happens when someone is presented with information that they already believe to be accurate, because they chose to believe something similar previously, thus they choose not to use their skills to properly vet the information they now see. This happens in a variety of contexts, once someone chooses their political stance, their philosophy on life, how other people should act, how they should take care of themselves, and pretty much any other decision, that choice has a profound impact on them. People tend to not scrutinize information consistent with that belief, however, they will heavily scrutinize information that challenges it.

Allow me to present to you a relatively innocuous example of this. For nearly a century in the United States, many people believed that they should wash off meat, especially turkey and chicken, before cooking it. The logic is the same as why you are supposed to wash fruits and vegetables before eating them, it gets off bacteria, viruses and anything else potential harmful. However, back in 2010, the USDA found that while washing fruits and vegetables is good, washing off chicken and other meats is actually harmful due to the fact that is is very likely to spread bacteria and viruses around the kitchen and that cooking meat adequately is by far the best way to get rid of viruses and bacteria. Drexel university did their own study and found the same thing (they even started a Don't wash your chicken campaign, found here: https://drexel.edu/dontwashyourchicken/ ). Most people who were used to washing their meat strongly question the results, they challenged the core idea and the research studies vehemently on the basis of sample size, excessive contamination of the chicken used, and failing to acknowledge issues such as "chicken washer experience." The campaign was so profoundly ineffective, that the USDA had to run another campaign in 2017 (you may remember some news stories about it around this time) which has had limited results, and they are still trying to communicate this idea to people today as the behavior has not been curbed and is still causing food-borne illnesses. Many people are still so committed to the idea that they need to wash meat before cooking to make it clean, they heavily scrutinize any research which says otherwise because they think this new research is potentially harmful.

This is one of many examples of when intelligent, educated people use their rigor to protect a belief rather than enhance their knowledge. We see some extreme examples today as well. A small sect of people aggressively challenge research data showing that vaccines work (they do!) while immediately accepting any data that says they are harmful, even from sources proven false. There are groups convinced that the earth is flat, the moon landing was fake, and many other false ideas which have inexplicably gained traction over the years even after thorough evidence is offered to the contrary. Additionally, US politics has shown extraordinary levels of polarization over the last decade, leading many intelligent people to apply selective rigor to protect their preferred political stance.

In this discussion I want you to evaluate your biases and to do three things. First, describe a time when you "overly scrutinized" information that you did not want to agree with. Why do you think you did that? Did you end up believing any of it later? Next, describe a time when you failed to scrutinize information because you agreed with it. Again, why did you do that? Did you come to question this information later? Finally, after reflecting on these, which general knowledge or opinion areas to you need to be particularly cautious about moving forward and why?

I hope this discussion helps you identify any personal biases you have and that it will help you be a be a better decision maker. There is one final statement I would like to leave you with: