Deliberation enhances the confirmation bias. An examination of politics and religion

David Dickinson

No 20-06, Working Papers from Department of Economics, Appalachian State University

Abstract: This paper present new evidence on the confirmation bias in two polarizing topic areas: politics and religion. While a reasonable amount of evidence has documented this bias in the domain of politics, relatively little existing research has examined the confirmation bias in religion. I developed a novel task in the religious domain to examine the presence of the confirmation bias and its comparative strength compared to that observed in the political domain. Using a preregistered data collection and analysis plan, I examine data from n=402 participants who were prescreened to be distinct in terms of political and religious beliefs. Each was administered a two-pronged confirmation bias online that examined selective information exposure and perceived strength of arguments incongruent to one’s own beliefs regarding “gun control” and the “existence of God”. Results showed strong support for the existence of a confirmation bias along both dimensions and in terms of both information exposure and perceived argument strength. I also examined the hypothesis that the confirmation bias is actually stronger in situations where more thought or deliberation is brought to bear on the task. The evidence here depends on the measure of deliberation used, but generally is in the direction hypothesized. More strongly, we find that individuals who have thought a lot about the topic at hand (gun control and the existence of God displayed more of a confirmation bias in perceived argument strength than those having thought less about the issue. A main contribution of this paper is to offer new evidence documenting the confirmation bias in a more direct task comparison across domains. And, the findings regarding how deliberation may worsen the bias are in line with previous research suggesting the confirmation bias may be unlike other decision biases—this bias may thrive when the decision maker is more is more deliberative or thoughtful. Key Words: Confirmation bias, decision bias, politics, religion, behavioral economics

JEL-codes: C9 D91 Z1 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cbe and nep-neu
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://econ.appstate.edu/RePEc/pdf/wp2006.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: Deliberation Enhances the Confirmation Bias: An Examination of Politics and Religion (2020)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:apl:wpaper:20-06

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from Department of Economics, Appalachian State University Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by O. Ashton Morgan ().