Denial is a River on the Bayesian Plains

Shankar Vedantam had this article in the WaPo about bias and our evaluation of information:
Emory University psychologist Drew Westen put self-identified Democratic and Republican partisans in brain scanners and asked them to evaluate negative information about various candidates. Both groups were quick to spot inconsistency and hypocrisy -- but only in candidates they opposed.

When presented with negative information about the candidates they liked, partisans of all stripes found ways to discount it, Westen said. When the unpalatable information was rejected, furthermore, the brain scans showed that volunteers gave themselves feel-good pats -- the scans showed that "reward centers" in volunteers' brains were activated. The psychologist observed that the way these subjects dealt with unwelcome information had curious parallels with drug addiction as addicts also reward themselves for wrong-headed behavior.

Not too surprising to anyone, I guess, but I think it goes a long way toward explaining why the word "subjective" leaves a bad taste in most scientists mouths. Another unsurprising conclusion reported was that:
That study found that supporters of President Bush and other conservatives had stronger self-admitted and implicit biases against blacks than liberals did.
Oddly enough, the Republican Party claims to be unimpressed.

Everybody has prejudices, but I always felt that scientists had an obligation to try to get beyond these. Evidently, not everyone agrees.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Anti-Libertarian: re-post

Uneasy Lies The Head

We Call it Soccer