2008/01/07 by Christopher R. Wolfe, M. Anne Britt · 2 citations
Psychology · Social Sciences · #Argumentation theory #Cognitive psychology #Computer science #Confirmation bias #Education and Critical Thinking Development #Educational Strategies and Epistemologies #Epistemology #Information retrieval #Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods #Philosophy #Psychology #Schema (genetic algorithms) #Social psychology
paper · doi:10.1080/13546780701527674
openalex publication_date 2008/01/07 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/29
The myside bias in written argumentation entails excluding other side information from essays. To determine the locus of the bias, 86 Experiment 1 participants were assigned to argue either for or against their preferred side of a proposal. Participants were given either balanced or unrestricted research instructions. Balanced research instructions significantly increased the use of other side information. Participants' notes, rather than search patterns, predicted the myside bias. Participants who defined good arguments as those that can be “proved by facts” were more prone towards the myside bias. In Experiment 2, 84 participants of high and low argumentation ability read a text called “More Than Just the Facts” designed to contradict this fact-based argumentation schema. For high argumentation ability participants, the intervention reduced the myside bias, but for low ability participants it increased. The roots of the myside bias are underdeveloped argumentation schemata leading to misconceptions about research and argumentation.