A week or two back I was accused on Twitter of having ‘confirmation bias’. In response to a comment I left on a blog post, Judy Gombita contacted me by private message to say that “it’s very discouraging when you only engage/listen to/agree with the thoughts of one person”. She went on to accuse me of favouring “the usual suspects” when referencing articles here or on Twitter, and when commenting on others’ blogs. I’m not one to run and hide from criticism and so, in the spirit of open debate, I asked her to write a guest post about the issue for FutureComms. She declined.
Confirmation bias occurs when a person favours or interpets information and opinions in such a way that they confirm their own beliefs. It leads to a situation where they selectively retain information that backs up their own views and ignore information that challenges them, resulting in deeply entrenched opinions and a lack of rational questioning in the face of contrary evidence. It’s quite a damning accusation, especially for someone who sees himself as someone who’s always questionning others’ views. But does it actually describe me? And, more to the point, does it apply to half the blogosphere? To you?
Do We Agree Through Habit?
Personally speaking, I do favour some bloggers over others. But I make no excuses for that. I could not possibly subscribe to all of the communications/PR/social media/SEO/tech/psychology blogs I’d like to. I’d never do anything but read. And so yes, I am selective to whom I listen to and I probably do reference some individuals who I respect on a semi-regular basis and many others not at all. Futhermore, I interact with some people far more than others as I have relationships with them, built over time spent chatting and debating on the social web. However, I don’t agree with everything they say. Hell, one of the people Judy is referring to has openly called me her “nemesis”. We disagree about stuff. A lot.
So is this confirmation bias? If it is, then it would look to me as though pretty much the entire blogosphere is guilty as charged. And yet I cannot quite dismiss Judy’s assertions outright. I’ve seen what she’s referring to in specific blogging communities where the ‘community voice’ dismisses the opinions of anyone challenging the group opinion. I wrote about groupthink a few weeks ago, and about how communities often rally to eradicate divergent thinking and rational questioning to come to a consensus that invariably agrees with the blog author. This, surely, is confirmation bias at its worse.
So maybe it’s rife in the blogosphere. And maybe I’m no better than anyone else. Maybe you’re the worst of all of us. What do you think?
Like this post? Subscribe to FutureComms and get it straight to your inbox.
On the contrary. I like you’re blog. I like you. But these aren’t the reason I’m here. I read you’re blog because you challenge me.
Often we agree, but many times we do not and that has led me to respect your blog content for what it is.
All of this would be a ‘social crime’ if I was just here to pat you on the back and promote either of us but that is far from the case. Sometimes I visit blogs and social accounts to gather information, say hello, engage in discussion and debate or just to walk on by and have a look into that window.
There are over 300 channels of TV available to me every night, but I like others have my particular favourites. Decisions based on exactly the same as the social places I go.
Anything wrong with that?
Nothing Chris. Not to my mind
From my perspective I don’t see enough challenging and questioning in the blogosphere, so quite probably confirmation bias does exist within some communities. But jesus, if you and and I are everyone we’re connected to always agreed, wouldn’t life be dull. I NEVER listen to you for god’s sake… 
(joke)
Paul, you know I like your blog and challenging style, but think the accusation in question is absolute B*ll*cks, if you accuse my asterisked french.
People, in life, exist in huddles. Often because of mutual thought-provocation, mutual agreement, like-mindedness and common interest. Often, just because of time. Even in social media, many people have columns in their hootsuite of close contacts – I know this, because people have said it, and I am in such `lists`. It is impossible to be attentive to more than 25% of our social media connections – and probably settles at 5-10%.
We are naturally drawn towards commenters and writers that we often admire and confirm our own views. It’s human. We all need self-assurance, and are prone towards providing assurance to others in our `huddle`.
Some people clearly have too much time on their hands, and choose to over-analyse the actions of others in too deep a method. I am a regular reader, and a fairly regular contributor to this blog – and I see nothing of the sort.
Social Media has it’s massive downsides, and one of them is the over-expression and opinion of saddos sitting in their pants behind their desk with a name plaque that says `Joe Bloggs – Social Media Consultant` – and a LinkedIn profile that continually says `for hire`.
Keep up the way you play Paul – I’d be intrigued if anyone else offers the same opinion as this social media cardigan – but frankly, I don’t care one jot.
As you can see Steve – we’re on the same page. Enough said Paul.
Haha! Stop sitting on the fence, Steve…speak your mind, man!
Cheers, appreciate that. As you say, we exist in huddles and that’s natural. Does that mean we never, ever listen to others or read others’ blog posts or interact with them on Twitter? No.
Despite that, like I said in the post, I find it hard to dismiss the idea of confirmation bias within social media communities completely. It kind of makes sense to me that each micro-community has its own ‘norms’ and that they probably differ from others. But I don’t know a way past that.
Thanks again.
I think confirmation bias does exist for us all to differing degrees, for a lot of the reasons outlined above, we’re human and are attracted to people who both share our beliefs on a given subject or who challenge us.
Personally I follow you as you’re happy to speak your mind but you ‘get it’ (i.e. your beliefs/values seem to align to mine on the whole) – it doesn’t mean I agree with everything you say though and you challenge how I think about some things, how dull would that be?!?
I’d say the lesson to learn is that we can get ‘stuck’ following the same people sometimes and we all need to shake things up from time to time to keep fresh.
As a blogger, aren’t we meant to get a reaction from our readers, be it agreement, disagreement or something inbetween? I don’t comment on things just to agree with them (although I know plenty of sad souls who do), I comment things that provoke a strong reaction in me and I think you’re the same?
Truck on Paul, truck on
A lot of people seem not to agree with me a lot, Jan
But I do agree with you when you say that we can get ‘stuck’ following the same people. I’ve just recently been seeking out new people and bloggers in new topic areas as I’ve grown a bit tired of seeing the same recycled opinions. Like you say, it’s shaking things up. It keeps us fresh,. And it avoids getting trapped in that ‘bubble’.
Thanks for commenting, appreciate it.
Can I have one of those social media cardigans – sounds cosy. But of course we have been seeking confirmation of our own opinions for centuries – what else is a Guardian reader or a Daily Mail taker. The cleverest papers of course always contain just enough variety of opinion to let their readers think they are independent.
I’m not a cardigan fan, Lucy, but yeah – I can see the benefit!
You’re certainly right about newspapers (and any other form of media), but that doesn’t mean it’s right, does it?
Exactly! Well said.
I think it’s an absurd term and a ludicrous accusation. People gravitate to thoughts and opinions they agree with and they tend to echo the thoughts and opinions of like-minded people…?
What the actual f*ck?
That’s what societies do, isn’t it? It’s part of the glue that binds people together. From the very personal (you meet someone in a bar, you talk, you like them, you find yourself mirroring their body language and postures) right to much larger scale stuff – geo-political motivations for certain countries banding together.
Well in defence (really?!) of the terminology and the concept, it’s a recognised condition that dates back to the 1960s and, according to Wikipedia at least, “poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts”. I can see that. If your thinking is too one-sided then you’re not going to be considering all the relevant information and data when making decisions.
But to me at least, that’s a very different thing than whose blogs your read and comment on, or what company you keep on a social network. As you say, it’s a societal thing.
Exactly. If one is charged with running the affairs of state, or deploying troops into battle then you cannot be blinkered.
But to take the concept out of its only true context and apply it in more recreational settings is dumb, in the extreme.
She must be a fucking riot in the ice cream parlour… “Have you really considered all the options…?”
Paul, everybody operates under some degree (and it is a spectrum) of confirmation bias some of the time in some areas of their life. It’s an unavoidable fact of human nature. There is no truly objective person. Especially politics and sports.
I am, Eric. Speak for yourself
Seriously though, as Sean points out above, making this accusation is largely ridiculous if the real application is in the context of military and societal groups.
Hi Paul! I seem to be so busy these days (and my own blogging is so lacking, as you know!) that I rarely manage to comment on any of the blogs I read. However, yours is one of the ones I enjoy, and comment on when I can! I hope coming out of my commenting hibernation to comment here doesn’t equal confirmation bias! However, I have to agree with Chris – we tend to enjoy blogs that challenge us, and your blog is one such. It’s a shame Judy declined to expand further in a post.
Best
Sheli
Well you’re not alone there, Sheli. I’ve been absolutely AWFUL at both writing and commenting the last few weeks. But anyway, I agree it’s a real shame Judy declined a guest post or indeed, even to comment – I thought that would have made an interesting read and a worthwhile debate.. What can you do though?! Thanks for commenting, Sheli.