Cognitive bias codex and critical thinking

Chuckman

Chuckman

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2016
Messages
19,845
Location
North Durham
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
I think we are all given to varying degrees of confirmation bias: we believe the things we believe and tend to gravitate toward data that will back it up. Here's a good article about cognitive bias and the various heuristics that all of us fall into:

www.teachthought.com

The Cognitive Biases List: A Visual Of 180+ Heuristics

Cognitive biases are tendencies to selectively search for or interpret data in a way that confirms one's existing beliefs.
www.teachthought.com www.teachthought.com

www.visualcapitalist.com

Every Single Cognitive Bias in One Infographic

Here's all 188 cognitive biases in existence, grouped by how they impact our thoughts and actions. We also give some specific cognitive bias examples.
www.visualcapitalist.com www.visualcapitalist.com

I am trying to get better in listening, thinking, considering options, and thinking outside the box.
 
Goofyfoot2001 said:
This article ignores the Google Effect wherein the first 20 pages of a search result are pure lies, BS and propaganda and then you look for a different search engine which you hope will provide unbias results
Click to expand...
I think that your cognitive bias is showing.
 
I think cognitive and confirmation bias are pretty evident in this forum. Not saying its a bad thing necessarily. We are all gun owners, most share similar political and social views. But we see it every time someone who thinks slightly differently than we do joins the forum. Depending on how they handle the disagreement it often turns into a poop storm as opposed to a debate.

If I had to narrow down the damage I feel the internet has caused since its inception is that it has given voice to everyone, both intelligent and not. Which on the surface is an amazing thing. But it also gives mass groups of morons a platform they can easily congregate together using and then multiply their stupid.

We literally have the knowledge of the entire globe at the tips of our fingers, yet most spend their time screaming at people they will never meet about topics they will never budge on in ways they would never do face to face.
 
Sometimes - not always but often - we believe what we believe and are not easily dissuaded from it because that belief is based on years of observation and experience. It’s a sort of shorthand. We can’t relitigate every damned thing that comes up, because no one has the time for that - you have to go with what you know, and spend your time learning about the things you don’t know.
 
Chuckman said:
I think we are all given to varying degrees of confirmation bias: we believe the things we believe and tend to gravitate toward data that will back it up. Here's a good article about cognitive bias and the various heuristics that all of us fall into:

www.teachthought.com

The Cognitive Biases List: A Visual Of 180+ Heuristics

Cognitive biases are tendencies to selectively search for or interpret data in a way that confirms one's existing beliefs.
www.teachthought.com www.teachthought.com

www.visualcapitalist.com

Every Single Cognitive Bias in One Infographic

Here's all 188 cognitive biases in existence, grouped by how they impact our thoughts and actions. We also give some specific cognitive bias examples.
www.visualcapitalist.com www.visualcapitalist.com

I am trying to get better in listening, thinking, considering options, and thinking outside the box.
Click to expand...
BRAVO 👍🏼👊🏼
 
Goofyfoot2001 said:
The problem that I have with all this is that the truth is the truth and is not subject to bias. This seems to be a serious condition with the left.
Click to expand...
Both sides, my friend. And if you don’t believe that, you’re proving the point.
 
Goofyfoot2001 said:
The problem that I have with all this is that the truth is the truth and is not subject to bias. This seems to be a serious condition with the left.
Click to expand...
nuh-uh. my truth doesn't have to be the same as your truth. if your truth is different from my truth, you're a racist because i'm latinx.
 
destasionn said:
Both sides, my friend. And if you don’t believe that, you’re proving the point.
Click to expand...
It definitely happens on both sides, for sure - but you can't possibly believe that the "My truth" vs "The truth" is equally spread across left & right? It's not helped by the fact that there are no meaningful news outlets in the middle, and only 1 on the right vs 5 or 6 on the left pushing said narrative.
 
OutLore said:
It definitely happens on both sides, for sure - but you can't possibly believe that the "My truth" vs "The truth" is equally spread across left & right? It's not helped by the fact that there are no meaningful news outlets in the middle, and only 1 on the right vs 5 or 6 on the left pushing said narrative.
Click to expand...
Not so sure about that. Check out the Media Bias Chart below. If you weed out the individual programs and obscure outlets, there's a pretty even distribution with the following breakdown of the majors--

Skews Left: MSNBC, CNN, NYT, WP
Center: AP, Reuters, PBS, NPR, ABC, CBS, BBC, USA Today, WSJ
Skews Right: NY Post, Fox News
Right: NewsMax, OANN

Those at the top are the ones we should go to for as close to "the truth" as possible--
*** AP, Reuters, PBS ***
Whenever I read or see something that registers on the BS meter, I'll typically go to both AP and Reuters and see what they are reporting.

And those toward the bottom are ones we should avoid at all costs.

1651091754516.png
 
destasionn said:
Not so sure about that. Check out the Media Bias Chart below. If you weed out the individual programs and obscure outlets, there's a pretty even distribution with the following breakdown of the majors--

Skews Left: MSNBC, CNN, NYT, WP
Center: AP, Reuters, PBS, NPR, ABC, CBS, BBC, USA Today, WSJ
Skews Right: NY Post, Fox News
Right: NewsMax, OANN

Those at the top are the ones we should go to for as close to "the truth" as possible--
*** AP, Reuters, PBS ***
Whenever I read or see something that registers on the BS meter, I'll typically go to both AP and Reuters and see what they are reporting.

And those toward the bottom are ones we should avoid at all costs.

View attachment 467315
Click to expand...

No mistaking the lefty bias in that chart, lol.
 
destasionn said:
Not so sure about that. Check out the Media Bias Chart below. If you weed out the individual programs and obscure outlets, there's a pretty even distribution with the following breakdown of the majors--

Center: AP, Reuters, PBS, NPR, ABC, CBS, BBC, USA Today, WSJ
Click to expand...
If you believe that Reuters, PBS, ABC, CBS, and the BBC are center, there's no conversation we can have. I can't comment on the others because I have little experience with them.

The chart has CNN just a little left from center, and in between "fact reporting" and "mostly fact reporting"...

The problem with all this - is that even the chart you provided to disprove media bias has a massive bias in it, because it was likely created by someone who is left thinking - so they actually think that CNN etc. are somewhat centrist. Now, I know I have a right bias on some things (not all) - but if anyone puts CNN at just left of center after the last 5 to 6 years, they either have a very left bias or have not been paying attention.
 
destasionn said:
Not so sure about that. Check out the Media Bias Chart below. If you weed out the individual programs and obscure outlets, there's a pretty even distribution with the following breakdown of the majors--

Skews Left: MSNBC, CNN, NYT, WP
Center: AP, Reuters, PBS, NPR, ABC, CBS, BBC, USA Today, WSJ
Skews Right: NY Post, Fox News
Right: NewsMax, OANN

Those at the top are the ones we should go to for as close to "the truth" as possible--
*** AP, Reuters, PBS ***
Whenever I read or see something that registers on the BS meter, I'll typically go to both AP and Reuters and see what they are reporting.

And those toward the bottom are ones we should avoid at all costs.

View attachment 467315
Click to expand...
Man, as a looong time listener of NPR, I had to mostly leave it years ago as it got so blatantly leftist biased... And the other 'center' ones are close to it.

Look, you can do a back test... Just see what they were saying on the then- controversial topics that we now have answers to... Were they balanced in their reporting or did they forcefully push the false mainstream narrative that has now been reversed:

Sandman encounter
Kavanaugh accuser
Trump Russia
Rittenhouse shooting
BLM fraud
COVID origins
Hunter laptop

And the list goes on and on
 
I remember correctly that chart was actually made by a someone conservative person. But I think it’s like 10 years old before CNN took a big left turn

I think that chart also predates Trump taking office which means it’s basically invalid
 
Last edited:
OutLore said:
If you believe that Reuters, PBS, ABC, CBS, and the BBC are center, there's no conversation we can have. I can't comment on the others because I have little experience with them.

The chart has CNN just a little left from center, and in between "fact reporting" and "mostly fact reporting"...

The problem with all this - is that even the chart you provided to disprove media bias has a massive bias in it, because it was likely created by someone who is left thinking - so they actually think that CNN etc. are somewhat centrist. Now, I know I have a right bias on some things (not all) - but if anyone puts CNN at just left of center after the last 5 to 6 years, they either have a very left bias or have not been paying attention.
Click to expand...
The CNN I think you're referencing is the WEB version, not the TV version which is farther to the left and down one block, where I think it rightly fits...just a little "better" :) than MSNBC.

I don't watch ABC/CBS/BBC, so I cannot comment on those, but again, I do reference AP and Reuters frequently.
 
vp9c said:
I remember correctly that chart was actually made by a someone conservative person. But I think it’s like 10 years old before CNN took a big left turn

I think that chart also predates Trump taking office which means it’s basically invalid
Click to expand...
It may have started 10 years ago, but this particular version is as of January 2022.
Here is a link to their methodology in rating each story and source: https://adfontesmedia.com/how-ad-fontes-ranks-news-sources/
 
destasionn said:
The CNN I think you're referencing is the WEB version, not the TV version which is farther to the left and down one block, where I think it rightly fits...just a little "better" :) than MSNBC.

I don't watch ABC/CBS/BBC, so I cannot comment on those, but again, I do reference AP and Reuters frequently.
Click to expand...
I see it now. Both of them are in the wrong spot. Need to be lower and more to the left for both of them, for sure.

The fact that the chart has nothing shown on the left side under "misleading info" tells me pretty much everything I need to know.
 
We speak of these bias as passive conditions that simply exist. But, we must remember there are people that not only understand these bias in great detail, but manipulate them for their own purposes. Con artist, from shell games on the street to million dollar ponzi schemes. The Psychological Battalion out of Bragg. (An associates brother worked for them.) Media and the CFR, not just bias because they believe in something, but deliberate exploitation of the public discourse for nefarious reasons.

Just sayin'
 
Great quote from Babylon 5: Truth is a three edged sword.

OutLore said:
The chart has CNN just a little left from center, and in between "fact reporting" and "mostly fact reporting"...
Click to expand...
I think you just exemplified the difference between median (middle) and mean (average).
 
NKD said:
"Center: AP, Reuters, PBS, NPR, ABC, CBS, BBC, USA Today, WSJ"

LMFAO. This is so unbelievably dumb. NPR and PBS is centrist? Hahahahahahaha.
Click to expand...

No kidding. They don't even try to hide it anymore.
 
georgel said:
We speak of these bias as passive conditions that simply exist. But, we must remember there are people that not only understand these bias in great detail, but manipulate them for their own purposes. Con artist, from shell games on the street to million dollar ponzi schemes. The Psychological Battalion out of Bragg. (An associates brother worked for them.) Media and the CFR, not just bias because they believe in something, but deliberate exploitation of the public discourse for nefarious reasons.

Just sayin'
Click to expand...

Every commercial we watch on TV. Entertainment (TV, movies). Your examples, and mine, are on a macro level. On the micro level, understanding them can help one present arguments better and more logically, as well as (hopefully) help one come to understand their own biases and issues with reasoning better. I am trying to get better at this with myself.
 
destasionn said:
Not so sure about that. Check out the Media Bias Chart below. If you weed out the individual programs and obscure outlets, there's a pretty even distribution with the following breakdown of the majors--

Skews Left: MSNBC, CNN, NYT, WP
Center: AP, Reuters, PBS, NPR, ABC, CBS, BBC, USA Today, WSJ
Skews Right: NY Post, Fox News
Right: NewsMax, OANN

Those at the top are the ones we should go to for as close to "the truth" as possible--
*** AP, Reuters, PBS ***
Whenever I read or see something that registers on the BS meter, I'll typically go to both AP and Reuters and see what they are reporting.

And those toward the bottom are ones we should avoid at all costs.

View attachment 467315
Click to expand...

Even distribution based on what. exactly? The assessment of Vanessa Otero, that's what. What are her qualifications? Pharmaceutical sales rep and Xerox machine sales? Her law school alma mater ain't exactly ivy league.

The first chart she released was back in 2016. She did it as a side project while working as an attorney. Two years later she founded her little "organization" called Ad Fontes Media.

She's a registered Democrat.

1651170097442.png

Occupy Democrats is on the same horizontal line as Fox News? GTFOH.

You're trying to tell us what "we should" go to for the "truth" and what we should avoid. All without any research into where this data actually came from and exactly how biased THAT source might or might not be.

Folks, this is exactly the kind of post that underscores a cognitive bias. If you're left of center, there are a myriad of so-called "unbiased" sources that are self affirming.

The most pernicious bias is that of omission.
 
NKD said:
"Center: AP, Reuters, PBS, NPR, ABC, CBS, BBC, USA Today, WSJ"

LMFAO. This is so unbelievably dumb. NPR and PBS is centrist? Hahahahahahaha.
Click to expand...
They are both on the line between Middle and Skews left which is the mirror image of WSJ-- all of which I feel is accurate for the most part (for NPR, at least-- I don't watch anything on PBS). Just because something is far to the left of what your opinion is, doesn't necessarily mean it's "far-left". Much like something that is far to the right of what an ultra progressive believe doesn't necessarily mean it's "far-right". Those are relative measures as opposed to absolute measures.
 
B00ger said:
I think cognitive and confirmation bias are pretty evident in this forum. Not saying its a bad thing necessarily. We are all gun owners, most share similar political and social views. But we see it every time someone who thinks slightly differently than we do joins the forum. Depending on how they handle the disagreement it often turns into a poop storm as opposed to a debate.

If I had to narrow down the damage I feel the internet has caused since its inception is that it has given voice to everyone, both intelligent and not. Which on the surface is an amazing thing. But it also gives mass groups of morons a platform they can easily congregate together using and then multiply their stupid.
Click to expand...

B00ger said:
We literally have the knowledge of the entire globe at the tips of our fingers, yet most spend their time screaming at people they will never meet about topics they will never budge on in ways they would never do face to face.
Click to expand...

I read a solution to this issue.

Tie ones IQ level to internet speed. Low IQ? Dial-up for you.
 
destasionn said:
They are both on the line between Middle and Skews left which is the mirror image of WSJ-- all of which I feel is accurate for the most part (for NPR, at least-- I don't watch anything on PBS). Just because something is far to the left of what your opinion is, doesn't necessarily mean it's "far-left". Much like something that is far to the right of what an ultra progressive believe doesn't necessarily mean it's "far-right". Those are relative measures as opposed to absolute measures.
Click to expand...

Do you actually understand the chart you posted? The Y axis isn't a relative measure at all. It's not a measure of bias, rather it supposedly measures the amount of factual reporting.

There are many things about this chart that I don't agree with. It's not as unbiased as it purports, for one thing.
 
I won't even begin to get into bias in the media. I don't own a TV anymore for a reason.

But human memory is fallible, and our memories do change over time, without us realizing it. So something that we "know" to be "truth" may not be the truth any longer.

There have been a few long term memory studies done, where subjects were asked about certain events in their life, and the answers recorded. A few years later, they were asked again about the same events, and those answers recorded. Its been found that certain details committed to memory change. What was a sunny day, is now remembered as cloudy. What was a red shirt is now green. The friend who was about to get married, you were happy for them then, but now remember it as suspecting the marriage would end in divorce. These changes happen naturally to our memories, but we don't know or remember the changes happening.

With enough information about someone, its also possible to create false memories. This works especially well if someone the subject knows and trusts is in on it. One experiment I saw once was creating a false memory of being lost in a shopping mall while a child created in adults, by using information you already knew about their childhood. It was successful in nearly every subject. The human brain is a biological organ, not a physical computer, and the way it works is still quite mysterious. Our brains, in my personal opinion, aren't the best suited to this modern world we live in. Constant stimulation from news, radio, screens, phones, worldwide events brought to us instantly, and media that has found ways of manipulating our feelings in order to market to us are all using our brains natural abilities against us.

So yes, the truth is the truth, but what's remembered as truth may not be completely true.
 
Here is the biggest issue with that chart.

If I wanted to, I could post a very small number of articles on a website. I could meticulously research them. Hire a cadre of reporters to be wherever the news is happening. On the ground in Ukraine, for example.

I could put reporters in various poor communities and from their findings create a series of articles about welfare fraud.

The factual basis of those articles would be darn near impossible to impeach. But because of the perceived bias, I would be somewhere to the right of center and NOT near the top half of the chart. NOT because my articles were less factual. But because of the perceived bias on the part of Otero.

That is why that chart cannot be used as any measure of "truth".
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
Studentofthegun said:
Even distribution based on what. exactly? The assessment of Vanessa Otero, that's what. What are her qualifications? Pharmaceutical sales rep and Xerox machine sales? Her law school alma mater ain't exactly ivy league.

The first chart she released was back in 2016. She did it as a side project while working as an attorney. Two years later she founded her little "organization" called Ad Fontes Media.

She's a registered Democrat.

View attachment 467675

Occupy Democrats is on the same horizontal line as Fox News? GTFOH.

You're trying to tell us what "we should" go to for the "truth" and what we should avoid. All without any research into where this data actually came from and exactly how biased THAT source might or might not be.

Folks, this is exactly the kind of post that underscores a cognitive bias. If you're left of center, there are a myriad of so-called "unbiased" sources that are self affirming.

The most pernicious bias is that of omission.
Click to expand...
Even distribution based on what. exactly? Even number of outlets on the left and right.

I know some excellent lawyers who went to UD. Which law school did you attend? If it's Ivy League, I have some work for you and we pay generously.

Yes, she's a Democrat, but did you read their methodology and who is performing the ratings? "...at least three human analysts with balanced right, left, and center self-reported political viewpoints."

You're trying to tell us what "we should" go to for the "truth" TBH, I don't care what you do. I don't know you and likely never will. I was simply presenting as independent of an evaluation that is out there in response to a statement that there are 5-6 left-leaning outlets and only 1 right-leaning. No need to be such an angry person.
 
OutLore said:
I see it now. Both of them are in the wrong spot. Need to be lower and more to the left for both of them, for sure.

The fact that the chart has nothing shown on the left side under "misleading info" tells me pretty much everything I need to know.
Click to expand...
What, on the left, would you suggest is on-par with InfoWars and OANN in terms of providing misleading info? And be serious...don't just spout out "CNN and MSNBC", because that is factually untrue. Seriously MISLEADING information, ie- outright lies...not things you vehemently disagree with.
 
Rowsdower said:
Bias is a heck of a drug.

For a lot of people, even clear, factual, truth can't sway them from something they already believe.

Gun control is a great example. Crime has been falling for decades and the numbers don't support the picture the anti's are painting, but no logical argument or dataset will deter or convince them anything different from what they already believe.
Click to expand...
Gun Control from the left (moderates, not the wacky far left) is not a "crime" thing, it's a "safety" thing.
 
I’m betting if we had an experiment where everybody plotted the sources on the plot based on where they thought ithey should go a pretty good indicator of our own biases.

Everybody should pick 10 sources that they feel like they know and put them where they think they should go on the plot!
 
Last edited:
Studentofthegun said:
Do you actually understand the chart you posted? The Y axis isn't a relative measure at all. It's not a measure of bias, rather it supposedly measures the amount of factual reporting.

There are many things about this chart that I don't agree with. It's not as unbiased as it purports, for one thing.
Click to expand...
I understand it fully. Yes, you are correct. The y-axis measures factual reporting => through opinion => down to falsehoods. The x-axis measures political slant. What did I say to make you think that I do not understand it?

You can agree or disagree with it all you want. Unless you are dead-center, you are going to take at least small issue with something on one side or another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom