Post #11

Theories: Confirmation Bias

General Definition: the tendency to interpret evidence as confirmation of one’s existing beliefs or theories (accurate or inaccurate)

Since the 2016 presidential election, politics has been one of the most common aspects of our society’s culture. Sparking vast amounts of controversy throughout the media, voters who are considered to be on the extremes of the political spectrum, and are often biased, may also be the ones to pave the way into the world of politics for those who are either uninformed or misinformed. It is evident that social media dictates nearly every aspect of our lives. Most of us may not think about it, but the level of impact that the media has is genuinely terrifying. When it comes to politics, people are more prone to share articles or stories on social media sites, such as Twitter, Instagram or Facebook to name a few, that emphasize their political stance rather than refute it and often do so without fully knowing the extent of its accuracy. With that said, making sure that the information we choose to listen to from the media is accurate, unbiased, and current is one of the critical components of being a well-informed citizen and voter, as well as changing the statistics for high and low information voters in the United States.

In 1787, a group of men began calling themselves Federalists, followed by the Democratic-Republicans nearly ten years later. Since that time, roughly 29 independent political parties were added with different views. Having the right to express your political opinions freely with no repercussions is one of the many privileges of living in the United States of America. Unlike numerous countries and cultures, we as Americans have a right to express freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom to petition and freedom of expression. This amendment gives us the ability to say, do and practice anything we wish as long as we are abiding by the laws. Without getting off topic, this fundamental human right of speaking our mind freely is worth mentioning when discussing the extensive information shared throughout the world every second of every day. Combine the first amendment with our privilege to access social media at the click of a button and that extensive information becomes a mix of truth and fiction.

Accodring to BuzzFeed News, in 2016 (near the election) the number of fake news stories that caught peoples attention on Facebook jumped due to no restrictions on sharing false information. Like mentioned before, the public is not often aware of the hidden bias that social media has, resulting in what society now likes to refer to as “fake news,” as well as its inability to portray the whole story. But the least detectable effect of it would have to be the strong opinions of not only friends and family, but the politicians themselves. There is always a lingering untold bias in nearly everything we see. Someone may say that they are, in fact, not biased in their opinions, yet their underlying tone would say otherwise. Many often think that social media generally influences the views of teens, implying that they are the only ones who will fall under this type of misinformation. According to the Pew Research Center, 88 percent of adults in the United States ranging from ages eighteen to twenty-nine use at least one form of social media as of this time last year. Every day, that age range only continues to grow, meaning the part of the United States population that is voting off of this misinformation is growing, too. 

Going off of that percent, according to Forbes, a study was done in 2016 that shows how 59 percent of all shared posts on a majority of social media websites were not read and followed up before sharing. If the picture and title appear to say something that goes along with the beliefs of an individual, they will most likely repost it. Therefore, out of the 69 percent of U.S. adults who use social media, nearly 59 percent will see a potentially inaccurate post and share it. This then feeds into confirmation bias.

Kathryn Schulz, the author of Being Wrong, discusses the various ways that many might process what may be true or false though their own chosen lenses. That is, when one is trying to understand what they should believe internally, they may think about things like the French philosopher Descartes did through radical doubt, through formal logic, or through the collective knowledge they have acquired through their personal life. The various lenses of analysis can then be applied to our beliefs as well as the societal stereotypes connected to that. In other words, once a pattern begins to form many may add that specific pattern to their “bank of knowledge” to then use as a way of backing up their logical reasoning process. We can think about this as confirmation bias. People who support their ideas with confirmation bias may be aware that their “proof” does not necessarily check out but will be believed to prove something they already think. The idea of confirmation bias can create an internal struggle and challenges what we think or know to be true, but more frequently is overlooked solely to prove a point (Schulz).