The locus of the myside bias in written argumentation
The locus of the myside bias in written argumentation
复制标题
书面论证中我方偏见的根源
DOI：
10.1080/13546780701527674
复制
发表时间：
2008
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
M. A. Britt
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Christopher R. Wolfe;M. A. Britt
在书面论证中，我这边的偏见意味着要从论文中排除其他方面的信息。为了确定偏见的轨迹，86名实验1的参与者被分配到争论要么赞成或反对他们的首选方的建议。参与者被给予平衡或不受限制的研究指示。平衡的研究指导显著增加了其他辅助信息的使用。参与者的笔记，而不是搜索模式，预测了myside偏见。那些将好的论点定义为可以“被事实证明”的论点的参与者更倾向于我这边的偏见。在实验2中，84名高、低论证能力的被试阅读了一篇名为《不仅仅是事实》的文章，旨在反驳这一基于事实的论证图式。对于高论证能力的被试，干预降低了我方偏误，但对于低论证能力的被试，干预增加了我方偏误。我方偏见的根源是不发达的论证图式导致对研究和论证的误解。
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.