Monday, July 24, 2006

Interesting Conclusions On Bias

We all strive for objectivity in our reasoning, and largely fail. The Washington Post has an interesting article that details how much bias shapes our perception. A study was conducted, wherein pro-Arab and pro-Israeli subjects watched the same news pieces, revolving around the 1982 war in Lebanon. The findings:
Partisans, it turns out, don't just arrive at different conclusions; they see entirely different worlds . In one especially telling experiment, researchers showed 144 observers six television news segments about Israel's 1982 war with Lebanon.

Pro-Arab viewers heard 42 references that painted Israel in a positive light and 26 references that painted Israel unfavorably.

Pro-Israeli viewers, who watched the very same clips, spotted 16 references that painted Israel positively and 57 references that painted Israel negatively.


The more information, the worse the bias:
Were pro-Israeli and pro-Arab viewers who were especially knowledgeable about the conflict immune from such distortions? Amazingly, it turned out to be exactly the opposite, Stanford psychologist Lee D. Ross said. The best-informed partisans were the most likely to see bias against their side.

Ross thinks this is because partisans often feel the news lacks context. Instead of just showing a missile killing civilians, in other words, partisans on both sides want the news to explain the history of events that prompted -- and could have justified -- the missile. The more knowledgeable people are, the more context they find missing.


Let's put it too the test, what do you see below:


Myself, I see shocking evidence of the "precision" bombing campaign gone astray. I suppose a Conservative would say that Hezbollah is using ambulances to transport rockets to the border. I guess we will never know?

7 comments:

Annamarie said...

I see the same things you did. Somehow, I feel our view is closer to the truth... Does that make me biased?? Perhaps...

Steve V said...

There is one thing missing in this study, that being no "independent" source to say whether the perceptions were genuine or simply bias. Were the news segments objectively true, or did they have a bias in the reporting? Not sure if that makes sense :)

Anonymous said...

Looks like a bullseye to me.

Canadian Tar Heel said...

Hi Steve V,

Thanks for the insight. I even referred to your remarks on my blog.

Steve V said...

tarheel

Thanks. I check out your blog regularly- great job!

Anonymous said...

Great site loved it alot, will come back and visit again.
»

Anonymous said...

This site is one of the best I have ever seen, wish I had one like this.
»