Confirmation Bias

I have always thought that bias was something other people were prone to. Not me. I may be many things, but I’m not biased. Turns out I was wrong. 

There are many different types of bias but it’s a particular type of bias I’d like to consider here. It’s called confirmation bias and involves favouring or focusing on information that confirms our existing beliefs and preconceptions.

To illustrate, I’d like to share a recent personal example. After February 24th 2022, when the conflict started between Ukraine and Russia, I followed the story closely on the BBC and accepted what I was being told. But during that time I stumbled across an article in a Chinese newspaper about how one-sided the Western media is, how racist it is in its coverage, and how its reports only tell half truths – and I began to question what I was being told. Was this article correct?  Was there at least some truth in it? Was the narrative I was being fed by the BBC really the truth of what was happening? I was becoming suspicious.

So I began reading the news from various sources to try and find a balance. I continued to scour the web pages of the BBC but also read Al Jazeera, Arab News, The Times of India, Russia Today, Sydney Morning Herald, and more. Surely now I could say – as a result of this wide reading – that I was able to decipher the truth of what was happening. But despite trying to eliminate general bias, I realised I was actually subject to a subtle type of bias that I was unaware of previously. 

A bias that was deep within me.

As I read, I realised that I was favouring information that confirmed my preexisting beliefs. So in practice I was reading these different news sites and giving more weight to some information and discounting others based on my preconceived ideas. After 50 years of listening to the West’s narrative on the Russian state, the message had been received loud and clear and I had developed deep set ideas about it. They weren’t about to change drastically as a result of reading more balanced sources of information.

I was exhibiting confirmation bias, which is how we gather, interpret or remember information in a selective way so that it doesn’t challenge our existing beliefs. As I examined my own confirmation bias about the topic, I realised that although difficult to eliminate, accepting it was the first step in dealing with it. I think it’s crucial we bring this special type of bias to our consciousness as we digest new information in all aspects of our lives. 

What Does Confirmation Bias Look Like?

Confirmation bias changes the way we think and behave, especially when it comes to views different from our own. Let’s have a look at some of these behaviours:

• It can make us search for information in a particular way. We end up looking for information that confirms our preexisting beliefs and avoiding information that contradicts those beliefs.

• It can make us favour certain information – giving more weight to material that supports our beliefs.

• It causes us to interpret information differently to other people, depending on the belief we would like to confirm.

• It can make us remember some things and forget others. We remember information that supports our beliefs and forget information that contradicts it.

Here’s an example to illustrate: a person might think, men are better drivers than women,despite there being no scientifically sound evidence to confirm this. That person might Google it with the leading question: “are men better drivers than women?” and find a host of sites to further justify their view. If they were attempting to be more balanced in their inquiry, they might then ask: “are women better drivers than men?”. If their view is firmly held, they will dismiss these results as inaccurate or poorly researched (if they even visited them and read them to the end). They might read that car insurance is cheaper for women than men, however they don’t attribute it to the fact women have fewer accidents (that would imply that women are better drivers!) so they instead attribute it to another reason – perhaps women drive really slowly, or they don’t drive as much as men. They’ll recall evidence selectively, remembering that lady who was driving at 40 mph in the fast lane on the motorway, or the lady who pulled out in front of them and caused them to slam on the brakes last Tuesday.  

This biased favouring of information is true in all aspects of our lives, including our study and interpretation of scripture. When presented with new views, evidence, or information, we selectively interpret it so that our preconceptions aren’t challenged and remain intact. This can not only affect us as individuals but also as church families when we seek to work through issues that arise as a result of different interpretations of scripture.

I came across these words from a Christian blogger. This is in response to the question, “How do we resolve issues in the church family?” She says:

Not that long ago my answer would have been “The Bible,” which (and I base this on many years of Sunday School experience) can usually be counted on as correct. And if not the Bible, then “Jesus.” Those answers always worked. But now I think it’s not that simple to offer up the Bible as the final arbiter on such volatile questions.  It’s not that simple because, too often, the cognitive awareness we bring to Scripture’s pristine pages gets muddled by the underlying sum total of our cultural background, life experiences, education, and myriad of other factors. Though we position ourselves within earshot of God’s voice, our subconscious babble tugs and pulls, distorts and distends the message. This is referred to as confirmation bias, the tendency to interpret information in a way that confirms our own beliefs and preconceptions.¹

You could be thinking, yes, that’s exactly what happens in those more traditional people in my church or yes, that’s exactly what happens in those more liberal types but it is what happens in ~every single one of us~ because our brains are made that way. Confirmation bias is very much part of how we think. 

Charles Darwin, many years ago, recognised this when conducting his research. He recognised the biased recall aspect of confirmation bias and said:

“I had … for many years, followed a golden rule, namely that whenever a published fact, a new observation or thought came across me, which was opposed by my general results, to make a memo of it without fail and at once, for I had found by experience that such facts and thoughts were far more apt to escape from memory than favorable ones.” 

Darwin doesn’t explicitly refer to confirmation bias but is clearly mindful of its influence in his work. Years later, scientists have not only identified it but also named it and now even understand the physiology of what’s happening in our brain, in particular an area called the amygdala.

In the event of a physical threat, the amygdala will trigger the fight-or-flight response, but you also have another area of the brain that helps you process the information you’re receiving so you can determine if the danger is significant or just a mild threat. If the threat is perceived as mild, this area can override your amygdala so you can approach the situation rationally. But in the case of strong threats, the amygdala continues that fight-or-flight response.

In the past this is what has kept our species alive.

The response by our amygdalas, triggered by the significant threats, kept people from being killed by neighbouring tribes or wild animals. Today, however, the threats can be different and are often psychological threats, such as the pressures and stress of work and relationships. We can also feel these psychological threats when confronted with beliefs different to our own. These can be perceived as significant threats and can trigger the amygdala’s fight-or-flight response. When this happens, your amygdala sends a signal to your hypothalamus which in turn triggers your endocrine system. Your adrenal glands then release adrenaline and cortisol into your bloodstream which triggers a physiological stress response, things like: increased breathing rate, increased sweating, tight chest, face flushing, dry mouth, and pounding heart.

Whether we are young or old, male or female, there’s no getting away from it!

This internal response makes us susceptible to confirmation bias because seeking information to confirm our existing beliefs helps us avoid psychological threats and the subsequent physiological stress response, which keeps us comfortable.

And we all want to feel comfortable.

Confirmation Bias in Scripture

This can be particularly evident in the church. Humans feel less threatened and more able to rationally process information and give equal weight to multiple viewpoints if they are emotionally distant from the issue. Because our faith is so very important to us, most of us are not emotionally distant from the issues we discuss as a body of believers and so we need to be particularly mindful of this type of bias when we explore ideas together. These feelings of stress we experience aren’t necessarily because the ideas we are being exposed to are wrong but because they are at odds with our own deeply held ideas and we perceive them as a threat. 

Recognizing it and dealing with it can have really positive effects as we work through issues together in our churches. Conversely, ignoring it can be very detrimental. Think how different the history of the world would be if the Pharisees had recognised it in themselves. I feel for the Pharisees in a way – Jesus would have really provoked their amygdalas to work over time, constantly presenting them with situations that challenged them.

Let’s have a look at exactly how confirmation bias affected their thinking and subsequent decision making. 

1. They were waiting for the Messiah and were looking for signs of his presence but as is characteristic of confirmation bias, they searched for info in a particular way – avoiding any information that contradicts their firmly held beliefs which was of a Messiah who like them tried to follow every detail of the law – often at the expense of loving the individual. 

2. They thought the Messiah would come as a King and not a servant and so Jesus just didn’t fit with their preconceived ideas of how a Messiah should be. They missed the most important thing that humankind could possibly miss in all of history: their Messiah, standing right in front of them.

3. When Jesus was moved to give the blind man sight, they ignored the staggering evidence that Jesus had the power to make a blind man see (and surely this is good evidence that he is from God) and instead selectively focused on the fact that Jesus healed on the Sabbath. So they rejected this healing as a sign Jesus was the Messiah because of the tendency to selectively interpret information in a way that confirmed their preconception (that the Messiah would behave in a similar way to them – rigidly observing the law – so therefore this surely couldn’t be him). Ironically, the man is given sight whilst the Pharisees are blinded by their bias.

4. Of the information they don’t ignore, they tended to interpret it in a way that didn’t challenge their preconceptions. So for example they attribute the power Jesus had as from the devil or Satan and not God.

But the Pharisees weren’t the only ones.

The Gospel of John tells us about the Jewish people in general; a people that John knew had firmly held beliefs that kept them from seeing the truth. And he says this right at the start of his book: “Jesus came to His own, and His own people did not receive Him.” (John 1:11)

These people who ‘did not receive him’ were Jewish people who had all of the prophecies to describe his coming. They studied them all the time, and yet when Jesus walked before them – the very Word of God made flesh – they were angry at him and they killed him because they were blinded by their preconceived ideas. 

The gospels are littered with examples. If Jesus was who he claimed to be, why was he eating with tax collectors and sinners? Healing on the sabbath? Allowing a sinful woman to wash his feet? Why didn’t he keep the traditions of the time? Why didn’t he ritually wash his hands before eating? Why did he touch lepers? This was no way for their Messiah to behave – therefore he couldn’t be the Messiah!

They ignored all the evidence that pointed to the fact he was the Son of God. All those miracles, including raising people from the dead, restoring sight to the blind, healing the sick, and walking on water! All of these miracles provided dramatic and clear evidence that he was the Messiah yet they dismissed the evidence even when it stared them in the face.

Why? Because they were subject to confirmation bias.

They couldn’t get their heads around a man of, in their eyes, dubious birth having the audacity to say he was the Son of God.  In order to feel comfortable and stop their amygdalas from being triggered, they took the easy option and dispelled this new information and stuck to their old preconceived ideas about  the messiah. Consequently they wrote Jesus off as a disgrace. How different things could have been.

And all because they wanted to feel comfortable. 

Do we ever write things off as a disgrace as a result of our confirmation bias? When really we should open our minds to new possibilities. It’s easy to point the finger and see people who have opposing views as subject to confirmation bias but we all do it!

Not long ago, my own confirmation bias steered me towards an advert for an online Bible class about the role of women in the church. But the content wasn’t what I expected and I experienced the stress response I described earlier.

When I saw the title and picture used for the advert, I was interested because they had used a very modern image of a young woman in a work situation. I felt some empathy with the woman in the picture – we can’t help but be drawn to what we are familiar and comfortable with. I also felt that the progressive image might reflect my own views about women in the church.

I’d again fallen into the trap of looking for information that confirmed my preexisting beliefs. 

So I settled down to watch it one evening and as the class progressed, I began to realise that the speaker was not going to say things that supported my view. It wasn’t long before I was being confronted with ideas at odds with my own. Views which I don’t surround myself with and made me feel very uncomfortable. I began to experience a stress response. My amygdala had been triggered.

Is it just me, or have you ever felt the same? When confronted with views that are opposed to our own, have you ever felt that physiological stress response? Isn’t that why we unconsciously steer towards people and material that confirms our bias because we don’t get challenged by opposing views which stimulate our amygdalas? I suggest, if we think a certain way, it’s not because we are necessarily right but because we have interpreted information so it confirms our existing ideas, doesn’t trigger a stress response, and consequently we have feelings of comfort.

What Can We Do About It?

So what can we learn from this? How can we not fall into the same trap just because we prefer to feel comfortable and therefore miss a vital aspect of our discipleship? Or hold on tightly to inaccurate views because of our own confirmation bias?

Here are 3 ways to help us deal with our confirmation bias:

1. Be conscious and own our own bias. As a child, I was brought up in a home where my mum was extremely capable and my dad was a feminist in the proper sense of the word – he believed in equality of the sexes; jobs and decisions were always equally shared. I was encouraged to be independent and having not married til my 30s, I spent my twenties living on my own and doing periods of extended travelling. All that and much more is going to influence who I am today and how I perceive situations. I am fiercely loyal to my view just as you are to yours. You might be listening, thinking I can see that about her. But without being provocative, can I ask, do you also see that in yourself?  

Using a checklist to help you identify your bias can be helpful. Asking the following questions can focus your attention:

Do I actively seek evidence that backs up my existing beliefs?

Do I reject any contradictory information without looking at the evidence?

Do I give more weight to evidence that confirms my views? 

Do I misinterpret or manipulate information to reinforce what I already believe?

Do I seek out other people who have the same beliefs?

Do I only remember the things I want to?

Do I claim those with opposing views have ulterior motives?

It’s really hard to read those questions and think yes, ~I~ do that but very easy to think he or she in my church definitely does that! But we need to recognise our own bias before we can act on it. Relating this back to the example I gave you at the beginning, in my mission to seek out the truth of what was happening in the world, I took this initial step of searching for other perspectives. But when scrutinising them, I was doing so with behaviours influenced by my confirmation bias, rejecting some evidence and giving more weight to others. I had taken the first step in addressing my bias but had fallen at the next hurdle.

2. Once we have accepted we have bias and therefore our need to seek out alternative views, we need to consider how we behave when we interact with these different ideas. This really challenges our comfort and we need to be ready to respond in a rational way. If we experience a stress response, we must recognise that our amygdala has been activated. The negative feelings we are experiencing don’t mean the view we are exploring is wrong. Rather, we have come face to face with a view that doesn’t match our own ideas and this stress response we are feeling is just down to biology and therefore quite normal. 

We need to avoid using confirmation bias-based behaviours to bring us back to our level of comfort, as we won’t progress in our learning but will simply reinforce our current view. Instead perhaps we can try some controlled breathing or other mindfulness techniques which have been proven to calm our amygdalas. 

3. Finally, prayer. The Bible talks a lot about wisdom. Part of true wisdom is to aim towards thinking without bias. In James chapter 1 it says, If you need wisdom, ask our generous God, and He will give it to you. He will not rebuke you for asking (James 1:5). Similarly, Proverbs chapter 2 says, Tune your ears to wisdom, and concentrate on understanding. Cry out for insight, and ask for understanding. Search for them as you would for silver, seek them like hidden treasures (Prov 2:2-4).

This speaks for itself: God will help us overcome our bias if we recognise that we need help with it and ask. Prayer also calms our amygdala. Of course God knew this when he instructed us to pray because he designed our brain. 

Acknowledge and Be Mindful

Every generation is faced with the big issue of the time (sometimes a few). Having an understanding of confirmation bias and how it affects us and those within our church will help us work empathetically and lovingly together when we confront these tricky issues, moving through the issues with better outcomes. 

As we’ve seen in the example of the Pharisees, confirmation bias can lead to dangerous conclusions. So in addition to working more harmoniously together, being mindful of the influence of this type of bias in our lives will also help us reach better conclusions. 

Warren Buffet summed confirmation bias up nicely when he wrote: What human beings are best at doing is interpreting all new information so that their prior conclusions remain intact.

Let’s not be best at this.

Instead, be focused on our tendency to be subject to confirmation bias when examining new ideas. Ideas that may initially provoke our amygdalas to react and cause us to feel uncomfortable. Accepting this discomfort is a necessary step if we are truly going to move forward in our discipleship rather than simply reinforcing our preconceptions.

We need to accept our views are fallible and in order to truly show love, we need to metaphorically remove our impenetrable cloak of bias, throw it on the ground, and wash each others’ feet.