another lesson here is that beliefs

another lesson here is that beliefs don't need to be logically entrenched in order to kindle confirmation bias. The hypothesis as stated becomes an immediate if subtle aspect of the participants choice of cards. Even though subjects have no reason to accept the hypothesis, they become loyal enough to its validity that they are unable to recognize the correct answer choice. In fact, when beliefs are firmly established in evidence, the effects of confirmation bias become less overt. This is due to a tendency to give more attention and weight to data that fit with beliefs with stronger foundations.
Numerous studies have demonstrated that people excessively value confirmatory information, that is, positive or supportive data. The "most likely reason for the excessive influence of confirmatory information is that it is easier to deal with cognitively" than contradictory information is; that is, most people find it easier to discern how a piece of data might support rather than challenge a given position. Researchers are sometimes guilty of confirmation bias, as they occasionally design experiments or frame data in ways likely to confirm their hypotheses. To compound the problem, some scholars also avoid dealing with data that would contradict their hypotheses.
Practical application
To demonstrate confirmation bias, we discuss employees penchant for over concentrating in company stock. Most practitioners have encountered clients who rationalize their disproportionate holdings by citing the promising "big things" that are developing at their companies. Numerous shareholders in Enron and WorldCom (during the most recent crisis) probably speculated that great growth was going to be sustained forever, in only these investors had had some clue as the nature of the "big things" that would soon befall their employers! When employees load up on company stock en masse and bullish commentary on employer stock prices dominates water cooler conversation, inauspicious details can be easily overlooked. For a more elaborate example, we are going "retro" back to the early 1990s. A strong cautionary tale emerged during that time at a well-established techfirm: IBM.
in the early 1990s, many IBM employees were convinced that their company's OS/2 operating system would achieve industry standard status. They frequently ignored unfavorable signs, including evidence of competition from Microsoft WIndows. These employees loaded on IBM stock, anticipating that OS/2's performance would drive the company forward. In 1991, IBM stock reached a split-adjusted peak of $35 per share. Over the course of the next to year, however, IBM slide to allow of $10. It would not reach $35 again until the end of 1996. During this five-year slump, IBM employees rallied around seemingly positive developments that "confirmed" that IBM was making a comeback. Some even delayed retirement. Unfortunately, in an effort to engineer a turnaround, IBM laid off a number of its employees. In the end, OS/2 caused many people to become less wealthy. For some, the failed operating system even led to unemployment. This is a classic case of confirmation bias in action.
experienced practitioners have seen similar scenarios play out repeatedly. Client ignore downside risks of, for example, employer stock and focus only on the upside potential. Why? in this case, confirmation bias played a signification role in the behavior of the IBM employees. It led them to accept information that supported their rosy predictions regarding IBM while discounting evidence of increased competition from Microsoft. Consequently, these employees lost money as IBM's stock price fell. Only those few who were able to hang on, over the course of five years of uncertainty, remember, shows us that most investors "panic" in such a situation-had the opportunity to profit in the end.
Implications for investors
anyone who has played a hand or two of poker knows well the downside of confirmation bias. Suppose you are entrenched in a game, and you get three kings on the flop. Your opponent raises the pot, and you are only happy to raise him back. You aren't really paying attention as the turn card comes out. Your cards are telling you "I can't lose". You are oblivious to the fact that a series of hearts are showing up. A two comes up on the river and you are pretty much guaranteed to win. You bet big. You get called. Oops, someone had a flush, and you lose.
In the context of the poker analogy, what's important to note is that, by listening only to information that confirms your belief that you have the best hand, you ignore the other player's card. Focusing on the payoff of the present hand might eventually earn a profit; however, you don't analyze the implications of a loss-even if some indication has cropped up during the game that another player might be collecting hearts. While the poker metaphor isn't flawless, it gets the point across: people believe what they want to believe and ignore evidence to the

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

lain pelajaran di sini adalah bahwa keyakinan tidak perlu mengakar kuat secara logis untuk menyalakan bias konfirmasi. Hipotesis seperti yang dinyatakan menjadi aspek segera jika halus pilihan kartu peserta. Meskipun mata pelajaran tidak punya alasan untuk menerima hipotesis, mereka menjadi cukup setia kepada keabsahannya bahwa mereka tidak mampu mengenali pilihan jawaban yang benar. Bahkan, ketika keyakinan yang mapan di bukti, efek bias konfirmasi menjadi kurang terang-terangan. Hal ini karena kecenderungan untuk memberi lebih banyak perhatian dan berat untuk data yang sesuai dengan keyakinan dengan dasar-dasar yang lebih kuat.Sejumlah penelitian telah menunjukkan bahwa orang berlebihan menghargai konfirmasi informasi, data, positif atau mendukung. "Kemungkinan alasan untuk pengaruh berlebihan konfirmasi informasi adalah bahwa lebih mudah untuk berurusan dengan kognitif" daripada bertentangan informasi; itu adalah, kebanyakan orang menemukan lebih mudah untuk melihat bagaimana sepotong data mungkin mendukung daripada menantang posisi tertentu. Peneliti kadang-kadang bersalah bias konfirmasi, karena mereka kadang-kadang desain eksperimen atau bingkai data dalam cara yang mungkin untuk mengkonfirmasi hipotesis mereka. Untuk senyawa masalah, beberapa sarjana juga menghindari berurusan dengan data yang akan bertentangan hipotesis mereka.Aplikasi praktisUntuk menunjukkan bias konfirmasi, kita membahas kegemaran karyawan lebih berkonsentrasi dalam saham perusahaan. Kebanyakan praktisi telah menjumpai klien yang merasionalisasi kepemilikan mereka tidak proporsional dengan mengutip menjanjikan "hal-hal besar" yang berkembang perusahaan mereka. Banyak pemegang saham di Enron dan WorldCom (selama krisis Pemesanan) mungkin berspekulasi bahwa pertumbuhan yang besar akan dipertahankan selama-lamanya, di hanya investor ini telah beberapa petunjuk sebagai sifat "hal-hal besar" yang segera akan menimpa majikan mereka! Ketika memuat karyawan di perusahaan saham en secara massal dan bullish komentar pada harga saham majikan mendominasi percakapan pendingin air, sial rincian dapat mudah diabaikan. Untuk contoh yang lebih rumit, kami akan "retro" kembali ke awal 1990-an. Kisah peringatan kuat muncul selama waktu itu di techfirm mapan: IBM.di awal 1990-an, banyak karyawan IBM yakin bahwa sistem operasi OS/2 perusahaan mereka akan mencapai status standar industri. Mereka sering mengabaikan tanda-tanda tidak menguntungkan, termasuk bukti kompetisi dari Microsoft WIndows. Karyawan tersebut dimuat saham IBM, mengantisipasi bahwa OS/2 kinerja akan mendorong perusahaan ke depan. Pada tahun 1991, saham IBM mencapai puncak split-disesuaikan $35 per saham. Selama tahun berikutnya, bagaimanapun, IBM geser untuk memungkinkan sebesar $10. Ia tidak akan mencapai $35 hingga akhir tahun 1996. Selama lima tahun ini merosot, IBM karyawan mengumpulkan sekitar tampaknya positif perkembangan yang "dikonfirmasi" bahwa IBM membuat comeback. Beberapa bahkan tertunda pensiun. Sayangnya, dalam upaya untuk insinyur perputaran, IBM diberhentikan sejumlah karyawan. Pada akhirnya, OS/2 menyebabkan banyak orang untuk menjadi lebih kaya. Untuk beberapa, sistem operasi gagal bahkan menyebabkan pengangguran. Ini adalah kasus klasik bias konfirmasi dalam tindakan.experienced practitioners have seen similar scenarios play out repeatedly. Client ignore downside risks of, for example, employer stock and focus only on the upside potential. Why? in this case, confirmation bias played a signification role in the behavior of the IBM employees. It led them to accept information that supported their rosy predictions regarding IBM while discounting evidence of increased competition from Microsoft. Consequently, these employees lost money as IBM's stock price fell. Only those few who were able to hang on, over the course of five years of uncertainty, remember, shows us that most investors "panic" in such a situation-had the opportunity to profit in the end.Implications for investorsanyone who has played a hand or two of poker knows well the downside of confirmation bias. Suppose you are entrenched in a game, and you get three kings on the flop. Your opponent raises the pot, and you are only happy to raise him back. You aren't really paying attention as the turn card comes out. Your cards are telling you "I can't lose". You are oblivious to the fact that a series of hearts are showing up. A two comes up on the river and you are pretty much guaranteed to win. You bet big. You get called. Oops, someone had a flush, and you lose.In the context of the poker analogy, what's important to note is that, by listening only to information that confirms your belief that you have the best hand, you ignore the other player's card. Focusing on the payoff of the present hand might eventually earn a profit; however, you don't analyze the implications of a loss-even if some indication has cropped up during the game that another player might be collecting hearts. While the poker metaphor isn't flawless, it gets the point across: people believe what they want to believe and ignore evidence to the