Confirmation and Disconfirmation: Their Social Advantages

Abstract

In this chapter, we review theory and research on strategies of hypothesis testing. We propose that confirmation is the default option in information processing; however, and contrary to common belief, it is not necessarily a lazy strategy and can even have social advantages. Disconfirmation, on the other hand, may be spontaneous and effortless. We also propose that both strategies, confirmation and disconfirmation, can fulfill inclusionary or exclusionary goals. Finally, a last series of experiments illustrates how perceivers can create ingroup biases without resorting either to confirmation or to disconfirmation. In general, we offer a perspective on perceivers as very fiexibie gatherers and interpreters of information, who use diverse strategies to their functional advantage.

Who May Enter? The Impact of In-Group Identification on In-Group/Out-Group Categorization

“…This result establishes a nice parallel to an emerging body of literature on the effect of accountability on the processing of information. Although accountability is generally supposed to increase the systematic processing of information and promote complexity of thought, this work has shown that it may sometimes amplify, rather than attenuate, biases (for a similar point, see Lerner & Tetlock, 1999;Leyens, Dardenne, Yzerbyt, Scaillet, & Snyder, 1999, Yzerbyt, Dardenne, & Leyens, 1998. This is consistent with the idea that under certain circumstances, "biased" judgments may be more adaptive than unbiased ones.…”

The influence of power on the information search, impression formation, and demands in negotiation

“…In their scholarly and provocative review of information search strategies, Leyens, Dardenne, Yzerbyt, Scaillet, and Snyder (1999) concluded: ''The image of people that emerges from this research is that of very flexible perceivers. Given the circumstances, they will spend lots of effort, or none, at confirming or disconfirming specific hypotheses.…”

What Is the Function of Confirmation Bias?

“…If confirmation bias was selected for sustaining social beliefs for the sake of reality matching then the bias should also be particularly pronounced when it comes to beliefs about other people especially in situations conducive to reality matching. For instance, powerful individuals have been found to be more likely to prompt subordinates to behaviorally confirm their social conceptions than relatively powerless subjects (Copeland 1994;Leyens et al 1999). That is, interactions between powerful and powerless individuals are conducive to reality matching of the powerful individuals' social beliefs.…”