Estudio de revisión sobre el sesgo de creencia
Review Study on Belief Bias
Resumen (es)
El sesgo de creencia describe la tendencia a evaluar la validez de un argumento a partir de la credibilidad de su conclusión y no de su estructura lógica. Este trabajo presenta una revisión sistemática de literatura para analizar el estado actual de la investigación sobre este sesgo cognitivo. Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en PsycNET, EBSCO Publishing, ERIC, DialNet, RedalyC y Scielo, de la cual se obtuvo una muestra final de 64 artículos tras aplicar criterios de inclusión y exclusión. Los principales hallazgos muestran la evolución de las teorías explicativas del sesgo de creencia y la consolidación de líneas de investigación específicas. Se discuten, además, las principales discusiones abiertas en este campo y se destacan líneas de investigación a futuro.
Resumen (en)
Belief bias refers to the tendency to assess the validity of an argument based on how believable its conclusion is, rather than on its logical structure. This paper presents a systematic literature review analysing the current state of research on this cognitive bias. A bibliographic search was conducted across databases including PsycNET, EBSCO Publishing, ERIC, DialNet, RedalyC, and SciELO. After applying specific inclusion and exclusion criteria, a final sample of 64 articles was selected. Key findings illustrate the evolution of explanatory theories related to belief bias as well as the establishment of particular research lines. Additionally, this review discusses the main ongoing debates in the field and highlights directions for future research.
Referencias
Asensio, M., Cordero, J. M., Madruga, J. G. y Recio, J. (1990). “Ningún iroqués era mohicano”: la influencia del contenido en las tareas de razonamiento lógico. Estudios de Psicología, 11(43-44), 35-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/02109395.1990.10821142
Attorresi, H. F., Picón Janeiro, J., Abal, F., Aguerri, M. E. y Galibert, M. S. (2009). Aplicación del modelo LLTM de Fischer al análisis de las fuentes de dificultad de ítems de razonamiento deductivo. Interdisciplinaria, 26(1), 77-93.
Ball, L., Phillips, P., Wade, C. y Quayle, J. (2006). Effects of belief and logic on syllogistic reasoning. Eye-movement evidence for selective processing models. Experimental Psychology, 53(1), 77-86. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.53.1.77
Ball, L. y Thompson, V. (2018). Belief bias and reasoning. En L. J. Ball y V. A. Thompson (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 16-36). Routledge.
Banks, A. P. y Hope, C. (2014). Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning: an event-related potential study of belief bias. Psychophysiology, 51(3), 290-297. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12169
Beeson, N., Stupple, E., Schofield, M. B. y Staples, P. (2019). Mental models or probabilistic reasoning or both: reviewing the evidence for and implications of dual-strategy models of deductive reasoning. Psychological Topics, 28(1), 21-35.
Blanchette, I. y Campbell, M. (2012). Reasoning about highly emotional topics: Syllogistic reasoning in a group of war veterans. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 24(2), 157-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2011.603693
Brisson, J., de Chantal, P.-L., Lortie-Forgues, H. y Markovits, H. (2014). Belief bias is stronger when reasoning is more difficult. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(3), 385-403. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2013.875942
Calvillo, D. P., Swan, A. B. y Ruthchick, A. M. (2020). Ideological belief bias with political syllogisms. Thinking & Reasoning, 26(2), 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2019.1688188
Clark, C. y Winegard, B. (2020). Tribalism in war and peace: the nature and evolution of ideological epistemology and its significance for modern social science. Psychological Inquiry, 31(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2020.1721233
Correia, V. (2011). Biases and fallacies: The role of motivated irrationality in fallacious reasoning. Cogency: Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation, 3(1), 107-126.
de Chantal, P.-L., Newman, I. R., Thompson, V. y Markovits, H. (2020). Who resists belief-biased inferences? The role of individual differences in reasoning strategies, working memory, and attentional focus. Memory & Cognition, 48, 655-671. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00998-2
De Jong, P. J., Weertman, A., Horselenberg, R. y van den Hout, M. A. (1997). Deductive reasoning and pathological anxiety: evidence for a relatively strong “belief bias” in phobic subjects. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 21(6), 647-662. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021856223970
De Neys, W. (2012). Bias and conflict: A case for logical intuitions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(1), 28-38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611429354
De Neys, W. (2014). Conflict detection, dual processes, and logical intuitions: some clarifications. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(2), 169-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2013.854725
De Neys, W. y Van Gelder, E. (2009). Logic and belief across the lifespan: The rise and fall of belief inhibition during syllogistic reasoning. Developmental science, 12(1), 123-130. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00746.x
Eliades, M., Mansell, W., Andrew Stewart y Blanchette, I. (2012). An investigation of belief-bias and logicality in reasoning with emotional contents. Thinking & Reasoning, 18(4), 461-479. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2012.713317
Espino, O., Santamaría, C. y García Madruga, J. A. (1999). La influencia de la figura y el contenido semántico en tareas silogísticas. Cognitiva, 11(2), 133-150.
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2017). Belief bias in deductive reasoning. En R. F. Pohl (Ed.), Cognitive illusions: Intriguing Phenomena in Thinking, Judgment and Memory (2nd ed.), (pp. 175-192). Routledge.
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2019). Reflections on reflection: the nature and function of type 2 processes in dual-process theories of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 25(4), 383-415. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2019.1623071
Evans, J. St. B. T., Barston, J. y Pollard, P. (1983). On the conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 11(3), 295-306. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196976
Evans, J. St. B. T., Handley, S. J. y Harper, C. (2001). Necessity, possibility and belief: A study of syllogistic reasoning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54(3), 935-958. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713755983
Evans, J. St. B. T. y Curtis-Holmes, J. (2005). Rapid responding increases belief bias: evidence for the dual-process theory of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 11(4), 382-389. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780542000005
Galibert, M. S., Abal, F., Auné, S., Lozzia, G. S. y Aguerri, M. E. (2015). Componentes de dificultad de tareas de razonamiento deductivo aplicando el modelo LLTM de Fischer. Diversitas: Perspectivas en Psicología, 11(2), 235-243. https://doi.org/10.15332/s1794-9998.2015.0002.05
Gampa, A., Wojcik, S. P., Motyl, M., Nosek, B. A. y Ditto, P. H. (2019). (Ideo)Logical reasoning: ideology impairs sound reasoning. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(8), 1075-1083. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619829059
Goel, V. y Vartanian, O. (2011). Negative emotions can attenuate the influence of beliefs on logical reasoning. Cognition and Emotion, 25(1), 121-131. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931003593942
Handley, S. J., Capon, A., Beveridge, M., Dennis, I. y Evans, J. St. B. T. (2004). Working memory, inhibitory control and the development of children's reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 10(2), 175-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780442000051
Hardman, D. y Payne, S. (1995). Problem difficulty and response format in syllogistic reasoning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48(4), 945-975. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749508401424
Howarth, S., Handley, S. J. y Walsh, C. (2016). The logic-bias effect: the role of effortful processing in the resolution of belief–logic conflict. Memory & Cognition, 44(2), https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-015-0555-x
Howarth, S., Handley, S. J. y Walsh, C. (2019). The logic sense: exploring the role of executive functioning in belief and logic-based judgments. Thinking & Reasoning, 25(4), 416-448. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1523808
Johnson-Laird, P. y Bara, B. (1984). Syllogistic inference. Cognition, 16(1), 1-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(84)90035-0
Keren, G. y Schul, Y. (2009). Two is not always better than one: a critical evaluation of two-system theories. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(6), 533-550. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01164.x
Klauer, K., Musch, J. y Naumer, B. (2000). On belief bias in syllogistic reasoning. Psychological Review, 107(4), 852-884. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.107.4.852
Kruglanski, A. W. y Gigerenzer, G. (2018). Intuitive and deliberate judgments are based on common principles. En A. Kruglanski, The Motivated Mind. The Selected Works of Arie Kruglanski (pp. 104-128). Routledge.
Macpherson, R. y Stanovich, K. (2007). Cognitive ability, thinking dispositions, and instructional set as predictors of critical thinking. Learning and Individual Differences, 17(2), 115-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.05.003
Manterola, C., Astudillo, P., Arias, E. y Claros, N. (2013). Systematic reviews of the literature: what should be known about them. Cirugía Española, 91(3), 149-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cireng.2013.07.003
Markovits, H., Brunet, M.-L., Thompson, V. y Brisson, J. (2013). Direct evidence for a dual process model of deductive inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 39(4), 1213-1222. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1037/a0030906
Markovits, H., Brisson, J., de Chantal, P. L. y Thompson, V. A. (2017). Interactions between inferential strategies and belief bias. Memory & Cognition, 45(7), 1182-1192. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-017-0723-2
Morley, N. J., Evans, J. St. B. T. y Handley, S. J. (2004). Belief bias and figural bias in syllogistic reasoning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57(4), 666-692. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980343000440
Moutier, S., Plagne-Cayeux, S., Melot, A. M. y Houdé, O. (2006). Syllogistic reasoning and belief-bias inhibition in school children: evidence from a negative priming paradigm. Developmental Science, 9(2), 166-172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00476.x
Naranjo Tamayo, D. C. y Orjuela Gómez, J. J. (2022). Revisión sobre los estudios en el campo académico de la discapacidad y las personas con discapacidad. Diversitas, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.15332/22563067.7877
Newman, I. R., Gibb, M. y Thompson, V. A. (2017). Rule-based reasoning is fast and belief-based reasoning can be slow: Challenging current explanations of belief-bias and base-rate neglect. Journal of experimental psychology: learning, memory, and cognition, 43(7), 1154-1170. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000372
Newstead, S., Handley, S. J. y Buck, E. (1999). Falsifying mental models: Testing the predictions of theories of syllogistic reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 27(2), 344-354. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211418
Newstead, S., Pollard, P., Evans, J. St. B. T. y Allen, J. (1992). The source of belief bias effects in syllogistic reasoning. Cognition, 45(3), 257-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92)90019-E
Oakhill, J., Johnson-Laird, P. N. y Garnham, A. (1989). Believability and syllogistic reasoning. Cognition, 31(2), 117–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(89)90020-6
Oaksford, M. y Chater, N. (2007). Bayesian rationality: the probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Oxford University Press.
Osorio, J. E. y Cárdenas Niño, L. (2017). Estrés laboral: estudio de revisión. Diversitas, 13(1), 81-90. https://doi.org/10.15332/s1794-9998.2017.0001.06
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffman, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S.,… Moher, D. (2020). Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas. Revista Española de Cardiología, 74(9), 790-799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016
Pennycook, G. (2020). Belief bias and its significance for modern social science. Psychological Inquiry, 31(1), 57-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2020.1722577
Quayle, J. D. y Ball, L. J. (2000). Working memory, metacognitive uncertainty, and belief bias in syllogistic reasoning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 53(4), 1202–1223. 10.1080/713755945
Raoelison, M., Boissin, E., Borst, G. y De Neys, W. (2021). From slow to fast logic: the development of logical intuitions. Thinking & Reasoning, 27(4), 599-622. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2021.1885488
Richards, C. A. y Sanderson, J. A. (1999). The role of imagination in facilitating deductive reasoning in 2-, 3-and 4-year-olds. Cognition, 72(2), B1-B9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00037-2
Roberts, M. J. y Sykes, E. D. (2003). Belief bias and relational reasoning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 56(1), 131-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980244000233
Robison, M. K. y Unsworth, N. (2017). Individual differences in working memory capacity and resistance to belief bias in syllogistic reasoning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(8), 1471-1484. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1188406
Shynkaruk, J. M. y Thompson, V. A. (2006). Confidence and accuracy in deductive reasoning. Memory & cognition, 34(3), 619-632. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193584
Smeets, G. y De Jong, P. J. (2005). Belief bias and symptoms of psychopathology in a non-clinical sample. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 29(4), 377-386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-005-1676-5
Šrol, J. y De Neys, W. (2021). Predicting individual differences in conflict detection and bias susceptibility during reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 27(1), 38-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2019.1708793
Stanovich, K. (2003). The fundamental computational biases of human cognition: heuristics that (sometimes) impair decision making and problem solving. En J. E. Davidson y R. J. Sternberg (Eds.) The Psychology of Problem Solving (291–342). Cambridge University Press.
Stollstorff, M., Bean, S. E., Anderson, L. M., Devaney, J. M. y Vaidya, C. J. (2013). Rationality and emotionality: serotonin transporter genotype influences reasoning bias. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 8(4), 404-409. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nss011
Stupple, E., Ball, L., Evans, J. St. B. T. y Kamal-Smith, E. (2011). When logic and belief collide: individual differences in reasoning times support a selective processing model. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23(8), 931-941. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2011.589381
Stupple, E. y Ball, L. (2008). Belief – logic conflict resolution in syllogistic reasoning: inspection-time evidence for a parallel-process model. Thinking & Reasoning, 14(2), 168-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780701739782
Thompson, V. y Evans, J. St. B. T. (2012). Belief bias in informal reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 18(3), 278-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2012.670752
Thompson, V. y Johnson, S. (2014). Conflict, metacognition, and analytic thinking. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(2), 215-244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2013.869763
Thompson, V., Striemer, C., Reikoff, R., Gunter, R. y Campbell, J. (2003). Syllogistic reasoning time: disconfirmation disconfirmed. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10(1), 184-189. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196483
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F. y Stanovich, K. E. (2017). Real-world correlates of performance on heuristics and biases tasks in a community sample. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30(2), 541-554. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1973
Trippas, D., Handley, S. J. y Verde, M. (2014). Fluency and belief bias in deductive reasoning: new indices for old effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 631. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00631
Trippas, D., Kellen, D., Singmann, H., Pennycook, G., Koehler, D., Fugelsang, J. y Dubé, C. (2018). Characterizing belief bias in syllogistic reasoning: a hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis of ROC data. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 25, 2141-2174. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1460-7
Trippas, D., Pennycook, G., Verde, M. y Handley, S. J. (2015). Better but still biased: analytic cognitive style and belief bias. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(4), 431-445. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2015.1016450
Trippas, D., Thompson, V. y Handley, S. J. (2017). When fast logic meets slow belief: evidence for a parallel-processing model of belief bias. Memory & Cognition, 45(4), 539-552. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-016-0680-1
Vroling, M. S. y De Jong, P. J. (2009). Deductive reasoning and social anxiety: evidence for a fear-confirming belief bias. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 33(6), 633-644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-008-9220-z
Vroling, M. S. y de Jong, P. J. (2013). Belief bias and the extinction of induced fear. Cognition & Emotion, 27(8), 1405-1420. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.792245
Winegard, B. y Clark, C. (2020). Without contraries is no progression. Psychological Inquiry, 31(1), 94-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2020.1724725
Cómo citar
Licencia
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
Si un artículo es aceptado, los autores/as conservarán sus derechos de autor y garantizarán a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de su obra, en este caso los derechos patrimoniales de publicación y reproducción, en medios impresos y digitales que permitan el acceso público a la obra, mediante la licencia Creative Commons, son del editor.
No obstante, un autor o un tercero pordrá adquirir el permiso de reproducción o adaptación siempre y cuando se de el crédito apropiado, proporcione un enlace a la licencia, e indique si se han realizado cambios
- Los autores/as conservarán sus derechos de autor y garantizarán a la revista el derecho de primera publicación de su obra, el cuál estará simultáneamente sujeto a la Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
, que permite a terceros compartir la obra siempre que se indique su autor y su primera publicación esta revista. - Los autores/as podrán adoptar otros acuerdos de licencia no exclusiva de distribución de la versión de la obra publicada (p. ej.: depositarla en un archivo telemático institucional o publicarla en un volumen monográfico) siempre que se indique la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y recomienda a los autores/as difundir su obra a través de Internet (p. ej.: en archivos telemáticos institucionales o en su página web) después del proceso de publicación, lo cual puede producir intercambios interesantes y aumentar las citas de la obra publicada.
