Training did not reduce confirmation bias on in-context measurements embedded in the second murder case¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? A 2x2 ANOVA on in-context confirmation-bias scores found no significant main effects of Training or Context and no interaction. → Poos 2017

Evidence¶

Poos 2017¶

Poos, J., van den Bosch, K. & Janssen, C.P. (2017). Battling bias: Effects of training and training context. Computers & Education, vol. 111, pp. 101-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.04.004

q3 · i? · causal · r2

In the same between-subjects experiment, the ANOVA on confirmation-bias in-context measurements of murder case two detected no significant Training or Context effects (equivalence was not tested). The authors suggest the rich game/story narratives may have made it too difficult to inhibit confirmatory thinking during these measurements.

"Analysis revealed no signi ficant main effects of Training ( F (1,73) ¼ 1.94, p ¼ 0.1 7), and no effect of Context ( F (1,73) ¼ 1.01, p ¼ 0.32). In addition, no signi ficant interaction effect between Training and Context was found ( F (1,73) ¼ 0.16, p ¼ 0.69, h2 < 0.01)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Critical-reflective thinking training reduces the tendency to commit the fundamental attribution error on in-context measurements during murder case two — related
• Fundamental-attribution-error training effects did not transfer to independent out-context posttests — related
• An interactive game training context provided no immersion or bias-mitigation advantage over a text script with identical content — related
• Training in critical-reflective thinking produced no change on the Cognitive Reflection Test — related