The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Valuing thoughts, ignoring behavior: The introspection illusion as a source of the bias blind spot
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Bias blind spot has been theorized to be a result of the three possible sources: introspection illusion, naïve realism, and self-enhancement motives (Pronin & Kugler, 2007).”
From Agency and self-other asymmetries in perceived bias and shortcomings: Replications of the Bias Blind Spot and link to free will beliefs (2021) · cites this paper as Pronin & Kugler, 2007
In the citing paper
“Bias blind spots have been attributed to two complementary mechanisms (Pronin, 2007, 2008; Pronin et al., 2004): (a) people’s belief that they objectively perceive reality (i.e., naïve realism; Griffin & Ross, 1991; Ross & Ward, 1996) and (b) self-other asymmetries in the value1 given to introspective evidence (Pronin & Kugler, 2007).”
From Everyone I Don’t Like Is Biased: Affective Evaluations and the Bias Blind Spot (2026) · cites this paper as Pronin, 2007
In the citing paper
“Self-other asymmetries regarding the value given to introspective evidence support the perception of an objective self in a world of biased others.”
From Everyone I Don’t Like Is Biased: Affective Evaluations and the Bias Blind Spot (2026) · cites this paper as Pronin & Kugler, 2007
In the citing paper
“But people actually lack access to their own associative machinery 18,19 , and rely on heuristics to understand the decision-making of other people 20 .”
From Understanding, explaining, and utilizing medical artificial intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as [20]
Citations
Cites
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
The Handbook of Social Psychology
Gravatt, A. E., Lindzey, G. E., & Aronson, F. (1969) · The Family Coordinator · doi:10.2307/582242 · Cited by 12,518
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 · Cited by 11,317 · cited 3×
“People often fail to recognize that while they do have access to their mental contents, they do not have access to the mental processes that underlie those contents and therefore to whether those processes involve bias (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977a).”
BackgroundHuman Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment.
Cherniak, C., Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. D. (1983) · The Philosophical Review · doi:10.2307/2184495 · Cited by 4,196
Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior
JONES, E. E. (1987) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,760
Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment
Bottom, W. P., Gilovich, T. D., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. J. (2004) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/20159081 · Cited by 3,583
Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility.
Darley, J. M., & Latane, B. (1968) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0025589 · Cited by 3,083 · cited 1×
“These included the eVects of nonconscious cues on bystander intervention ( Darley & Latane, 1968; Darley, Teger, & Lewis, 1973), interpersonal rudeness (Bargh, Chen, & Burrows, 1996), achievement at a verbal task (Bargh, Gollwitzer, Lee-Chai, Barndollar, & Troetschel, 2001), cooperation vs. competition in a prisoner’s…”
BackgroundMiller, G. A., & Cantor, N. E. (1982) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.1982.1.1.83 · Cited by 2,862
Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.230 · Cited by 2,736
Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment.
Connolly, T., Nisbett, R. E., & Ross, L. D. (1981) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392481 · Cited by 2,690
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–370 of 370
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.003.0005
How Do Epistemic Principles Guide?
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.003.0003
Regulative Epistemology in the Seventeenth Century
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.003.0002
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.003.0011
Self-Control and Deliberate Ignorance
Basu, S., & Friedrich, J. R. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780197500941.003.0016
Punitiveness Towards Users of Illicit Drugs: A Disparity between Actual and Perceived Attitudes
Kugler, M. B., & Darley, J. M. (2012) · Federal Sentencing Reporter · doi:10.1525/fsr.2012.24.3.217
Self-citationMills, M. N., & Vito, A. G. (2021) · Corrections · doi:10.1080/23774657.2021.1878070
“Prior research shows that when people are aware of their unconscious biases, they can become more skeptical of their decision-making (Pronin & Kugler, 2007; Uhlmann & Cohen, 2005).”
BackgroundPeople Who Mistake Dogma For Reason: Development And Validation Of The Pseudo-Rationalism Scale
Jung, H. Y. (2021) · doi:10.30707/etd2021.20210719070603178000.64
“Similarly, Pronin and Kugler (2007) also attempted to link bias blind spot to introspection illusion: They demonstrated that people are likely to believe they are introspecting themselves well even when making judgments regarding their own biases.”
The Bias Blind Spot and Making Objective Decisions Despite It
Hansen, K. (2013)
Fleury, S., & Richir, S. (2021) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119887294.refs
Morewedge, C. K. (2021) · Character Lab Playbook · doi:10.53776/playbooks-decision-making
Machuca, D. E. (2022) · Synthese Library/Synthese library · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-91210-9_8
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.003.0006
أثر البقع العمياء السلوكية للقيادات الأستراتيجية في الأداء التنظيمي
(2019) · Journal of Arts, Literature, Humanities and Social Sciences · doi:10.33193/jalhss.36.9
Detecting and Avoiding Cognitive Biases
(2018) · Advances in psychology, mental health, and behavioral studies (APMHBS) book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-2978-1.ch009
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.003.0010
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.003.0007
Self-Other Asymmetries in Perceptions of Black Lives Matter Engagement on Social MediaPreprint
Johnson, S., & Goh, J. X. (2022) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/7eb3h
From Learning to Doing: The Effects of Educating Individuals on the Pervasiveness of BiasPreprint
Joy-Gaba, J. A. (2017) · doi:10.31237/osf.io/vpd8b
Kelly, T. J. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0003
Kelly, T. J. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0007
Kelly, T. J. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0012
The Bias Blind Spot and the Biases of Introspection
Kelly, T. A. F. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0005
(2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.002.0003
Knowledge, Skepticism, and Reliability
Kelly, T. J. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0010
(2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.002.0004
Kelly, T. J. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0009
Bias Attributions and the Epistemology of Disagreement
Kelly, T. J. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0011
Symmetry and Bias Attributions
Kelly, T. A. F. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0008
The Norm-Theoretic Account of Bias
Kelly, T. J. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0004
Kelly, T. J. (2022) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192842954.003.0006
Strategien in Business-Ökosystemen
Ince, C. (2022) · doi:10.20378/irb-56230
Perpetrators’ folk explanations of their regretted and justified aggressive behaviors
McCarthy, R. J., & Wilson, J. P. (2023) · The Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/00224545.2023.2186830
“…because people feel as if their thoughts are unbiased, they may feel as if the thoughts that led to their aggressive behavior are a veridical source of information and that their reason explanations would be viewed as “good” reasons to others (e.g., Pronin & Kugler, 2007; Pronin et al., 2004).”
Learning from illusions: From perception studies to perspective-taking interventions
Quesque, F., Kambara, A., der Henst, J. V., & Rossetti, Y. (2023) · Neuroscience Research · doi:10.1016/j.neures.2023.05.003
Investigating The Perseverance and Bias Blind Spot Relationship
Davidson, J. A., & Drews, F. A. (2023) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/21695067231192288
“While previous research has largely investigated the consequences (Scopelliti et al., 2015) and cognitive mechanisms (Mandel et al., 2022; Pronin et al., 2007; West et al., 2015) behind bias blind spot, research into its potential advantages has been less investigated.”
BackgroundBounded Self-Righteousness and Heroism
Klein, N. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-17125-3_179-1
Flade, F., Messer, M., & Imhoff, R. (2024) · International Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.5334/irsp.775
Improving Forensic Expert Decision-Making through Deliberate PracticePreprint
Almazrouei, M. A., & Houck, M. M. (2024) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/c5ukx
A Note to the Reader about the Book’s Cover
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.002.0008
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.002.0003
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.002.0005
Ballantyne, N. (2019) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190847289.002.0004
Menschliche Entscheidungen verstehen und Entscheidungsfallen vermeiden
Lunze, N. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-68132-9_2
Bounded Self-Righteousness and Heroism
Klein, N. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-48129-1_179
Turning the Camera Off in Virtual Interactions Can Harm the Reputation
Stavrova, O., Ren, D., & Evans, A. M. (2025) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.3167
Quantifying Uncert-AI-nty: Testing the Accuracy of LLMs’ Confidence JudgmentsPreprint
Cash, T. N., Oppenheimer, D. M., Christie, S., & Devgan, M. (2025) · PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/47df5_v2
Revealing Preferences through AI Adoption: The Effect of Risk Attitudes On Prompting EffortPreprint
Toney, B. A., & Lubiani, G. G. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5365121
Epstein, R., Newland, A., Tang, L., & Edmison, A. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5348436
Algorithms help people see and correct their biases, study shows
Morewedge, C. K. (2024) · doi:10.64628/aai.q9j9hrt7f
Auelua-Toomey, S. L., Reinhart, E. C., & Louis, K. (2026) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2026.104974
Debunking the Climate Sceptic and the Threat of Self‐Defeat
Mudry, L. (2025) · Journal of Applied Philosophy · doi:10.1111/japp.70049
Less risk, more effort: How overconfidence reshapes tournament strategies
Jacober, N., & Santos-Pinto, L. P. (2025) · Mathematical Social Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2025.102477
Presbitero, A. (2025) · Journal of International Management · doi:10.1016/j.intman.2025.101314
Fugelsang, J. A., Mandel, D. R., Lab, C., Walker, A. C., & Collins, R. N. (2021) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.17605/osf.io/dzkxy
Age-Based Hiring Discrimination as a Function of Equity Norms and Self-Perceived ObjectivityPreprint
Nosek, B. A., & Lindner, N. M. (2016) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)
Quantitative Assessment of Service-Learning Outcomes
Bowman, N. A., & Brandenberger, J. W. (2010) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/978-1-61735-167-920251004
Political Epistemology, Rationality, and Externalism About Bias
Kelly, T. (2025) · Philosophical Issues · doi:10.1111/phis.70005
Epstein, R., Newland, A., Tang, L. Y., & Edmison, A. (2026) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0343692
Dimara, E. (2017) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/fa0c0a43z19acz4a60za48ez3ad8abc79047
“visible speech anxiety) 124 #PERF Illusion of validity [474] #5 [536] overcon dence for highly fallible predictions if story is coherent 125 #PERF Outcome bias [42] #2 evaluate decision maker only by choice outcome 126 #PERF Worse-than-average e ect [287] #3 underestimate one’s achievements related to others in di cul…”
Revealing Risk Preferences Through AI Prompting Effort
Toney, B. A., Lubiani, G. G., & Okunade, A. A. (2026) · Journal of risk and financial management · doi:10.3390/jrfm19040269
Success, Learning, and Overconfidence in Elimination ContestsPreprint
Santos-Pinto, L. P., & Sekeris, P. G. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.6576056
Advocating the use of metaphor in teaching and learning critical self-reflection
Willing, S. M.-R., & Reimer, E. C. (2026) · Social Work Education · doi:10.1080/02615479.2026.2675580
Threatened by science: Can affirmations alleviate motivated science rejection?
Heusler, L., & Altenmüller, M. (2026) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/09636625261445597
“Individuals often believe that their conclusion is the objective truth, unaware of their biased thinking (Pronin et al., 2002; Pronin and Kugler, 2007).”
Off Script, Still Successful? Career Paths and Career Success of Academics in U.S. Business Schools
Varela, O. E., Biemann, T., Dlouhy, K., & Rossetti, C. (2026) · Academy of Management Learning and Education · doi:10.5465/amle.2024.0149
xAARA: Explainable and Augmented Automated Rehabilitation Assessment
Ahmed, T., Rikakis, T., Kelliher, A., Khan, M. S. S., & Guo, Z. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3848511
“” This difficulty reflects a well-documented limitation of expert self-report: introspection gives only partial and often unreliable access to the tacit processes that drive skilled judgment [75].”
ЕФЕКТ СЛІПОЇ ПЛЯМИ УПЕРЕДЖЕНЬ: СУТЬ, ПРИЧИНИ, ПРОЯВ
Чуйко, Г., & Чаплак, Я. (2026) · ГРААЛЬ НАУКИ · doi:10.36074/grail-of-science.24.07.2026.043
de Hemptinne, D., Gallant, A., Teyssier‐Roberge, G., & Tremblay, S. (2026) · Frontiers in Political Science · doi:10.3389/fpos.2026.1984235
Brown, J. A. (2022) · Digital Archive @ GSU · doi:10.57709/1598884
Metadata
- Authors
- Pronin, E., & Kugler, M. B.
- Affiliations
- Princeton University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Pronin, Emily
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2007-07
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 565-578
- ISSN
- 0022-1031 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2124744634
- Cited by
- 366
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 43 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 18.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
- Keywords
- bias blind spot, behavioral data, unconscious processes, metacognition
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
