Cited by 12Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsPsychology Research and Bibliometrics

“Choice-supportive bias” in science: Explanation and mitigation

Kafaee, Mahdi, Marhamati, Hanie, Gharibzadeh, Shahriar·2021·Accountability in Research

Abstract

Mistakes in scientific research, their origins, and the possible solutions have always been noteworthy. On the other hand, researchers in some fields have focused on cognitive biases and their interventions in thinking and information processing. In this article, by bridging between these two issues, i.e., scientific research mistakes and cognitive bias, it will be first shown that scientific research requires scientists' choices in various stages such as subject selection, data treatment, theory determination, and technological design. Then, we show the involvement of choice-supportive bias in scientific inquiry as one of the potential cognitive limitations of science. Finally, three ways are discussed to mitigate the effects of this bias in science: more scores to self-criticism publications, recording of the shortcomings of the research by the researcher before publishing, and emphasizing control processes before researcher choices in scientific inquiry.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08989621.2021.1872377

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 85 · Cited by 12

Authors
Kafaee, M., Marhamati, H., & Gharibzadeh, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Shahrood (IR)
  • Shahid Beheshti University (IR)
Corresponding author
Kafaee, Mahdi
Venue
Accountability in Research
Published
2021-01-12
Volume
28
Issue
8
Pages
528-543
ISSN
  • 0898-9621 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-5815
OpenAlex
W3119515099
Cited by
12
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2
FWCI
1.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Accountability in Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
Keywords
cognitive biases, self-criticism, publication incentives, control processes, bias mitigation
MeSH terms
Humans, Publishing, Research Personnel, Scientific Misconduct, Bias

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