CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 43Social and Intergroup PsychologyPersonality Traits and PsychologyDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Confirmation Bias as a Social Skill

Open access
Dardenne, Benoit, Leyens, Jacques-Philippe·1995·Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
DOI 10.1177/01461672952111011
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The authors propose that when testing a hypothesis about a personality trait of another person, a preference for questions that match the hypothesis is a manifestation of a social skill. If so, socially skilled people should request matching questions when the context stresses their relevance. On the contrary, less skilled people should be relatively insensitive to this environmental cue. To test this pragmatic stance, participants varying in self-monitoring sought information to validate an introvert or an extrovert hypothesis concerning a high-or equal-status interviewee. As predicted, only high self-monitors in the high-status-interviewee context showed a preference for matching questions. Moreover, the preference was stronger for not rejecting than for accepting these matching questions. Results are discussed in light of a pragmatic perspective that points out the adaptive and socially useful value of what look like errors and biases from a strictly rationalist perspective.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/01461672952111011

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Preference for hypothesis-matching questions indicates social skill, conveying a feeling of being understood and contributing to a smooth conversation.

    “Dardenne and Leyens (1995) reasoned that when testing a hypothesis about the personality of another individual (e.g., their being introverted or extroverted), a preference for questions that match the hypothesis (e.g., that the subject is introverted) indicates social skill, conveying a feeling of being understood to the individual and contributing to a smooth conversation.”

    From What Is the Function of Confirmation Bias? (2022) · cites this paper as Dardenne and Leyens 1995

    The available passages are repository metadata and lists of related publications, not the paper’s argument or results. Searches for hypothesis-matching questions, feeling understood, and smooth conversation found no passage addressing those points, so the claim cannot be checked against our copy. (LLM, conf=0.74)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • High self-monitors selected matching questions most; socially skilled subjects displayed a stronger confirmatory tendency than less socially skilled.

    “Dardenne and Leyens did find that matching questions pertaining to an introvert or an extrovert hypothesis were selected most by high self-monitors: socially skilled subjects displayed a stronger confirmatory tendency than less socially skilled subjects (ibid).”

    From What Is the Function of Confirmation Bias? (2022) · cites this paper as Dardenne and Leyens 1995

    The indexed copy provides a publication record (p. 1229–1239), not passages from the study’s methods or results. Searches for high self-monitors, introvert/extrovert matching questions, and social skill found no passage addressing the claimed comparison, so the claim cannot be verified from this copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 50 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dardenne, B., & Leyens, J.-P.
Affiliations
  • Catholic University of Louvain at Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium and Belgian National Fund for Scientific Research,
  • UCLouvain (BE)
Venue
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1995-11
Volume
21
Issue
11
Pages
1229-1239
ISSN
  • 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7433
DOI
10.1177/01461672952111011
OpenAlex
W2166809159
Cited by
42
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • DIAL (Catholic University of Leuven) (submittedVersion)
  • Open Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
confirmation bias, social skills, self-monitoring, hypothesis testing, matching questions, personality judgment, pragmatic approach, adaptive 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