Linked by David Adams on Thu 1st Mar 2012 22:29 UTC, submitted by akoprowski
Thread beginning with comment 510040
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
You might claim so, you might even be convinced in succeeding at it, genuinely believe you are impartial, and it might even appear so when glancing over the article ...but that's extremely hard to do, if not virtually impossible - just how our brains are wired, how we work (ho through a list of cognitive biases, this is our primary mode of operation; and the best & "crazy" part with, say, confirmation bias - research clearly shows that we are actually more susceptible to do it when we are aware of its possibility ...only careful methodology can eliminate such)
Most importantly, some side note in a bio doesn't change how, pushing such articles can filter down (or that's "up" in the ~management chains, I guess) / decisions are made.