Confirmation bias in studies of fluctuating asymmetry |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Universidad de Tarapacá, Facultad de Ciencias Agronómicas, Departamento de Recursos Ambientales, Arica, Chile;2. Engineering Faculty, Universidad EAFIT, Medellín, Colombia;3. University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Department for Agricultural Zoology, Zagreb, Croatia;4. Laboratorio de Ecología y Morfometría Evolutiva, Centro de Investigación de Estudios Avanzados del Maule, Universidad Católica del Maule, Talca, Chile;1. Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation, Virginia Tech, 310 West Campus Drive, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA;2. Advanced Conservation Strategies, PO Box 1201, Midway, UT 84049, USA;3. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA;4. Department of Statistics, Virginia Tech, 403-E Hutcheson Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA;5. Austral Center for Scientific Research (CADIC-CONICET), Houssay 200, Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego 9410, Argentina;6. Institute for Polar Sciences, Environment & Natural Resources, National University of Tierra del Fuego, Onas 400, Ushuaia, Tierra del Fuego 9410, Argentina |
| |
Abstract: | Fluctuating asymmetry (FA) represents small, non-directional deviations from perfect symmetry in morphological characters. FA is generally accepted to increase in response to stress; therefore, FA is frequently used in ecological studies as an index of stress experienced by an organism, in particular due to environmental pollution. We experimentally tested the hypothesis that the outcomes of studies based on FA measurements may have been influenced by confirmation bias, i.e. the tendency of humans to seek out evidence in a manner that confirms their hypotheses and beliefs. We collected 100 leaves of downy birch (Betula pubescens) from a single tree, grouped them haphazardly into ten samples, scanned every sample, and then asked each of 31 scientists (experienced in studying FA) to measure FA from the scanned images of all 100 leaves. Three groups of participants were provided with false information about the origin of each sample and about the hypothesis to be tested, and one group (control) was provided with true information. The participants who believed that the leaves originated from a heavily polluted site reported significantly higher values of FA when compared to the participants who believed that the leaves were collected from an unpolluted site. When the participants were told that half the samples originated from a polluted site and half from a clean site and were asked to attribute each sample to either of these sites based on leaf FA, the differences in FA between samples classified as ‘polluted’ and ‘unpolluted’ were much higher than the differences obtained from measurements of the same sets of samples made by the control group. We conclude that when scientists expected to find high FA in some samples, the results of their measurements confirmed their expectations. This effect, classified as confirmation bias, may considerably influence the outcomes of the research on FA. This confirmation bias can be avoided by using a blind method, where the person conducting measurements is not aware of the origin of samples being measured. We argue that the use of blind methods is critically important for any study addressing environmental or genetic impacts on FA. |
| |
Keywords: | Environmental stress Fluctuating asymmetry Indication of stress Industrial pollution Research bias |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|