Is research bias implicit or explicit?

Bias is defined as the tendency that limits the ability to present honest and unprejudiced inferences regarding a given study (Echabe, 2013). Within the field of research, bias mainly occurs when systematic errors are included in the sampling process or during the statistical tests. It also occurs when the researcher tries to support one potential outcome of research over another before the completion of the research process. Bias may arise at any point during the research process. Reviewers of research work emphasize on the extent to which statistical tools were employed to eliminate the bias. The focus of this study is on the bias from empirical study point. It is worth noting that unless bias is eliminated in the research process, end users of research outcome do not have confidence in such results 

Thesis

The Brentano’s contribution on the aspect of bias is very valid. It is evident that bias can be either implicit or explicit. While it is clear that researchers may sometimes act in a biased manner in their research process, in some instances, the bias occurs due to unconscious elements. 

Implicit versus explicit bias/conscious versus unconscious judgment

Implicit bias is defined as the tendency to pursue predetermined outcomes of research and to present the same to the end users of research information. The bias is conscious and made deliberately. It is mainly driven by social as well as personal values. The communicated outcomes of research can thus be termed as self-reporting. On the other hand, implicit bias and attitudes are normally unconscious and spontaneous. They often occur as a result of habits and vicarious experience and are driven by response latency (Echabe, 2013).

Self-knowledge versus knowledge of others

In the field of psychology and from an empirical standpoint, Brentano presents self-knowledge as knowledge communicated by a person using the first person pronoun. It is distinguished from self as awareness, self-consciousness and the feeling of self. Brentano focuses on knowledge and cognition of self. He assumes that every mental action occurs as a result of the consciousness of itself. The knowledge of substance is emphasized. This may not always be true as actions by human beings are not always conscious. There are many philosophical questions regarding human psychology which are connected to the self-description as self-knowledge. The author assumes that self-knowledge plays major roles in understanding others. There are debates that Brentano’s views may not always hold as people are not always aware of themselves. People may act in a manner that shows that they never intended to do so in the first place especially when actions are carried out as a result of emotions rather than deliberate moves

In the beginning of his psychology career, Brentano suggested that psychology is best defined with the mental phenomena and not the soul. This is based on an argument by many scholars that there is nothing like the soul. In the inner perceptions, people experiences feelings but there are no specific properties attributed to the same. It is thus thought by many that the soul is just but a mere fiction. If there is nothing special about self to know, it would thus no different from the knowledge of an individual's mental acts. The argument that self-knowledge knows the substance that bears the mental capability does not seem to hold. In a nut shell, Brentano perceives self-knowledge no difference from mental substance. There is also the perception that there is a first person understanding of self and hence other people may not understand oneself than themselves. Nevertheless, other scholars have noted that inner perception by people should not be assumed to denote awareness. It is in this context that it may be argued that individuals may not have to understand themselves if they are to have an understanding of others. Rather people may end up understanding others even if they do not understand themselves. It could thus be concluded that understanding of self and understanding of oneself lies along a continuum. ( Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park, 2013

Relevance and implications

There exists a high level of relevance in the existence of implicit and explicit bias. For instance, the existence of implicit bias implies that it may not always be easy to minimize the bias in research. It implies that individuals should rely on such outcomes with citation and benchmark the findings with other findings. For instance, it has always been viewed that research presented to stakeholders, who are funded by particular organization tends to support the views of such organization as opposed to general truth. For instance, when developing drugs, organizations may purport that such drugs are the most effective approach to treatment. In the field of psychology, foreign firms and government may prescribe research reports with an aim of influencing population behavior in such countries such as population control. This may not always be effective as it is geared towards the attainment of the desired goals by the third parties

Understanding of explicit bias informs the reasons as to why statistical testing of bias is important. The statistical approach recognizes the fact that such bias may not have been intended, though it may have emanated from valid assumptions, research tools and, methods used. Understanding explicit bias is thus key to informing of research procedures. For instance, by adopting 95% confidence interval, researchers ensures that the outcomes can rely on irrespective of the potential bias that may have been encountered in the research development process ( Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park, 2011).

There is a potential awareness that individual researchers may have on the outcome and process of research while they may not be aware of others. For instance, when conscious efforts are made to influence study, outcome, the end of users of such information are expected to understand themselves in order to understand the motive and changes of the outcome by the researcher. For instance, through peer reviews, it is easy to identify results that are not in line with the expected findings. At the same time, the unconscious efforts need to be understood. There is a need to understand that individuals are not always aware of themselves or their actions. Bias may arise as a result of lack of poor alignment of the concept of self and the real awareness of self. In such scenario, the application of standard procedures in research, and statistical testing may help in identification of such bias. It is also important to understand the limits of awareness that one can have on others. For instance, it would be difficult to understand their intentions in some cases unless such intentions are exposed. Equally, when people have low awareness of self, it may also be difficult to have a reliable awareness of others. For instance, a psychiatric patient may wonder the reason as to why the doctor has to keep on punishing him with needles during injection. While the doctor is doing the right thing, the lack of self-awareness by the psychotically affected person reduces his or her ability to understand the decision of others ( Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2011).

In understanding other people or other elements in the external environment, it is evident that not all forms reveal themselves to people in a similar way. Awareness by people of who they are often more immediate than the understanding of who other people are. The problem of the mind is based on the presumption that other people have the same form of mind as we have. Nevertheless, the fact that almost all human beings are similar to us in multiple ways is a generally held truth among many people. There is often the assumption that people experience the physical state as we do and they do not possess a hidden self that we do not know. These are mainly believed and philosophers are still grappling with the sources of these beliefs and their authenticity. In the epistemological understanding of the mind, one may have a full understanding that he or she is undergoing a particular form of pain when they are in pain. When others are in the same state and do not show it, it is difficult to understand what they are going through.

Importance of this study to Brentano’s theory

The above presentation contributes significantly to the discourse on consciousness and unconsciousness as presented by Brentano. The study notes the strengths of his contribution when it comes to the differentiation between matter and quality. The study also tends to contribute to the aspect of external perception, where inner perception as promoted by Brentano is viewed as not being the only perception that individuals may posses ( Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2011). The study also notes that many scholars note the differences that exist between the belief in the soul and the mind. The mental status would thus be most relied on in interpreting bias as compared to the assumption of third elements that may result to unconscious self. Nevertheless, the study is in affirmation of Brentano contribution in dualism, where personal perception is different from personal awareness. How people perceive themselves may be totally different from who they actually are and how they are viewed by other people. This challenge is applicable to the manner individuals perceives research process and information as compared to the way people view others. Due to the differing levels of awareness of the content, there could a rise a sought of bias that is not deliberate. In the study, the need for identification of such bias has been identified. The use of peer reviewers of such information has been utilized as a key way through which such biases may be identified and mitigated. The study also presents the need for the use of statistical testing in the identification of bias in research. The use of scientific methods has been important in ensuring that bias is eliminated through the use of consistent methods, bearing a high level of reliability and validity ( Wilson, Lindsey, & Schooler, 2011).

Thesis affirmation/conclusion

This section presents a defense of the study thesis. It is evident that the contributions of Brentano on the issue of bias are very valid. People have different levels of convictions, attitude, and perception. As a result, they may perceive their decisions as being optimal even in scenarios where they are not. Equally, there is evidence on how researchers may also deliberately influence the outcome of the research process. For instance, in psychology, various nongovernmental organizations have often disseminated misleading information with an aim of serving the needs of their financiers as compared to those of the stakeholders expected to receive such information. Other researchers may also engage in buyers with an aim of encouraging funding. Bias is thus double pronged where it can be carried out either deliberately or by accident. The need for identifying of multiple scientific methods of facilitating identification of such bias and its elimination in the research process is thus high ( Shiv, & Fedorikhin, 2010).

References

Echabe, A. (2013). The relationship between implicit and explicit measures of attitudes: The impact of application conditions. Europe Journal of Psychology, 9(2), 231-245.

Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (2010). Heart and mind in conflict: The interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision making. The Journal of Consumer Research, 26 , 278-292.

Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. (2011). A model of dual attitudes. Psychological Review, 107(1) , 101-126. Wittenbrink, B., Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (2011). Evaluative versus conceptual judgments in automatic stereotyping and prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37 , 244-252. 

Wittenbrink, B., Judd, C. M., & Park, B. (2013). Evidence for racial prejudice at the implicit level and its relationship with questionnaire measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72 , 262-274.