Recognizing Bias in Reasoning Flashcards
7 cards from real Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Recognizing Bias in Reasoning flashcards as text
A nutrition study funded by a sugar company concludes that sugar consumption has no link to obesity. A critical thinker should first question:
Answer: Whether the funding source creates a conflict of interest
Funding bias can systematically skew research design, analysis, and conclusions in favor of the sponsor's interests.
An argument states: 'Dr. Peterson, a renowned cardiologist, says this new diet is the best for weight loss.' Which reasoning flaw is present?
Answer: Appeal to authority outside the relevant domain
A cardiologist's expertise is in heart disease, not necessarily weight loss nutrition, making this an inappropriate appeal to authority.
A manager reviews only five-star customer reviews before concluding that the product has no flaws. This reasoning error is called:
Answer: Selective perception bias
Selective perception bias occurs when someone focuses only on information that confirms a desired conclusion while ignoring contradictory evidence.
A columnist writes: 'Anyone who supports stricter gun regulations clearly wants to abolish all gun ownership.' This misrepresentation is known as:
Answer: Straw man fallacy
The straw man fallacy distorts an opponent's position into an extreme version that is easier to attack.
A study shows that countries with higher chocolate consumption have more Nobel Prize winners. A biased conclusion from this data would be:
Answer: Eating chocolate causes higher intelligence and Nobel Prize wins
Concluding causation from correlation is a common bias; correlation alone cannot establish that chocolate consumption causes Nobel Prize wins.
A debate participant says: 'My opponent has been divorced twice, so his views on family policy cannot be trusted.' This is an example of:
Answer: Ad hominem fallacy
Ad hominem attacks discredit a person's character rather than addressing the actual merits of their argument.
A company reports: 'Employee satisfaction increased by 50% this quarter.' Without knowing the baseline, a critical thinker would recognize this statistic as potentially:
Answer: Misleading due to lack of baseline context
A percentage increase is meaningless without knowing the starting value; satisfaction rising from 2% to 3% is technically a 50% increase but still very low.