Actively seek evidence that would prove you wrong

Ask what would change your mind — and then look for it.

Why it works

Confirmation bias means we naturally notice and remember evidence that fits our existing views. The scout countermove is to actively search for disconfirming evidence — not because it is more likely to be right, but because it is the set of evidence your automatic processes are most likely to overlook. Galef frames this as "what would I need to see to update toward the opposite view?" — a question that bypasses the search-filtering that confirmation bias produces.

How to do it

1. For any strongly held belief, write down what evidence would falsify it.
2. Actively seek one source that disagrees with your current view — not to be contrarian, but to audit your prior.
3. After reading it, note: did it update you even slightly? If not, examine why.

Evidence

Confirmation bias is among the most replicated effects in judgment and decision-making research. Active consideration of alternatives ("consider the opposite" instructions) has been shown to reduce the effect in controlled studies. Taber and Lodge (2006) document the flip side this practice targets — a "disconfirmation bias" in which people spend disproportionate effort denigrating arguments that cut against their priors — making the deliberate hunt for falsifying evidence a direct counter to a measured tendency. (observational)

Debiasing instructions help in controlled settings but effects are modest; real-world motivated reasoning is driven by stakes that lab studies lack.

Sources

• Wason (1968), selection task — original demonstration of confirmation bias
• Lord, Lepper & Preston (1984), "Considering the opposite" as a debiasing instruction
• Wason, P. C. (1968). Reasoning about a rule. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20(3), 273-281.
• Lord, C. G., Lepper, M. R., & Preston, E. (1984). Considering the opposite: A corrective strategy for social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231-1243.
• Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755-769.

Common mistake

Seeking technically "disconfirming" sources that you already know are poor quality — telling yourself you looked at the other side without taking any of it seriously.