The Concept of Bias and the False Consensus Effect
The concept of bias has been identified and acknowledged by researchers. It is common knowledge that each single individual has biases. One of these biases is evident when individuals seek to conduct the role of the social psychologist. When a person is trying to determine the behavior and perceptions of other individuals, he is more likely to provide a biased understanding. This has come to be recognized as the false consensus effect. Numerous studies have been conducted on the concept of false consensus effect. This particular review of literature seeks to determine whether literature supports the existence of a false consensus effect.
The Definition of the False Consensus Effect
There has been a general consensus in literature, regarding the definition of the false consensus effect. For example, Ross, Greene & House (1977) explain that a false consensus occurs when a person tends to assume that his behavior and judgment is the most appropriate way to act in a particular situation. As a result, he considers other contradictory forms of judgments and behavior to be inappropriate, and a sort of deviance from the norm. A similar definition is proposed by Mudyn & Kaluzina-Wielobob (2015), who contend that the false consensus effect as an individual’s tendency to assume that his individual views and ideals are a representation of what other people think and believe.
The Phenomenon of the False Consensus Effect
The 1977 study conducted by Professor Lee Ross, a Stanford University psychologist professor, is considered one of the most phenomenal contributions to research on the false consensus effect. The researchers were able to prove that people tend to experience a significantly high level of the false consensus effect. According to Ross, Greene & House (1977), people’s social inferences tend to often reflect their individual preferences and decisions. A similar stance was adopted by a study conducted in 2015, by two psychology professors from the Pedagogical University in Cracow. Mudyn & Kaluzina-Wielobob (2015) were able to demonstrate that the false consensus effect is also prominent in ontological matters. In fact, this bias is universally present among all individuals, regardless of their age, sex and other identifying features.
Attitudes Towards Contradictory Views and Deviance
To further cement their claims that people experience a false consensus effect, Ross, Greene & House (1977) also investigated the attitude people possess towards those with contradicting attitudes, opinions, and ideals. Evidence showed that people consider others who make contradicting decisions to be at odds with what they consider acceptable. In fact, they consider these people to be odd and deviant. Once again, this demonstrates that the false consensus effect is real.
The Influence of Overall Level of Consensus
Another notable and significant study was conducted by Gross & Miller (1997) which sought to investigate the concept of the false consensus effect. The researchers conduct an analysis of 128 different studies. Their conclusions provide a new understanding of this bias. They observed that supposed consensus of a person’s attitudes is largely dependent on the overall level of the actual consensus. The 'golden ratio' is used to determine the borderline value used to measure an individual's underestimating or overestimating of other people's consensus. In essence, this landmark study only modified the understanding of the false consensus effect. However, it did not disapprove previous studies claim of the existence of a consensus effect. In fact, it reinforced the overall concept of the consensus effect.
Factors Influencing the False Consensus Effect
Other articles attempt to explain the existence of the false consensus effect using other psychological concepts. This is particularly because this bias increases with the expression of minority opinions. When people's opinions have a lower chance of attaining consensus, the person is more likely to overemphasize and overestimate consensus. According to Bogdan Wojciszke (1994), there several factors that lead people to overestimate the consensus of their opinions with those of other individuals. These factors include self-esteem, perceptions of morality, and competence.
Opposing Opinions on the False Consensus Effect
While most studies seek to offer support to the existence of the false consensus effect, some researchers seek to disapprove this stance. Engelmann and Strobel (2000) present an opposing opinion. In their study, they argue that the false consensus effect is more likely a result of "bad definition." They contend that studies that acknowledge the existence of this bias employ flawed methodologies. This is because they fail to employ incentives that reveal the true opinions of individuals. Their study demonstrates that this bias is absent when information and monetary incentives are provided to individuals. A similar stand is taken by Offerman, Sonnemans & Schram (1996), who discover that when incentives are used, a consensus effect is present as participants later revealed that they would have chosen a different answer if there was no incentive. However, the authors conclude that this is not the false consensus effect.
Conclusion
The literature review demonstrates that a majority of literature supports the existence of the false consensus effect. In fact, the effect is also present when dealing with ontological matters. However, a small number of studies are opposed to the existence of the bias since it remains relatively absent when incentives and information are provided to individuals. These studies are few, and their conclusions are wanting as incentives and information undermine the overall goal of their studies.
References
Engelman, D., " Strobel, M. (2000). The false consensus effect disappears if representative information and monetary incentives are given. Experimental Economics, 3, 241-60.
Gross, S.R., " Miller, N. (1997). The “golden section” and bias in perceptions of social consensus. Pers Soc Psychol Rev., 1(3), 241-71.
Mudyn, K. " Kaluzina-Wielobob, A. (2015). On the false ontological consensus. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 46(2), 160-73.
Offerman, T., Sonnemans, J., " Schram, A. (1996). Value orientations, expectations and voluntary contributions in public goods. The Economic Journal, 106(437), 817-45.
Ross, L. Greene, D. " House, P. (1977). The “False consensus effect” : An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279-301.
Wojciszke, B. (1994). Multiple meanings of behavior: Constructing actions in terms of competence or morality. J Pers. Soc. Psychol., 67, 222-32.
