3 kinds of bias that shape your worldview | J. Marshall Shepherd

Summary

In this engaging talk, a meteorologist with a PhD in physical meteorology humorously addresses common misconceptions about weather forecasting and climate change. He emphasizes the importance of understanding the difference between weather and climate, and critiques the public's skepticism towards climate science. The speaker discusses cognitive biases such as confirmation bias, the Dunning-Kruger effect, and cognitive dissonance, which contribute to the gap between scientific consensus and public perception. He advocates for expanding one's understanding by challenging personal biases, evaluating information sources, and speaking out about climate change.

Takeaways

• 🔮 Science is not a belief system; it is based on evidence, unlike beliefs such as the tooth fairy.
• 🌍 A significant gap exists between scientists and the public on various science topics, including climate change.
• 🤔 Belief systems and biases, such as confirmation bias, Dunning-Kruger effect, and cognitive dissonance, shape public perceptions of science.
• ❄️ Many people confuse weather with climate, leading to misconceptions, like using cold days to discredit global warming.
• 📊 Dunning-Kruger effect leads people to think they know more than they actually do, contributing to misinformed opinions.
• 🌀 Misinformation, especially in social media, distorts public understanding of scientific data, such as during Hurricane Irma.
• 🚨 Despite accurate weather forecasts, people struggle to accept predictions outside their experience, as seen with Hurricane Harvey.
• 🌡️ The media often amplifies incorrect perceptions, such as the misinterpretation of winter storm warnings during Atlanta's 'Snowpocalypse.'
• 🧠 To improve scientific literacy, individuals must take inventory of their biases and critically evaluate their information sources.
• 📢 Expanding one's understanding of science requires recognizing personal biases and openly discussing them, as exemplified by meteorologist Greg Fishel.

Q & A

What are the four common questions the speaker, Dr. Shepherd, receives as a meteorologist?

The four common questions Dr. Shepherd receives are: 1) What channel is he on? 2) What's the weather going to be tomorrow? 3) Will it rain at someone's daughter's outdoor wedding next September? 4) Does he believe in climate change or global warming?

Why does Dr. Shepherd consider the question about believing in climate change as ill-posed?

Dr. Shepherd considers the question about believing in climate change as ill-posed because science isn't a belief system. It's based on evidence and facts, not beliefs.

What is the difference between weather and climate according to Dr. Shepherd?

Dr. Shepherd explains that weather is like your mood, which can change daily, while climate is like your personality, which is a long-term pattern of behavior.

What are the three elements that shape biases and perceptions about science according to Dr. Shepherd?

The three elements that shape biases and perceptions about science according to Dr. Shepherd are confirmation bias, the Dunning-Kruger effect, and cognitive dissonance.

What is confirmation bias, and how does it relate to the public's understanding of climate change?

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. In the context of climate change, it means people may only pay attention to information that supports their view on the subject, ignoring scientific evidence to the contrary.

What is the Dunning-Kruger effect, and how does it apply to public understanding of scientific topics?

The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where people with low ability at a task overestimate their ability, while those with high ability underestimate their competence. It applies to public understanding of scientific topics as people might think they understand more than they actually do, leading to misconceptions.

Can you explain cognitive dissonance as described by Dr. Shepherd?

Cognitive dissonance, as described by Dr. Shepherd, is the mental discomfort experienced by a person who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. He uses the example of people asking for a rodent's or Farmer's Almanac weather forecast despite more accurate scientific methods being available.

How does misinformation impact public perception of weather forecasts, as mentioned by Dr. Shepherd?

Misinformation, such as fake weather forecasts or outdated methods like the Farmer's Almanac, can lead the public to distrust or ignore accurate scientific forecasts, impacting their preparedness for weather events.

What role does literacy play in shaping people's understanding of science, according to Dr. Shepherd?

Literacy in science is crucial as it allows individuals to better understand and interpret scientific information. A lack of scientific literacy can lead to misunderstandings and perpetuation of biases and misinformation.

What did Dr. Shepherd predict about Hurricane Harvey before it made landfall?

Dr. Shepherd predicted that Hurricane Harvey would bring 40 to 50 inches of rainfall a week before it made landfall.

What is the advice Dr. Shepherd gives to expand one's understanding of science?

Dr. Shepherd advises taking inventory of one's own biases, evaluating the sources of scientific information, and speaking out about one's understanding and biases to expand one's radius of understanding of science.

Outlines

00:00

🌤️ The Meteorologist's Dilemma

Dr. Marshall Shepherd, a meteorologist with a PhD in physical meteorology, humorously addresses the common questions he receives, such as inquiries about his TV channel, weather forecasts, and even the weather for future events like weddings. He emphasizes the difference between weather and climate, using the analogy of mood versus personality. He also tackles the misconceptions around climate change, comparing public skepticism to the belief in the tooth fairy. Dr. Shepherd points out the gap between scientific consensus and public perception on various scientific topics, including climate change, and introduces the concepts of confirmation bias, the Dunning-Kruger effect, and cognitive dissonance as factors that shape these perceptions.

05:03

🌀 The Impact of Biases on Scientific Perception

In this section, Dr. Shepherd delves deeper into cognitive dissonance, using the example of Groundhog Day and the Farmer's Almanac to illustrate how people often prefer traditional or familiar methods over scientific ones, despite their lower accuracy. He discusses the importance of expanding our understanding of science by challenging our biases, evaluating our sources of information, and speaking out about our findings. He also highlights the role of literacy and misinformation in shaping public perception, using the example of fake weather forecasts during hurricane season. Dr. Shepherd emphasizes the advancements in weather forecasting technology and the need to move beyond biases and misinformation to better understand and predict weather and climate phenomena.

10:05

🌍 Expanding Our Radius of Understanding

Dr. Shepherd concludes with a call to action, encouraging the audience to take inventory of their biases, evaluate their sources of scientific information, and speak out about their findings. He shares a clip of TV meteorologist Greg Fishel, who discusses his journey from climate skepticism to acknowledging the scientific consensus on climate change. Dr. Shepherd emphasizes that expanding our understanding of science is crucial for preserving life as we know it, not just for a better future. He uses the metaphor of a circle's area, suggesting that by increasing our radius of understanding, we can cover more ground in terms of knowledge and awareness.

Keywords

💡Meteorologist

A meteorologist is a scientist who studies the Earth's atmosphere, particularly its weather and climate. In the video, the speaker identifies as a meteorologist with advanced degrees in physical meteorology, highlighting their expertise in discussing weather patterns and climate change. The term is central to the video's theme as it establishes the speaker's credibility in addressing scientific issues related to weather and climate.

💡Climate Change

Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns, primarily caused by human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. The video discusses the public's perception of climate change and the speaker's frustration with being asked to 'believe' in it, emphasizing that climate change is a scientific fact, not a matter of belief.

💡Global Warming

Global warming is the long-term increase in Earth's average surface temperature due to human activities, primarily the emission of greenhouse gases. The video equates the questioning of global warming with disbelief in gravity, illustrating the absurdity of doubting well-established scientific phenomena.

💡Confirmation Bias

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, and remember information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs. The video uses the example of people using snowfall to deny global warming, demonstrating how confirmation bias can lead to the rejection of scientific consensus.

💡Dunning-Kruger Effect

The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where people with low ability at a task overestimate their ability, while those with high ability underestimate their competence. The video mentions this effect to explain how some individuals may overstate their understanding of complex scientific issues like climate change.

💡Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort experienced by a person who holds two or more contradictory beliefs or ideas. In the video, the speaker humorously points out that asking a meteorologist about a rodent's weather forecast, like Groundhog Day, is an example of cognitive dissonance, as it contradicts the scientific methods used in weather forecasting.

💡Literacy and Misinformation

Literacy and misinformation are discussed in the context of the public's understanding of science. The video suggests that a lack of scientific literacy and the spread of misinformation can hinder the public's ability to accurately perceive and understand scientific phenomena, such as weather forecasts and climate change.

💡Weather vs. Climate

The video distinguishes between weather, which is short-term atmospheric conditions, and climate, which is the long-term average of weather patterns. This distinction is crucial for understanding climate change, as a single weather event, like a cold day or a snowfall, does not disprove climate change.

💡Bias Systems

Bias systems refer to the set of personal beliefs, values, or assumptions that can influence how individuals perceive and interpret information. The video argues that bias systems, including political, religious, or cultural biases, can shape people's perceptions of scientific facts, leading to skepticism or denial of phenomena like climate change.

💡Expanding Radius of Understanding

The concept of 'expanding radius of understanding' is used as a metaphor for increasing one's knowledge and comprehension of scientific issues. The video encourages the audience to challenge their biases, evaluate their sources of information, and speak out to broaden their understanding of science, particularly in the context of climate change.

💡Peer-Reviewed Literature

Peer-reviewed literature refers to scholarly articles that have been evaluated and approved by experts in the field before publication. The video mentions peer-reviewed literature as a reliable source of scientific information, contrasting it with the misinformation and biases that can cloud public understanding of issues like climate change.

Highlights

Meteorologist with a bachelor's, master's, and PhD in physical meteorology humorously addresses common questions about weather prediction.

The speaker clarifies the difference between weather and climate, likening weather to mood and climate to personality.

A critique of the public's misconception of climate change as a belief system rather than a scientific fact.

Comparison of public and scientific consensus on various scientific topics, highlighting a significant gap in understanding.

Introduction of three cognitive biases that affect public perception of science: confirmation bias, Dunning-Kruger effect, and cognitive dissonance.

Explanation of confirmation bias with a humorous anecdote about global warming skepticism during snowfall.

Discussion on the Dunning-Kruger effect and how it leads to overestimation of one's own knowledge.

Cognitive dissonance exemplified by the public's reliance on inaccurate weather forecasts like Groundhog Day predictions.

The impact of literacy and misinformation on public understanding of scientific phenomena, particularly during extreme weather events.

Recount of the speaker's experience at NASA, emphasizing the advanced technology used for weather and climate observation and prediction.

A specific example of accurate weather prediction before Hurricane Harvey, contrasting public perception with scientific forecasting.

The challenge of perceiving anomalies outside of normal experiences, using Houston's rainfall during Hurricane Harvey as an example.

The 'Snowpocalypse' incident in Atlanta as a case study of how perception biases can lead to misinterpretation of weather warnings.

A call to action for individuals to take inventory of their biases and evaluate their sources of scientific information.

The importance of speaking out against misinformation and for accurate scientific understanding, as illustrated by TV meteorologist Greg Fishel's story.

The metaphor of expanding one's radius of understanding in science to preserve life as we know it.

Transcripts

I'm a meteorologist by degree,

I have a bachelor's, master's and PhD in physical meteorology,

so I'm a meteorologist, card carrying.

And so with that comes four questions, always.

This is one prediction I will always get right.

(Laughter)

And those questions are,

"Marshall, what channel are you on?"

(Laughter)

"Dr. Shepherd, what's the weather going to be tomorrow?"

(Laughter)

And oh, I love this one:

"My daughter is getting married next September, it's an outdoor wedding.

Is it going to rain?"

(Laughter)

Not kidding, I get those, and I don't know the answer to that,

the science isn't there.

But the one I get a lot these days is,

"Dr. Shepherd, do you believe in climate change?"

"Do you believe in global warming?"

Now, I have to gather myself every time I get that question.

Because it's an ill-posed question --

science isn't a belief system.

My son, he's 10 -- he believes in the tooth fairy.

And he needs to get over that, because I'm losing dollars, fast.

(Laughter)

But he believes in the tooth fairy.

But consider this.

Bank of America building, there, in Atlanta.

You never hear anyone say,

"Do you believe, if you go to the top of that building

and throw a ball off, it's going to fall?"

You never hear that, because gravity is a thing.

So why don't we hear the question,

"Do you believe in gravity?"

But of course, we hear the question,

"Do you believe in global warming?"

Well, consider these facts.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science, AAAS,

one of the leading organizations in science,

queried scientists and the public on different science topics.

Here are some of them:

genetically modified food, animal research, human evolution.

And look at what the scientists say about those,

the people that actually study those topics, in red,

versus the gray, what the public thinks.

How did we get there?

How did we get there?

That scientists and the public are so far apart on these science issues.

Well, I'll come a little bit closer to home for me,

climate change.

Eighty-seven percent of scientists

believe that humans are contributing to climate change.

But only 50 percent of the public?

How did we get there?

So it begs the question,

what shapes perceptions about science?

It's an interesting question

and one that I've been thinking about quite a bit.

I think that one thing that shapes perceptions in the public, about science,

is belief systems and biases.

Belief systems and biases.

Go with me for a moment.

Because I want to talk about three elements of that:

confirmation bias, Dunning-Kruger effect

and cognitive dissonance.

Now, these sound like big, fancy, academic terms, and they are.

But when I describe them, you're going to be like, "Oh!

I recognize that; I even know somebody that does that."

Confirmation bias.

Finding evidence that supports what we already believe.

Now, we're probably all a little bit guilty of that at times.

Take a look at this.

I'm on Twitter.

And often, when it snows,

I'll get this tweet back to me.

(Laughter)

"Hey, Dr. Shepherd, I have 20 inches of global warming in my yard,

what are you guys talking about, climate change?"

I get that tweet a lot, actually.

It's a cute tweet, it makes me chuckle as well.

But it's oh, so fundamentally scientifically flawed.

Because it illustrates

that the person tweeting doesn't understand

the difference between weather and climate.

I often say, weather is your mood

and climate is your personality.

Think about that.

Weather is your mood, climate is your personality.

Your mood today doesn't necessarily tell me anything about your personality,

nor does a cold day tell me anything about climate change,

or a hot day, for that matter.

Dunning-Kruger.

Two scholars from Cornell came up with the Dunning-Kruger effect.

If you go look up the peer-reviewed paper for this,

you will see all kinds of fancy terminology:

it's an illusory superiority complex, thinking we know things.

In other words, people think they know more than they do.

Or they underestimate what they don't know.

And then, there's cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance is interesting.

We just recently had Groundhog Day, right?

Now, there's no better definition of cognitive dissonance

than intelligent people asking me if a rodent's forecast is accurate.

(Laughter)

But I get that, all of the time.

(Laughter)

But I also hear about the Farmer's Almanac.

We grew up on the Farmer's Almanac, people are familiar with it.

The problem is, it's only about 37 percent accurate,

according to studies at Penn State University.

But we're in an era of science

where we actually can forecast the weather.

And believe it or not, and I know some of you are like, "Yeah, right,"

we're about 90 percent accurate, or more, with weather forecast.

You just tend to remember the occasional miss, you do.

(Laughter)

So confirmation bias, Dunning-Kruger and cognitive dissonance.

I think those shape biases and perceptions that people have about science.

But then, there's literacy and misinformation

that keep us boxed in, as well.

During the hurricane season of 2017,

media outlets had to actually assign reporters

to dismiss fake information about the weather forecast.

That's the era that we're in.

I deal with this all the time in social media.

Someone will tweet a forecast --

that's a forecast for Hurricane Irma, but here's the problem:

it didn't come from the Hurricane Center.

But people were tweeting and sharing this; it went viral.

It didn't come from the National Hurricane Center at all.

So I spent 12 years of my career at NASA

before coming to the University of Georgia,

and I chair their Earth Science Advisory Committee,

I was just up there last week in DC.

And I saw some really interesting things.

Here's a NASA model and science data from satellite

showing the 2017 hurricane season.

You see Hurricane Harvey there?

Look at all the dust coming off of Africa.

Look at the wildfires up in northwest US and in western Canada.

There comes Hurricane Irma.

This is fascinating to me.

But admittedly, I'm a weather geek.

But more importantly, it illustrates that we have the technology

to not only observe the weather and climate system,

but predict it.

There's scientific understanding,

so there's no need for some of those perceptions and biases

that we've been talking about.

We have knowledge.

But think about this ...

This is Houston, Texas, after Hurricane Harvey.

Now, I write a contribution for "Forbes" magazine periodically,

and I wrote an article a week before Hurricane Harvey made landfall, saying,

"There's probably going to be 40 to 50 inches of rainfall."

I wrote that a week before it happened.

But yet, when you talk to people in Houston,

people are saying, "We had no idea it was going to be this bad."

I'm just...

(Sigh)

(Laughter)

A week before.

But --

I know, it's amusing, but the reality is,

we all struggle with perceiving something outside of our experience level.

People in Houston get rain all of the time,

they flood all of the time.

But they've never experienced that.

Houston gets about 34 inches of rainfall for the entire year.

They got 50 inches in three days.

That's an anomaly event, that's outside of the normal.

So belief systems and biases, literacy and misinformation.

How do we step out of the boxes that are cornering our perceptions?

Well we don't even have to go to Houston, we can come very close to home.

(Laughter)

Remember "Snowpocalypse?"

(Laughter)

Snowmageddon?

Snowzilla?

Whatever you want to call it.

All two inches of it.

(Laughter)

Two inches of snow shut the city of Atlanta down.

(Laughter)

But the reality is, we were in a winter storm watch,

we went to a winter weather advisory,

and a lot of people perceived that as being a downgrade,

"Oh, it's not going to be as bad."

When in fact, the perception was that it was not going to be as bad,

but it was actually an upgrade.

Things were getting worse as the models were coming in.

So that's an example of how we get boxed in by our perceptions.

So, the question becomes,

how do we expand our radius?

The area of a circle is "pi r squared".

We increase the radius, we increase the area.

How do we expand our radius of understanding about science?

Here are my thoughts.

You take inventory of your own biases.

And I'm challenging you all to do that.

Take an inventory of your own biases.

Where do they come from?

Your upbringing, your political perspective, your faith --

what shapes your own biases?

Then, evaluate your sources --

where do you get your information on science?

What do you read, what do you listen to,

to consume your information on science?

And then, it's important to speak out.

Talk about how you evaluated your biases and evaluated your sources.

I want you to listen to this little 40-second clip

from one of the top TV meteorologists in the US, Greg Fishel,

in the Raleigh, Durham area.

He's revered in that region.

But he was a climate skeptic.

But listen to what he says about speaking out.

Greg Fishel: The mistake I was making

and didn't realize until very recently,

was that I was only looking for information

to support what I already thought,

and was not interested in listening to anything contrary.

And so I woke up one morning,

and there was this question in my mind,

"Greg, are you engaging in confirmation bias?

Are you only looking for information to support what you already think?"

And if I was honest with myself, and I tried to be,

I admitted that was going on.

And so the more I talked to scientists

and read peer-reviewed literature

and tried to conduct myself the way I'd been taught to conduct myself

at Penn State when I was a student,

it became very difficult for me to make the argument

that we weren't at least having some effect.

Maybe there was still a doubt as to how much,

but to say "nothing" was not a responsible thing for me to do

as a scientist or a person.

JMS: Greg Fishel just talked about expanding his radius

of understanding of science.

And when we expand our radius,

it's not about making a better future,

but it's about preserving life as we know it.

So as we think about expanding our own radius in understanding science,

it's critical for Athens, Georgia, for Atlanta, Georgia,

for the state of Georgia, and for the world.

So expand your radius.

Thank you.

(Applause)