Modulation of the Leniency Bias in the Discursive Dilemma

GUSTAVO BODANZA; ESTEBAN FREIDIN; SEBASTIÁN LINARES; FERNANDO DELBIANCO

Santiago de Chile

Congreso; V Congreso en Argumentación, Psicología del Razonamiento y Pensamiento Crítico; 2017

Universidad Diego Portales

The choice of a deliberative style in the context ofthe doctrinal paradox is proved to be sensible to framing effects (Bonnefon,2007, 2010). However, we are uncertain about which specific factors could tilt the choice in one orother direction. Our proposal is aimed to contribute with that goal. We haveset a fixed scenario to test the incidence of three factors: the leniency bias,the confirmation bias, and the positioning of the subjects as jury members. Asin the work by Bonnefon (2010), we have found that subjects tended to preferthe deliberation style yielding the most lenient result for the candidate. Positioningthe subjects in a negative stance with respect to the candidate does notmodulate per se the leniency bias. On the other hand, we have found that theleniency is modulated when the negative stance on the elements of judgment isagreed by the subjects and the majority of the jury.  This modulation, nevertheless, does not occurwhen the negative result stems from the compound style.