Identifying Insincere and Sincere Bias through Post-Report Interactions
实验发现，当顾问与决策者面对面讨论时，决策者能更好地区分顾问建议中的无偏见、真诚偏见和不真诚偏见部分；要求顾问提供基于事实的自身行为信息也有助于识别偏见。
ABSTRACT Advisors frequently have an interest in the decisions their advisees make, forcing advisees to distinguish their advisors' unbiased beliefs from their self-interested bias. This task is likely to be especially hard when psychological forces distort advisors' beliefs to make some of their bias sincerely held. In our first experiment, we show that advisors bias both their recommendations and their own actions toward their persuasion goal, and that advisees are better at distinguishing between the unbiased, sincerely biased, and insincerely biased parts of their advisor's recommendation when they meet face-to-face to discuss, compared with when they receive only a written recommendation. Our second experiment shows that advisees distinguish their advisor's bias from their advisor's unbiased beliefs more accurately when the advisors are asked to provide fact-based information about their own actions. Both experiments show that post-report interactions are more helpful for identifying insincere bias than sincere bias. Data Availability: All raw data (excluding identifiable information), data processing code for tabulated analyses, and full experimental materials are available from the authors.