Accountability breeds response-ability

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

While there is growing consensus over the need to counteract biases in contexts of argumentation and decision-making, researchers disagree over which debiasing techniques are likely to be most effective. I attempt to show that contextual debiasing is more effective than cognitive debiasing in preventing biases, although I challenge the claim that critical thinking is utterly ineffective. In addition, a distinction is introduced between two types of contextual debiasing: situational correction, and dispositional correction. Drawing on empirical work on accountability, I argue that the later type of correction is more likely to prove effective against biases in everyday contexts. Holding arguers accountable is a contextual constraint that has the virtue of also enhancing cognitive skills and virtues. 
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationModeling and Using Context
EditorsP. Brézillon, R. Turner, C. Penco
Place of PublicationLondon
PublisherSpringer
Pages127-136
Number of pages9
ISBN (Electronic)978-3-319-57837-8
ISBN (Print)978-3-319-57836-1
Publication statusPublished - 2017
Event10th International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context - Paris, Paris, France
Duration: 20 Jun 201723 Jun 2017

Conference

Conference10th International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context
Abbreviated titleCONTEXT 2017
CountryFrance
CityParis
Period20/06/1723/06/17

Keywords

  • Accountability
  • Biases
  • Critical thinking
  • Debiasing
  • Rationality

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Accountability breeds response-ability'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Correia, V. (2017). Accountability breeds response-ability. In P. Brézillon, R. Turner, & C. Penco (Eds.), Modeling and Using Context (pp. 127-136). London: Springer.