The Simpson criminal trial provided an excellent opportunity to illustrate the hindsight bias, the tendency to exaggerate one's ability to have foreseen the outcome of an event after learning the outcome. As hypothesized, introductory psychology students who estimated their prediction of the outcome of the trial post verdict were more accurate than students who predicted the outcome pre verdict. In this article, I illustrate how the hindsight bias can be demonstrated in the classroom and how it can highlight the need for the scientific method in psychology.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
FischhoffB. (1975). Hindsight & foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1, 288–299.
2.
HawkinsS.HastieR. (1990). Hindsight: Biased judgments of past events after the outcomes are known. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 311–327.
3.
LearyM. (1982). Hindsight distortion and the 1980 presidential election. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 257–263.
4.
MyersD. (1995). Psychology (4th ed.). New York: Worth.
5.
StanovichK. (1992). How to think straight about psychology (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
6.
TaylorS.BrownJ. (1988). Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 193–210.
7.
WoodG. (1984). Research methodology: A decision-making perspective. In RogersA.ScheirerC., The G. Stanley Hall lecture series (Vol. 4, pp. 189–217). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
