Auditory Disfluency Disrupts the Confirmation Bias

Abstract

The current study examined whether two different types of auditory disfluency could result in diminished bias amongst juror verdicts in a mock trial. In Experiment 1, acting as jurors, participants read either a positive or negative description of the defendant. Participants then either read or listened to the stipulated facts, presented in either a fluent or disfluent format. After reading or listening to the stipulated facts, participants decided if the defendant was guilty or not guilty. In Experiment 2, a novel auditory disfluency design was used. In both experiments, participants who were given the stipulated facts in a disfluent format were less likely to show a confirmatory pattern in reported verdicts for the defendant.