The problem of confirmation bias when searching for symptoms online

Today, the internet is essential for both individual and global development in all areas of society, from the entertainment to job performance, through obtaining knowledge, socialization, search for a partner and many others more things. According to the document Digital around the world in 2019, 4,388 million people surf the net worldwide, which implies a 57% global penetration.

China is in the lead in terms of the number of users (8,000,000), while Ethiopia is in the queue, since only 1.9% of the entire population of the region has entered the internet at some point in their lifetime. Today, access to the Internet is not a matter of tastes and preferences, but of social status. Low-income areas are characterized by a very low user rate, and this is accompanied by poor economic and social development.

The Internet is essential for economic momentum and growth as individuals, but it also has its consequences. In 2020, it was estimated that, on average, we spent about 6 hours and 54 minutes connected to the network, working, chatting, getting to know and much more. The most normal thing is that, when something hurts us, we look on the net what can happen to us to stay calm, right? Based on this premise, we will see what it consists of

the problem of confirmation bias when searching for symptoms online.

• Related article: "Cognitive biases: discovering an interesting psychological effect"

What is confirmation bias?

Confirmation bias is a concept that starts from a simple premise: human beings have the right tendency to acquire or evaluate new information in a way that is consistent with pre-existing ideas. This means that, as a species, we tend to actively seek what reinforces what we already thought before embark on the search for knowledge and, therefore, quickly dismiss what we do not agree with. agreement.

We are all "guilty" (or victims) of this bias, because to write these lines, every author will search studies that describe how confirmation bias works, not whether or not it exists in the first place instance. Also, things get even more interesting when we discover that confirmation bias not only affects how we search for information, but also changes the way we perceive it and what we remember (learn) from it.

The confirmation bias in the search, processing and recall of information leads to 4 specific events. These are the following:

• Attitude polarization: especially in ideological areas, human beings tend to selectively interpret evidence to support their own beliefs. It is not always a manipulation mechanism, as it is inherent. The more we know, the more polarized our opinion on an issue (in general).
• Perseverance of belief: even if the initial evidence on which a belief is based is shown to be false, the human being tends to continue believing in it when he has already cemented his ideas.
• Primacy effect: the first evidence that is found is the one that is adopted and is given more importance than the subsequent ones, although this does not make a concrete sense.
• Illusory correlation: the belief that two events are linked, even though there is no evidence to show it.

These terminological ramifications all come from the same root: confirmation bias and how we perceive information. Inherently we look for what already gives us reason, and this can become a problem at all levels: scientific, political, social and, as we will see below, also medical.

Confirmation bias and patient symptoms

It is easy to apply all this theory in the symptomatic field of a patient. If a person has a headache, you can search the internet for what is causing the headache. Surely, in the "symptoms" section of any verified government website (such as the Mayo Clinic or the National Library of Medicine of the United States) many possible causes of this clinical sign will appear, but, almost always, the patient will fix his attention on the worst of all they.

Here another phenomenon comes into play, known as "negativity bias" or negative effect.. We are not going to dwell long on his theory, since it is enough for us to know that, according to this postulation, when faced with two events of the same intensity, the bad thing weighs much more than the neutral or positive thing.

Inherently, our species is fixated on bad things, probably because of the genetic imprint we inherit from the ancestors who once walked the Earth. Observing negative events in nature increases survival, as those who detect possible dangers learn to act prematurely when the threat is real.

So, of all the possible symptoms for a headache, the patient may be left with the brain tumor, as it is the worst of the available options. From now on, He will start looking for information only about this pathology and, unconsciously, he will be selecting only the one that supports his already established belief: "I have a brain tumor."

Depending on the degree of anxiety and vulnerability of the patient, this may begin to somatize his emotions. He believes that something hurts him, so he worries, suffers, and the body shows organic pain with no real physical cause to channel these negative feelings. It is the fish that bites its tail: "I worry because something hurts and something hurts because I worry."

• You may be interested in: "Hypochondria: causes, symptoms and possible treatments"

Confirmation bias and hypochondria

Until now, we have moved on theoretical grounds, but it is time to put these applications into practice. Medical portals estimate that up to 30% of patients who go to primary care centers do not have an organic cause for their pain. In addition, according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4-9% of patients in medical practice show hypochondriacal features.

From a psychological point of view, hypochondria is defined as a condition in which the person is excessively preoccupied with the idea of ​​having a serious illness. The patient spends a considerable part of his time looking for possible symptoms of "her illness" on the internet, he usually presents pictures of anxiety generalized and / or depression, does not remain calm despite medical diagnoses and constantly self-checks to confirm that his symptoms are real.

Thus, we see how two currents converge at the same point: it could be said that negativity bias and confirmation bias when searching for symptoms online favor the appearance of anxiety and hypochondria, as they facilitate the patient to spend an unhealthy amount of time corroborating the self-imposed idea that he has a serious pathology.

Breaking the cycle is possible

Breaking this feedback loop (something hurts-I look for symptoms-I worry-it hurts more) is possible, but always with the appropriate psychological help. Cognitive-behavioral therapies will help the patient to control his impulses, stop continually analyzing yourself and, above all, do not look for the symptoms of your discomfort in web portals and visit the doctor every time you feel that something is not going well.

The general premise is simple: if you feel persistent discomfort, go to the doctor, but if you have already been told that everything is fine, look no further for concern. Living beings are open systems and, as such, it is normal that sometimes something hurts us or we see some sporadic physiological imbalance. This in almost no case is a sign of a serious illness, so stay calm and do not rush to the keyboard. If you see that this is not possible, go for psychological help. We are not born learned and knowing how to control our impulses is key to ending confirmation bias.

Bibliographic references:

• Allahverdyan, A. E., & Galstyan, A. (2014). Opinion dynamics with confirmation bias. PloS one, 9 (7), e99557.
• DSM IV * - Diagnostic Criteria for Mental Disorders: Criteria for the diagnosis of F45.2 Hypochondria. Picked up on April 23 at https://www.infogerontologia.com/pop_out/patol_criterios_diagnosticos/dsm_iv/somatomorfos/hipocondria.html
• Palminteri, S., Lefebvre, G., Kilford, E. J., & Blakemore, S. J. (2017). Confirmation bias in human reinforcement learning: Evidence from counterfactual feedback processing. PLoS computational biology, 13 (8), e1005684.