DISCONFIRMATION BIAS:
A tendency for individuals to avoid acknowledging, or steer clear of counter-attitudinal arguments, or arguments that might challenge their prior beliefs1. Disconfirmation Bias can be illustrated when people who feel strongly about as topic, consistently evaluate attitudinally congruent arguments as stronger, and attitudinally incongruent arguments as weaker1. For example, an individual who is illustrating Disconfirmation Bias may find studies that support their ideas as ‘higher quality’, and studies which do not support, or contradict their ideas or beliefs as ‘poorer quality’.
It is argued that sophisticated persons or intellectuals who possessed greater amounts of knowledge about a topic, and were more invested in it, are more likely to engage in Disconfirmation Bias1. These findings illustrates that if Disconfirmation Bias were employed by academics and government, trust in medical science may be eroded; which may ultimately lead to negative population health consequences (e.g. vaccine hesitancy). Arguably, a way to mitigate this bias and earn trust, is to acknowledge and fairly evaluate alternative theories, even if they seem unreasonable at first. Also see: Confirmation Bias, and Belligerence Bias.
References:
1. Strickland AA, Taber CS, Lodge M. Motivated reasoning and public opinion. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2011;36(6):935-44. (Link to Reference)