One of the most common of the logical fallacy interference with human behavior is found from confirmation bias. Humans will generally seek to confirm something they desire to be accurate or look for situational examples that rationalize or explain their perspectives in a favorable light. Heuristics are the filters from which choices and specific influences are ran through prior to adjudications or response. Life experience directly, indirectly, or vicarious, or virtual will subconsciously create these filters.
All healthy humans hold desire and many want to be loved/like/appreciated according to many scholars postulations including but not limited to Maslow’s Pyramid which place love and belonging the need to be liked or appreciated as one of the highlighted levels of self-discovery and development. Being that one wants to be noticed for their opinions, the person will generally look to find their positions favorable in some manner or another. A bias then forms. A method of association with the like-minded or similar positions that support our own desire or hope for a phenomenon to be a specific way.
The logical fallacy of confirmation bias leads an individual to seek out information or data that can support the position in a positive way. In fact this bias is so strong in some people that there could be four different possible answers to a question and the person will only accept one that is compatible with their own mindset as a truth, ignoring any evidence to the others or discounting the possibility by finding flaws, fault, or accusations of misinformation within the additional options. One method of defeating the confirmation bias is apply the null hypothesis rule of thumb. You cannot prove something true but you can prove it to be false. Examine areas where you may hold a confirmation bias by looking at how to prove your position false, not how to support it as truth.
The idea sounds a bit odd but using this method you create a stronger argument for your position (unless of course you ultimately do prove your position wrong). Think of it this way, if you are trying to prove yourself wrong and are not able to do so then the position that you have taken needs no biased confirmation to support that position, the evidence will be overwhelming in support of your position that others can try as hard as you did to prove the position wrong and would be unable too (unless it is wrong of course – we are speaking of an objective wrong, not a subjective wrong here). Should you prove your position wrong even if it was a strong desire for you, is it not better to know that the position was incorrect or that the idea was flawed in some manner? Either way, if you utilize the null hypothesis idea of seeking to examine something to prove it false rather than seeking information to prove something true – you will have the strongest position to discuss with the evidence that you need! Confirmations should be about the evidence not about the bias!