Review candidate judgments before confidence, first impressions or outcome stories become stronger than the evidence.
Open situation →Reasoning Practice · Intermediate
The favourite candidate gets easier questions
The team already prefers one candidate. Interviewers ask that candidate to explain strengths, while competing candidates are pressed mainly on weaknesses.
Your decision
Which action would make the comparison more informative?
Show the best first move
A. Ask what evidence would make the preferred candidate a poor choice, then collect the same evidence for every candidate.
Why this move helps
The evidence search is asymmetric. Considering the opposite creates a real test of the preferred conclusion instead of collecting only supportive material.
Evidence still missing
- A shared question set.
- Evidence that would lower the preferred candidate’s rating.
- Comparable work samples or structured references.
Evidence note
Confirmation bias is a reasonable lens for the search pattern, but other explanations such as poor interview design may also matter.
Next action
Write one disconfirming question and apply it to all serious candidates.
Best first lens
Confirmation Bias
Use the lens to ask a better question. It does not prove that a person or team has a cognitive bias.
Other defensible lenses
The situation may have more than one explanation.
Continue the path
Situation → skill → technique → action.
You can separate a persuasive claim from the evidence that should change your mind.
Build this skill →Force a preferred explanation to compete with a credible alternative.
Run the technique →