THE INVINCIBILITY AND INEVITABILITY OF BIAS IN DECISION MAKING... ( Article by Professor Hu Chi Ku Chi )

When club committees embark on the difficult task of disciplining alleged wrongdoers , the spectre of bias looms long and large. Personal agendas , emotions , motives and vendettas can quickly replace objectivity , impartiality and fairness. 
Can disciplinary committees ever be free from bias ?    The answer I'm afraid is an emphatic " No ". Bias is the natural result of every person's self-centrism . Unless a committee member is completely incapacitated by self-doubt , then all those in attendance will be utterly convinced that their beliefs, actions and opinions are absolutely correct at the time. 
The caveat " at the time " is an essential part , because all the committee members ( except for those who are pathologically incapable of acknowledging error ) may well come to realise that they have made a mistake , and that their beliefs , actions and/or opinions were wrong. For instance , is sneezing in front of another member a deliberate biological assault or is it an unfortunate instinctive consequence of having a cold ? 
What is certain is that our human tendency is to believe the other person is biased , but not to believe that we ourselves are biased. With regards to disciplinary matters , it comes as no surprise to see committee members failing to perceive their own biases , and this regrettably warps their perceptions , judgements and decisions.  If the member who sneezed has a track record of being rude and ill-mannered , then his action must be deliberate. 
Bias is a sort of " blind spot " in a peoples' thinking : a place where their assurance of being right makes them vulnerable to imagining the world to be different from how it it truly is. As truth has it the sneeze was a reflex response to the cat hair /dust on the victim's clothing. But the thing about blind spots is that we are not aware of them. Our reality is made up of our thinking, assumed beliefs , our own self-awareness and introspection. If a committee member sees things in a jaundiced and particular way , then he/she might well form the view that the alleged member's explanation was without any validity or substance whatsoever , or was nothing more than a woefully limp , insufficient excuse. And should another committee member take a minority view of believing the accused , then he/she " can't see straight " or is just plain unintelligent. By denying our bias we delude ourselves and fail to recognise our susceptibility to deception and self-deception. 
It was Mark twain who once said : " It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so. " And so it is those cursed blind spots of bias which get people into trouble. Ignorance is merely a need for information or education : error , especially when it is believed wholeheartedly , is a calamity waiting to happen. 
Even when evidence of an allergy to cats is presented , which suggests the accused's explanation has both validity and merit , committee members might already have deluded themselves by crediting their motives , intentions , feelings and emotions to fully justify their decision to treat the incident as a biological assault. " We meant well.....our motives were good , and so arrived at a good decision to suspend the member so often guilty of gross misconduct ".
In any disciplinary hearing when contradictory evidence is presented , committee members have a choice to either consider it or ignore it. If the evidence is ignored simply because it conflicts with their pre-formed ( and self-corroborated ) view , then the spectre of bias is clearly present  for all objective onlookers to see. Indeed , it is laughable in the extreme to hear people state that they are " not biased " when they clearly are. Yes, everyone is biased to some extent , but when the boundaries have been pushed out by personal prejudices , their particular view of reality will be severely distorted. It's obvious the accused deliberately set out to transfer his snivelling cold onto the person he/she was known to dislike  .
Bias influences , shades and slants conscious decisions in ways that we are not aware of at the time. Looking back , some of us can be made aware of how our assurance of correctness can lead to a disaster , but we didn't , or couldn't , see it . Biased thinking , even when others have given out warnings of impending trouble , cannot be altered. Bias tends to be permanently ingrained. Many commentators have talked about " normalcy bias " which causes people to underestimate the possibility of decision leading to a disaster or catastrophe. The consequence of not heeding warnings is of course the failure to prepare for worst case scenarios. The threat of legal action being taken against us ? It wont happen. It'll all blow over "  is a classic response , yet again illustrating yet another blind spot. The consequence of underestimating is of course the failure to prepare any contingency plans , or to re-examine their decisions.
Such is the invincibility and inevitability of bias , it never goes away and can never be removed.
Such is the invincibility of bias , ignorance of it and denial become inevitable. And even when people are confronted and made aware of their bias , they inevitably pull out all the stops to rationalize their actions and decisions................ 
" We were not biased against the member who sneezed but we were biased towards the  complainant who was sneezed upon  "
"The sneeze may have been innocent but the suspension was justified based on the member's appalling track record of rudeness and inappropriate behaviour. "
" We invested so much time, effort and energy on this matter to admit we were wrong."
"The majority of members backed our decision , which clearly shows we made the right decision."
" I voted for suspension along with committee members who I really trust. They can't all be wrong."
" For the sake of the club , drastic action was called for. Members would have been upset if we had done nothing."
Dreaming up these counter-reality thoughts is without doubt hard work. Consequently, critics who challenge these rationalisations are not appreciated or liked. If one is allowed to trash this counter-reality , the likelihood of destroying their snug, safe sanctuary becomes becomes ever more apparent  . Biased people will therefore lash out at those who have the temerity to disagree with them. The Human Condition demands it.