I created a forum on this topic "Confirmation Bias Cannot be Beaten!" Here is the link:
Most debaters at this site think they have won debates because they have the best arguments; but, that is rarely the case. It is totally confirmation bias and in-friend bias.
Another problem is that too few people vote on the debates. I analyzed 1,000 debates selected at random to determine the number of voters. The average number of voters was 2, the median number of voters was 1, and the mode was zero, i.E., 376 of the 1,000 debates had no voters, 214 of the 1,000 debates had 1 voter, 152 of the 1,000 debates had 2 voters.
DDO should require that all debates have at least 25 voters or they don't count. But, that still would not solve the confirmation bias problem, but it might help.
And, friends should not be allowed to vote on the debates of friends.
Having the winners of all debates decided by a panel of professionals would be the best solution, but, that is not possible.
I have actually seen member messages where one member ask another member to vote for them, and in return for that favor, they would vote for them in a future debate. I suspect that this goes on frequently.
Winning debates at this site and being the top dog is very important to many of the egotists at this site. Nothing is proven by you having won the most debates giving the current debate format.
If debates were decided by a panel of professionals, then winning the most debates would have meaning. If that is not done, they should do away with debate rankings. That might improve the voting.
Anyway, Confirmation Bias Cannot Be Beaten!
"We love to agree with people who agree with us. It's why we only visit websites that express our political opinions, and why we mostly hang around people who hold similar views and tastes. We tend to be put off by individuals, groups, and news sources that make us feel uncomfortable or insecure about our views — what the behavioral psychologist B. F. Skinner called cognitive dissonance. It's this preferential mode of behavior that leads to the confirmation bias — the often unconscious act of referencing only those perspectives that fuel our pre-existing views, while at the same time ignoring or dismissing opinions — no matter how valid — that threaten our world view. And paradoxically, the internet has only made this tendency even worse."
Usually when voting on debates, there are sections regarding the points/your stance on the matter AND the debate itself. I think many people will already know what they are going to vote on because of their personal opinion, in some ways I guess you could say it makes you slightly 'biased'
I a sure that most of the people don't even read all the arguments. The idea of this website is amazing and it is sad that some people don't profit of it entirely i realy advice you , if you don't to it yet, to read all the comments and to be open minded. It is not because you truely believe in somehing that you should vote for who is pro if who is con has given better arguments
From the debates I have done, it seems evident that people vote based on their beliefs.
Sometimes this hinders me, sometimes this benefits me. What negates this is forfeits, but in a debate where both sides have put some sort of rational argument forward, I do find that voters as a whole generally have confirmation bias. This isn't a criticism of debate.Org which I enjoy, but of the voting system.