Belief perseverance can be explained as being the phenomenon in which individuals or groups believe in their theories in spite of the existence of contrary evidence (Bonabeau, 2009). When examining the erroneous research on vaccination scenarios, it is believed that this phenomenon did take place. As a psychology professional, there are ways in which belief perseverance can be identified. First, if theories or conclusions do not consider contrary evidence, belief perseverance might be present. Second, if theories or conclusions don't follow critical and scientific thinking guidelines, it is the other possibility which belief perseverance might be present. Eventually, as a psychology professional, it is imperative that I should remain unbiased, clear-headed, and aware of the phenomenon in order to recognize it and prevent it (Bonabeau, 2009).
With belief perseverance, just asking people to be unbiased, does not work. A few methods have been tried to decrease the problem, the most successful is to get the person to assume or describe how the opposite belief might be true. This method is termed as counter explanation, and has been the most successful to date. Counter explanation - not arguing - can help others to see from a different viewpoint.
How do you think it might be to council someone with belief perseverance?