Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Mar 6;24(1):17.
doi: 10.1186/s12910-023-00894-0.

Biases in bioethics: a narrative review

Affiliations
Review

Biases in bioethics: a narrative review

Bjørn Hofmann. BMC Med Ethics. .

Abstract

Given that biases can distort bioethics work, it has received surprisingly little and fragmented attention compared to in other fields of research. This article provides an overview of potentially relevant biases in bioethics, such as cognitive biases, affective biases, imperatives, and moral biases. Special attention is given to moral biases, which are discussed in terms of (1) Framings, (2) Moral theory bias, (3) Analysis bias, (4) Argumentation bias, and (5) Decision bias. While the overview is not exhaustive and the taxonomy by no means is absolute, it provides initial guidance with respect to assessing the relevance of various biases for specific kinds of bioethics work. One reason why we should identify and address biases in bioethics is that it can help us assess and improve the quality of bioethics work.

Keywords: Affective; Bias; Cognitive; Distortion; Ethics; Imperative; Judgment; Quality.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

I certify that there is no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this manuscript, and there are no financial arrangements or arrangements with respect to the content of this comment with any companies or organizations. Conflict of interests is none.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Toet A, Brouwer A-M, van den Bosch K, Korteling J. Effects of personal characteristics on susceptibility to decision bias: a literature study. Int J Humanit Soc Sci. 2016;5:1–17.
    1. FitzGerald C, Hurst S. Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review. BMC Med Ethics. 2017;18(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s12910-017-0179-8. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hall WJ, Chapman MV, Lee KM, Merino YM, Thomas TW, Payne BK, Eng E, Day SH, Coyne-Beasley T. Implicit racial/ethnic bias among health care professionals and its influence on health care outcomes: a systematic review. Am J Public Health. 2015;105(12):e60–e76. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.302903. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Banuri S, Dercon S, Gauri V. Biased policy professionals. World Bank Econ Rev. 2019;33(2):310–327. doi: 10.1093/wber/lhy033. - DOI
    1. Chapman GB. Cognitive processes and biases in medical decision making. In: Chapman G, Sonnenberg F, editors. Decision making in health care: Theory, psychology, and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2003. pp. 183–210.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources