Confirmation Bias and the Law of Attraction

Imagine a world that represents and confirms everything you think.

Comfortable, isn't it?

The mind loves a story that 'fits so much more than a truth that could potentially challenge it.

But there's more.

Once a belief settles in completely, how adept do you think our perception could be at reorganizing itself around it?

Welcome to the world of confirmation bias.

What is Confirmation Bias?

Confirmation Bias is one of the most well-documented concepts in modern psychology, shaping politics, relationships, financial decisions...careers.

And yet outside academic circles, the concept is quite unknown, often misunderstood, and simplified into something worthy of a lot more examination than it gets.

And then, somewhere along the way, pop psychology and the self-help industry added to the murkiness. And what is a fascinating and complex neurological process flattened into something far more seductive:

Belief 'attracts' external reality.

An attractive proposition indeed.

But to understand its deeper implications, it helps to take a good look at the underlying narratives.

Confirmation bias refers to the human tendency to notice, interpret, and remember information that confirms our existing beliefs while discounting evidence that contradicts them.

The concept gained prominence through the work of psychologist Peter Wason in the 1960s, whose experiments demonstrated that people tend to search for confirming evidence rather than that which might disprove their assumptions.

Later, research by cognitive scientist Raymond Nickerson and many others showed that this tendency is not just a minor flaw in reasoning, but a pervasive one.

It appears in political reasoning, medical decisions, legal judgments, and everyday interpersonal conflicts.

The brain, as it turns out, is not a neutral observer, but an interpreter with preferences.

Preferences that shape our beliefs, and vice versa.

The 'Prediction Machine'

Modern neuroscience understands that our brain constantly generates personal predictions about our environment while comparing incoming information to these, in real time.

It's called predictive processing.

Some researchers will describe the brain as a 'system' that updates its internal models of reality based on these incoming signals.

A process that takes a lot of energy.

So what it does to economize is favour stability, preferring interpretations that maintain existing expectations rather than exploring those that might need rewiring.

What this means is that perception itself is partly shaped by prior belief. What we see is deeply influenced by what we expect to see.

Inversely, that which we are unfamiliar with will burn more energy to take notice of, process, and absorb. At least at a non-subconscious level (and there's a very specific reason I use that hyphenated term).

The result? The latter will usually be a categorized as the second option.

When Psychology Became Pop Philosophy

Versions of the ideas discussed above have made their way into popular self-help industry rhetoric over the years in multiple forms. But its loudest avatar probably made its strongest presence felt with the popularity of Law of Attraction (LOA) movement.

The message was simple: You attract the events in your life.

So think positively, visualize success, and the universe will 'manifest' those beliefs into reality for you.

It is a beguilingly appealing narrative, and not something to dismiss lightly. What's more, it might actually appear to work for some people to varying degrees.

But actual research in neuroscience suggests something far more interesting.

Beliefs influence:

What we notice.
How we interpret events.
The choices we make.

Shifts in perception and behavior really can change certain outcomes over time, (depending on what the context is). But conflating it with blanket statements on how thoughts reorganize all external reality directly and absolutely is when things started getting troublesome.

The Problem With “Positive Thinking”

Positive Thinking, another pop-psychology Frankenstein, is an older close cousin of LOA, if you may, and comes with its own specific set of problems, often ending up encouraging people to treat belief as a cosmetic adjustment of sorts, rather than a deeper psychological process.

My dear friend and coach Peter Crone, has a blunt way of describing it.

“Whipped cream on shit''.

He says it in context to the practice of 'positive affirmations, one of 'Positive Thinking's' favourite tools.

It's crude, but it captures something crucial.

If unresolved beliefs, emotional wounds, and murky identity patterns remain untouched, layering affirmations on top of them changes very little.

The deeper architecture of the psyche continues operating exactly as before, meanhile leaving cleaning the actual inner architecture up (a process far more complex than motivational slogans tend to suggest), unattended.

There are entire spiritual traditions that dedicate themselves simply to that process alone. Non-duality schools of thought often refer to it as 'getting ourselves out of the way'.

Whether external circumstances literally rearrange themselves based on belief may remain a provocative question, sitting somewhere between psychology, philosophy, and spirituality. I'm not going to pretend to have the answer to that.

But what is far less ambiguous is the role belief plays in how we interpret and respond to what happens to us.

And that agency often gets drowned out by the noise of poorly researched advice telling us what we should believe.

One camp insists relentless positivity is the answer. Another, that the world is fundamentally hostile, and optimism is naïve.

Both can mutate into powerful forms of confirmation bias.

When Belief Becomes Burden

The real problem begins when a nuanced psychological or even neurological insight is collapsed with a totalizing philosophy.

When belief on its own is framed as the primary driver of reality, all outcomes start carrying a very different weight.

'Success' becomes proof of alignment, and 'failure' becomes evidence of the lack thereof.

And over time, this can shift insidiously from 'empowerment' into despair.

What was meant to offer agency distorts into self-blame instead.

Verified research has long linked patterns of self-blame to increased anxiety, depression, and reduced resilience in the face of stress.

When applied through the Law of Attraction lens, the self-doubt becomes difficult to ignore. If something is not 'working', it is easy to oversimplify into 'incorrect thinking'.

Taken then to its logical conclusion, this framing spirals downward into something far less supportive than it initially promises.

If everything is 'attracted', then everything is 'deserved'.

And that is a cognitive dissonance the nervous system is not built to carry on a permanent basis.

Real-world instances have displayed this strain of thought beyond abstraction into very disturbing territory.

One of the more visible examples of such is James Arthur Ray, a teacher associated with The Secret (an LOA Bible of sorts), whose teachings emphasized total personal responsibility for all outcomes. During a retreat built around these ideas in 2009, participants were encouraged to push beyond physical limits in a sweat lodge ritual.

Three people died.

The incident was later ruled as negligent homicide.

The point here is not to sensationalise tragedy, but to hold up a not-so-gentle reminder-that no claim is foolproof beyond scrutiny and discretion.

When belief systems remove inconvenient friction from reality, they can remove necessary boundaries.

People dealing with illness begin to question whether they have somehow “created” their condition.
Individuals navigating financial or relational difficulty internalize failure as a flaw in their mindset.
Survivors of severe trauma are left carrying an underlying layer of confusion and shame, wondering if they 'attracted' what happened to them.

If something works, it is taken as confirmation that the belief is 'law'.

And when it doesn't, the explanation often offered is that the same law has not been mastered adequately by the practitioner just yet.

Meanwhile, the 'system' remains intact either way.

It's a loop where LOA cannot fail. Only the individual can.

(Read that again).

This is a good time to assert that none of this negates the value of intention, perspective, a healthy growth mindset, or inner work.

But it does reveal that the relationship between belief and reality is far more complex than oversimplified narratives by business entities that have built empires around a questionable philosophy.

The good news?

The complexity is not a problem, but a starting point for where the actual agency begins.

A Spiritual Life Does Not Require Blind Faith

Questioning simplified interpretations of something like the Law of Attraction does not equate to adopting a strictly materialist-reductionist worldview.

Many philosophical traditions and even neuroscientists have long suggested that the internal state of the mind does indeed influence how external reality is experienced.

In Buddhist philosophy, the opening verses of the Dhammapada emphasize that the mind precedes experience.
Thinkers like Epictetus in Stoic philosophy argued that suffering arises less from events themselves than from the judgments we attach to them.
The concept of Karma, when studied, even hints at many points that could be considered a far deeper take than what the Law of Attraction has essentially appropriated (in my humble opinion).

Folks like Joe Dispenza and Emily MacDonald, while not the most popular figures in mainstream scientific circles, actually do have a background in science and have been doing serious and thorough research on these correlations, too.

These ancient traditions and more recent thought-leaders do not directly propose that thoughts magically 'manufacture' external events.

But they point toward something subtler: the mind’s interpretive power, and the influence that it has on our behaviour, emotions, and eventually on the circumstances that enter our lives.

तत्त्वमसि — Tat Tvam Asi

Translation

“Thou art That.”
(or more plainly): “You are that reality.”

-- Sanskrit Scripture: Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7

This ancient Sanskrit metaphor was never meant to be a mechanical law in a literal sense.

It was an invitation to deeper awareness.

Modern neuroscience seems to increasingly echo this insight from one of the world's oldest philosophical texts.

Emotional states influence attention, perception, memory, and decision-making.
The inner landscape of the mind shapes the external world we inhabit psychologically.

Negativity Bias

There is another cognitive tendency that complicates this entire conversation a bit more: negativity bias.

Research by Roy Baumeister and colleagues famously summarized the phenomenon succinctly with the following phrase:

“Bad is stronger than good.”

Explanation: Negative events leave stronger psychological impressions on the brain than positive ones.

From an evolutionary perspective, this makes total sense. Missing a potential threat could be fatal, while missing a pleasant opportunity carried a lot less risk.

The result? A human brain wired to pay disproportionate attention to danger, criticism, and loss.

The effect this bias has on our everyday life is not talked about enough: from news cycles to social media, relationships to other personal narratives about our own lives.

Meanwhile, despite the real challenges in the world, the number of systems that keep functioning as they should around us is enormous.

Communities cooperate.
Infrastructure runs.
People build relationships, raise families, create art
Humans solve problems every day.

None of it is done perfectly. But they still outnumber the dangers being sensationalized, astronomically.

However, the brain does not naturally track equilibrium with the same alertness as it does potential threats. So when negativity bias combines with confirmation bias, it is a potent combination.

A person who believes the world is collapsing will effortlessly collect evidence that supports the belief.
A person who believes relentless positivity is the only acceptable mindset will filter out signals that suggest otherwise.

Both narratives cannot help but affect neutrality.

Confirmation Bias in the Life of Creatives

For artists and creatives, confirmation bias can become especially intense.

Creative work sits close to identity.
Feedback rarely feels objective.
Every response is potential evidence about 'who we are'.
The mind begins assembling a story.

We interpret a rejection as proof that our career is hopeless.

Some interpret this as confirmation that they are misunderstood visionaries.

And while both interpretations may feel convincing, neither is necessarily accurate.

Creativity, especially in a professional context, often oscillates between two poles.

On one extreme lies self-sabotage. On the other, self-mythology.

The pendulum can swing between these states with surprising speed, and both narratives can be fuelled by confirmation bias.

To add to it all, spiritual language, when abused, is an open door to amplify this pattern.

A stalled project becomes a sign that “the universe is testing you..'', a random coincidence becomes confirmation that ''success is guaranteed.''

The mind finds the evidence it needs, while deeper work lies somewhere else entirely.

The Real Invitation

Let's get something straight: Confirmation bias is not a 'flaw' we want to remove from human cognition. It is a natural part of the mind's architecture.

In fact, as counterintuitive as it sounds, it might even be a sign of brain health.

So the real question is not whether we have biases (we all do), but how aware we are of them, and how we proceed from there.

Creativity requires a belief system and self-worth strong enough to survive uncertainty, rejection, and criticism.

But it also requires incredible quantities of intellectual honesty to examine assumptions when circumstances provide new information that doesn't line up with them.

A Confession

The irony in all of this is that I would probably qualify as someone you would catch using a lot of the spiritual language that I invite critical thinking towards in this article. I'm even open to the theory that our mindset is actually playing a far deeper role in our trajectory than most of us have been trained to identify.

Truth is, I even practice the 'philosophy' (for lack of a better term) that our external world is a reflection of our inner state, albeit at my own risk and with what I hope is a healthy dose of skepticism and discernment.

So why am I bothering with this?

The answer might disappoint you.

I spent 13 years in India, the former spiritual capital of the world, as an adolescent, watching relentless 'Eat Pray Love' tourists building empires out of their half-baked extractions.

It was not a lot of fun.

I haven't had the easiest path to get where I am in my life. (It wasn't the hardest, but it wasn't the easiest either).

And while I'm not a fan of wearing scars as a badge of honour (let alone trauma as an identity), I struggle more often than I am comfortable admitting to forgive certain demographics blissfully oblivious to the head start life gave them, never hesitating to patronize with their spiritual jargon after watching the newest self-help bestseller.

I have lost friends to these struggles. People I loved.

So I'd feel like a hypocrite saying this is all in the name of 'research' and just that.

Then there's the semantics.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines a law as “a statement of a fact, deduced from observation, to the effect that a particular natural or scientific phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions are present,” a standard the so-called Law of Attraction simply does not meet despite its claim.

It is not a law.

That being said, fun fact: it took me years of pretty intensive, multi-disciplinary study to find 'evidence' of sorts, both theoretical and practical, for me to actually start noticing patterns that might point towards what the Law of Attraction magnified and blew out of proportion.

And I concluded for myself that the 'physics' of it all (if that's a thing), is not black and white. and far removed from a banal 'if this = then that' equation.

Practical Ways to Tackle Confirmation Bias

A few practices can help loosen the grip of confirmation bias in everyday life.

1. Look for disconfirming evidence
When forming a belief about your work or career, deliberately ask what evidence might contradict it.

2. Separate identity from feedback
A critique of a piece of work is not a verdict on the person who created it.

3. Diversify mirrors
Seek feedback from people outside your immediate circle.

4. Track narratives
Journaling or reflective practice can reveal repeating patterns in how the mind interprets events.

5. Work with peers, mentors and coaches who can challenge authentically
The right mentor does not simply reinforce your beliefs. They help you examine them.

Conclusion

In my humble opinion, the most useful stance is neither blind optimism nor rigid skepticism.

I think it's a completely different one altogether.

Curiosity.

A willingness to notice when the mind is assembling evidence to support an emotionally convenient story. Dig deeper to enquire about the accuracy of the same.

And the courage, from time to time, to ask: What else might also be true?

During my coaching with Peter Crone (who, as you might have noticed, plays a significant role in my current trajectory), I remember him describing one of the biggest pitfalls of 'intelligence' as the ability to gather sufficient evidence to prove what it believes, including the dystopian type (paraphrasing here).

So I'll own it. Being 'smart' can make us act dumb. Find ample reason to believe things that feel familiar and shun those that don't.

Whether or not that is a strength is anyone's guess and probably a bias of its own.

I don't think the world as we know it is just concrete matter and a simplistic 'life sucks and then we die' story. Our emotions, beliefs, perspectives are not completely disconnected from the events that occur in our lives.

Does that mean I think the Law of Attraction Works after all and am just being a stubborn mule and not admitting it?

I don't know.

But here's my 'official' response to the elephant in the room (''is the Law of Attraction 'real''?).

Ready?

Here we go:

It doesn't matter.

I don't care!

The way I see it, working on our well-being, digging deeper into our belief systems, believing in the goodness of our world, doing the best we can - these don't need any law to exist, be true, or false.

Who we choose to be, the thoughts we choose to think, and how we navigate the emotions we do is an identity we either consciously embrace or don't.

It's as simple and complex as that.

References and Further Reading

Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001).
Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–370.

Clark, A. (2016).
Surfing Uncertainty: Prediction, Action, and the Embodied Mind. MIT Press.

Friston, K. (2010).
The free-energy principle: A unified brain theory? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(2), 127–138.

Kahneman, D. (2011).
Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Ruscio, J., & Beyerstein, B. L. (2010).
50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology. Wiley-Blackwell.

Nickerson, R. S. (1998).
Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220.

Sharot, T. (2011).
The optimism bias. Current Biology, 21(23), R941–R945.

Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988).
Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental health. Psychological Bulletin, 103(2), 193–210.

Welwood, J. (2000).
Toward a Psychology of Awakening. Shambhala Publications.

Wason, P. C. (1960).
On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12(3), 129–140.

Radhakrishnan, S. (Trans.). (1953).
The Principal Upanishads. HarperCollins.

Oxford English Dictionary. (n.d.). Law (n.). Oxford University Press.

Tapasya Loading: Peter Crone Interview

Joe Dispenza: Becoming Supernatural

Emily MacDonald: https://www.emonthebrain.com/

Join my free training.

Artist Mindmap 2.0 is a reimagined 6-day email mini-course designed for serious, sensitive, and soulful artists who want more than

surface-level hacks.

Join Free Training