English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Does anyone know what it's called when you interpret evidence to reach the conclusion you want?

share|improve this question
Sort of like everybody does. – Mitch Jun 11 '11 at 15:03
This isn't a single word, but there's a well-known saying "The devil can quote scripture for his purpose," which perfectly describes the process you're asking about. – Peter Shor Jun 11 '11 at 16:38
Deconstruction. – Peter Taylor Jun 11 '11 at 19:08
Interpretation. – Marcin Jun 12 '11 at 9:29
Nice pointing out, Mitch :) – Thursagen Jun 12 '11 at 22:48
up vote 11 down vote accepted

Biased interpretation, a type of confirmation bias, one possible reason for which is wishful thinking.

share|improve this answer

Eisegesis is a particularly apt term in religious contexts, but it is probably not great in other contexts.

share|improve this answer
Interesting. I'd only heard this given as exegesis. You learn something new every day. – Robusto Jun 13 '11 at 0:19
Exegesis is the opposite: exegesis is reading the meaning out of the text: eisegesis is reading meaning in. – dja Jun 13 '11 at 4:18
Thanks. I missed the distinction. Now I actually have learned something. :) – Robusto Jun 13 '11 at 11:07

You could call it 'cherry picking' - the selection of terms/facts or data which suit your purpose, but might not reflect the whole picture. It could also be called 'taking it out of context' - using a phrase or figure in a manner other than which it was written/intended.

As has been mentioned, interpretation bias and/or confirmation bias work as well.

share|improve this answer

One phrase to describe what you'd like to say is "self-serving conclusions"

share|improve this answer

Spin, as in what politicians (are alleged to) do.

share|improve this answer

There is also Hineininterpretierung/Hineininterpretation, but I'm not sure how much this term is used.

share|improve this answer
Is that a German literary analysis term? – Mitch Jun 11 '11 at 15:04
In English, very rarely I'm sure. Even in Dinglish. But I bet this answer becomes the top Google hit very soon. Hineininterpretierung, on the other hand ... – Robusto Jun 11 '11 at 15:07
@Robusto: Right, -ung is the more frequent word. – Cerberus Jun 11 '11 at 15:20
@Mitch: I'd say it's not confined to literature. But it's probably rare enough to be considered a German word occasionally used in English. – Cerberus Jun 11 '11 at 15:22

I would use tendentious.

share|improve this answer

Are there perhaps two issues here?

Confirmation bias/cherry picking is about choosing the bits of your data that support the conclusion that you want to find. If this is the case, then your conclusion is still backed by evidence, but the illegitimate step was in the selective use of data (ignoring things that don't support your conclusion), not in the interpretation.

The other terms like reading into', Hineininterpretation, eisegesis etc. are about making claims that aren't supported by the data, they've been shipped in by you. The data might be complete and adequate, but it's the conclusions you draw from it that are illegitimate - in which case, it's not evidence for your claim.

Since all interpretation is a kind of 'reading into' (since data doesn't interpret itself) it seems to me that there are two more possibilities here: importing data that isn't there to support a conclusion, or failing to consider other interpretations

For example, you see a colleague that you haven't seen for a while, and ask where she's been. She replies, "I've been on leave". If you then say "Oh, how lovely, did you have a nice time?" then you've interpreted "leave" as meaning "holiday", even though there are other kinds of leave - compassionate leave and sick leave, for example, where "did you have a nice time?" is an inappropriate response.

There are two possible errors

a) You added the concept "holiday" to the term "leave" even though it wasn't in the data, then drew your conclusion

b) You interpreted "leave" as holiday, without considering first whether there were other equally valid interpretations to choose from.

In which case, the phrase would be jumping to conclusions

A favourite term of mine, though I'm not sure who coined it is armchair hermeneutics - though that's not really the same thing, that's just reasoning from your chair without bothering to support your claims with evidence. There is an element of that here, though.

share|improve this answer

"Motivated Reasoning" is a term that I've seen recently to describe the process of interpreting information in order to support a predetermined conclusion. Various methods can be used in the process, including confirmation bias and cherry-picking as were mentioned in other answers, but there are numerous other techniques as well. Motivated Reasoning seems to be a descriptive name for the overall process, regardless of how it is done.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.