When reviewing close votes, this helper appears above every question to be reviewed:
I'm curious to know if there was any specific rationale for displaying such suggestions, other than to streamline the review process (i.e. aid in faster decision-making).
Because, if not, I think there's room for improvement. I think introspection reveals to many of us that these suggestions do influence the way we read questions. The first voter often sets the "context" of the review for any following voters who don't actively resist bias, which I think can be any of us when we are distracted, go on auto-pilot, are tired, or generally just not introspective.
Furthermore, upon voting to close, the reviewer also sees how many voters voted for what reason, and other details.
I feel that the case of showing referenced duplicates is an exception where the time it saves reviewers justifes any bias it may cause (but if anything, I think it helps reviewers make better decisions, by encouraging them to compare potential duplicates side by side).
However in other cases, for example, when voting to move a question to another site, shouldn't we each form an independent opinion keeping each site's FAQ in mind, instead of being tempted to bandwagon with the other 3 or 4 voters who voted for, say, Super User?
IMHO, if we agree on these premises (which we may not—I'd like to hear others' takes on this), I think there are many ways to reduce bias by making compromises such as:
requiring higher reputation to view new close-vote reviews (letting the veterans set the context), or
showing others' suggestions only after 2 or more have voted in the same direction (but not showing any "counters" like how many people voted to move to Super User).
What are your thoughts? Thanks!