Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Pseudocertainty effect, the tendency to make risk-averse choices if the expected outcome is positive, but make risk-seeking choices to avoid negative outcomes. [75] Status quo bias, the tendency to prefer things to stay relatively the same. [76] [77] System justification, the tendency to defend and bolster the status quo. Existing social ...
In other words, the boomerang effect is a situation where people tend to pick the opposite of what something or someone is saying or doing because of how it is presented to them. Typically, the more aggressively a position is presented to someone, the more likely they are to adopt an opposing view.
The negativity bias, [1] also known as the negativity effect, is a cognitive bias that, even when positive or neutral things of equal intensity occur, things of a more negative nature (e.g. unpleasant thoughts, emotions, or social interactions; harmful/traumatic events) have a greater effect on one's psychological state and processes than neutral or positive things.
This effect happens when two variables are not perfectly correlated: if one picks a sample that has an extreme value for one variable, it tends to show a less extreme value for the other variable. For the Dunning–Kruger effect, the two variables are actual performance and self-assessed performance.
Confirmation bias (also confirmatory bias, myside bias, [a] or congeniality bias [2]) is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. [3]
Alicke and Govorun proposed the idea that, rather than individuals consciously reviewing and thinking about their own abilities, behaviors and characteristics and comparing them to those of others, it is likely that people instead have what they describe as an "automatic tendency to assimilate positively-evaluated social objects toward ideal trait conceptions". [6]
When groups already have negative attitudes to each other, further exposure can increase hostility. [25] A statistical analysis of voting patterns found that candidates' exposure has a strong effect on the number of votes they receive, distinct from the popularity of their policies. [25]
Of these, sunk costs, time investment, decision maker experience and expertise, self-efficacy and confidence, personal responsibility for the initial decision, ego threat, and proximity to project completion have been found to have positive relationships with escalation of commitment, while anticipated regret and positive information framing ...