Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Overconfidence effect, a tendency to have excessive confidence in one's own answers to questions. For example, for certain types of questions, answers that people rate as "99% certain" turn out to be wrong 40% of the time. [5] [44] [45] [46] Planning fallacy, the tendency for people to underestimate the time it will take them to complete a ...
Differences in perceptions of sexual interest between men and women may be exploited by both genders. Men may present themselves as more emotionally invested in a woman than they actually are in order to gain sexual access; 71% of men report engaging in this form of manipulation and 97% of women report having experienced this form of manipulation. [7]
One line of debate is between two points of view: that of psychological nativism, i.e., the language ability is somehow "hardwired" in the human brain, and usage based theories of language, according to which language emerges through to brain's interaction with environment and activated by general dispositions for social interaction and ...
There are few studies explicitly linking cognitive biases to real-world incidents with highly negative outcomes. Examples: One study [11] explicitly focused on cognitive bias as a potential contributor to a disaster-level event; this study examined the causes of the loss of several members of two expedition teams on Mount Everest on two consecutive days in 1996.
In social science research social-desirability bias is a type of response bias that is the tendency of survey respondents to answer questions in a manner that will be viewed favorably by others. [1] It can take the form of over-reporting "good behavior" or under-reporting "bad" or undesirable behavior.
Social psychologist Scott Plous wrote, "No problem in judgment and decision making is more prevalent and more potentially catastrophic than overconfidence." [ 29 ] It has been blamed for lawsuits, strikes, wars, poor corporate acquisitions, [ 30 ] [ 31 ] and stock market bubbles and crashes.
Several theories predict the fundamental attribution error, and thus both compete to explain it, and can be falsified if it does not occur. Some examples include: Just-world fallacy. The belief that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get, the concept of which was first theorized by Melvin J. Lerner in 1977. [11]
The wave of research on attributional biases done by Kahneman, Tversky and others effectively ended the dominance of Heider's naïve scientist within social psychology. [15] Fiske and Taylor, building upon the prevalence of heuristics in human cognition, offered their theory of the cognitive miser.