Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The false-consensus effect is not restricted to cases where people believe that their values are shared by the majority, but it still manifests as an overestimate of the extent of their belief. [ 2 ] Additionally, when confronted with evidence that a consensus does not exist, people often assume that those who do not agree with them are ...
Thus, participants made different attributions about people depending on the information they had access to. Storms used these results to bolster his theory of cognitively-driven attribution biases; because people have no access to the world except through their own eyes, they are inevitably constrained and consequently prone to biases.
The tendency to overestimate how much one's future selves will share one's current preferences, thoughts and values, thus leading to sub-optimal choices. [113] [114] [115] Proportionality bias: Our innate tendency to assume that big events have big causes, may also explain our tendency to accept conspiracy theories. [116] [117] Recency illusion
Because they cause systematic errors, cognitive biases cannot be compensated for using a wisdom of the crowd technique of averaging answers from several people. [42] Debiasing is the reduction of biases in judgment and decision-making through incentives, nudges, and training.
Cultural Values: Values such as individualism versus collectivism, can lead to different cognitive approaches, which in turn affects how judgements are made. [51] Cultural backgrounds may have an influence on casual attribution, those raised in different cultural contexts could have varying perspectives on the causes of behavior and performance.
Another proposal is that people show confirmation bias because they are pragmatically assessing the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way. Flawed decisions due to confirmation bias have been found in a wide range of political, organizational, financial and scientific contexts.
Association fallacy (guilt by association and honor by association) – arguing that because two things share (or are implied to share) some property, they are the same. [94] Logic chopping fallacy (nit-picking, trivial objections) – Focusing on trivial details of an argument, rather than the main point of the argumentation. [95] [96]
Many researchers have attempted to identify the psychological process which creates the availability heuristic. Tversky and Kahneman argue that the number of examples recalled from memory is used to infer the frequency with which such instances occur. In an experiment to test this explanation, participants listened to lists of names containing ei