Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It is how people's current attitudes shape the development of sharing and communicating information. [1] The psychophysical principle involved for example, is when a stimulus is farther away from one's judgmental anchor, a contrast effect is highly possible; when the stimulus is close to the anchor, an assimilation effect can happen.
For example, when getting to know others, people tend to ask leading questions which seem biased towards confirming their assumptions about the person. However, this kind of confirmation bias has also been argued to be an example of social skill ; a way to establish a connection with the other person.
If people have too much external justification for their actions, cognitive dissonance does not occur, and thus, attitude change is unlikely to occur. On the other hand, when people cannot find external justification for their behavior, they must attempt to find internal justification—they reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes or behaviors.
The list of cognitive biases has long been a topic of critique. In psychology a "rationality war" [72] unfolded between Gerd Gigerenzer and the Kahneman and Tversky school, which pivoted on whether biases are primarily defects of human cognition or the result of behavioural patterns that are actually adaptive or "ecologically rational" [73 ...
For example, if we only see a small sample of people from a particular group, we might overestimate the degree to which they are representative of the entire group. Heuristics are described as "judgmental shortcuts that generally get us where we need to go – and quickly – but at the cost of occasionally sending us off course."
The overconfidence effect is a well-established bias in which a person's subjective confidence in their judgments is reliably greater than the objective accuracy of those judgments, especially when confidence is relatively high. [1] [2] Overconfidence is one example of a miscalibration of subjective probabilities.
Dual process theory within moral psychology is an influential theory of human moral judgement that posits that human beings possess two distinct cognitive subsystems that compete in moral reasoning processes: one fast, intuitive and emotionally-driven, the other slow, requiring conscious deliberation and a higher cognitive load.
Examples of social information include information about the behavior of a social entity or the properties of a social system, while nonsocial information is information about something physical. Contexts in which an organism may use social heuristics can include "games against nature" and "social games".