Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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. [9]
A 2006 meta-analysis found little support for a related bias, the actor–observer asymmetry, in which people attribute their own behavior more to the environment, but others' behavior to individual attributes. [9] The implications for the fundamental attribution error, the author explained, were mixed.
Systemic bias: This page outlines real, useful information about systemic bias on Wikipedia. We are aware that we have biases, and we do what we can to combat them. One against many: This page gives advice for dealing with situations where one editor wants to make a change but multiple editors oppose the change.
An example of a language dependent fallacy is given as a debate as to who in humanity are learners: the wise or the ignorant. [18]: 3 A language-independent fallacy is, for example: "Coriscus is different from Socrates." "Socrates is a man." "Therefore, Coriscus is different from a man." [18]: 4
The Cognitive Bias Codex. A cognitive bias is a systematic pattern of deviation from norm or rationality in judgment. [1] Individuals create their own "subjective reality" from their perception of the input. An individual's construction of reality, not the objective input, may dictate their behavior in the world.
Positive-results bias, a type of publication bias, occurs when authors are more likely to submit, or editors are more likely to accept, positive results than negative or inconclusive results. [15] Outcome reporting bias occurs when multiple outcomes are measured and analyzed, but the reporting of these outcomes is dependent on the strength and ...
Galef gives examples of what does and does not indicate a scout mindset, suggests ways to notice and counteract bias, and outlines strategies for quantifying and labeling levels of confidence. [ 9 ] Part III, "Thriving Without Illusions", argues that the supposed benefits of overconfidence and self-deception are not convincing reasons to shy ...
Jumping to conclusions (officially the jumping conclusion bias, often abbreviated as JTC, and also referred to as the inference-observation confusion [1]) is a psychological term referring to a communication obstacle where one "judge[s] or decide[s] something without having all the facts; to reach unwarranted conclusions".