Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The framing effect is a cognitive bias in which people decide between options based on whether the options are presented with positive or negative connotations. [1] Individuals have a tendency to make risk-avoidant choices when options are positively framed, while selecting more loss-avoidant options when presented with a negative frame.
In psychology and cognitive science, a memory bias is a cognitive bias that either enhances or impairs the recall of a memory (either the chances that the memory will be recalled at all, or the amount of time it takes for it to be recalled, or both), or that alters the content of a reported memory. There are many types of memory bias, including:
Her sampling frame might be a list of third-graders in the school district (sampling frame). Over time, it is likely that the researcher will lose track of some of the children used in the original study, so that her sample frame of adults no longer matches the sample frame of children used in the study.
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.
Choice-supportive bias or post-purchase rationalization is the tendency to retroactively ascribe positive attributes to an option one has selected and/or to demote the forgone options. [1] It is part of cognitive science, and is a distinct cognitive bias that occurs once a decision is made. For example, if a person chooses option A instead of ...
The concept of framing is adopted in prospect theory, which is commonly used by mental accounting theorists as the value function in their analysis (Richard Thaler Included [12]). In Prospect Theory, the value function is concave for gains (implying an aversion to risk), indicating decreasing marginal utility with accumulation of gain.
Most theoretical analyses of risky choices depict each option as a gamble that can yield various outcomes with different probabilities. [2] Widely accepted risk-aversion theories, including Expected Utility Theory (EUT) and Prospect Theory (PT), arrive at risk aversion only indirectly, as a side effect of how outcomes are valued or how probabilities are judged. [3]
Thus, a prediction about future event duration is biased because memory of past event duration is also biased. Roy and colleagues note that this memory bias does not rule out other mechanisms of the planning fallacy. [12] Sanna and colleagues examined temporal framing and thinking about success as a contributor to the planning fallacy.