Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In human–robot interaction, the tendency of people to make systematic errors when interacting with a robot. People may base their expectations and perceptions of a robot on its appearance (form) and attribute functions which do not necessarily mirror the true functions of the robot. [95] Fundamental pain bias The tendency for people to ...
The theory was formed as a comprehensive explanation of the way people interpret the basis of behaviors in human interactions; however, there have been studies that indicate cultural differences in the attribution biases between people of Eastern, collectivistic societies and Western, individualistic societies. [32]
However, the just-world fallacy also results in a tendency for people to blame and disparage victims of an accident or a tragedy, such as rape [15] [16] and domestic abuse, [17] to reassure themselves of their insusceptibility to such events. People may even blame the victim's faults in a "past life" to pursue justification for their bad outcome.
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.
The halo effect is a perception distortion (or cognitive bias) that affects the way people interpret the information about someone with whom they have formed a positive gestalt. [11] An example of the halo effect is when a person finds out someone they have formed a positive gestalt with has cheated on their taxes.
An outgroup member's positive outcome is not rooted in their effort or ability, but a result of external situational factors that are, at least in some part, influenced by others. Therefore, their positive behavior is not their own, and is of little consequence. [1]
Adaptive bias is the idea that the human brain has evolved to reason adaptively, rather than truthfully or even rationally, [clarification needed] and that cognitive bias may have evolved as a mechanism to reduce the overall cost of cognitive errors as opposed to merely reducing the number of cognitive errors, when faced with making a decision under conditions of uncertainty.
Botvin et al. (1992) did a popular study on the effects of the false-consensus effect among a specific adolescent community in an effort to determine whether students show a higher level of false-consensus effect among their direct peers as opposed to society at large. [18]