Automatic bias. False priorities. A tendency to over-reliance on automated systems, which can lead to incorrect automated information overriding correct decisions. Bias in attention Bias in accessibility The tendency to perceive repetitive thoughts. Result error. The tendency to judge a decision based on its final outcome rather than the quality of the decision at the time it was made. Projection bias. The tendency to overestimate how much our future self shares our current preferences, thoughts, and values, leading to less-than-optimal choices. [Sources: 10]

Hyperbolic actualization leads to choices that become inconsistent over time: people today make choices that their “I” in the future would prefer not to make, despite the fact that they use the same reasoning. When regret is an unfortunate consequence of making a right decision, or when previous results are unrelated to subsequent choices, blindly changing choices can lead to biased decisions. When faced with a negative outcome from one of your past decisions, you tend to avoid making choices by facing similar challenges, even if the same choices you made in the past are optimal. Having received a negative result for making a decision, we tend to avoid that decision when faced with another problem, even if it was the optimal choice at the time. [Sources: 1, 5, 10, 11]

In addition, by treating someone as expected, that person may inadvertently alter their behavior to match the expectations, thereby providing additional support for the confirmation bias on the part of the perceiver. In interpersonal relationships, confirmatory bias can be problematic as it can lead to inaccurate and distorted impressions of others. Importance Confirmation bias is important because it can cause people to forcibly hold false beliefs or give more weight to information that supports their beliefs than the evidence supports. Supporting evidence bias is strong and widespread, and manifests itself in a wide variety of contexts. [Sources: 4]

The process of making decisions and processing information by people is often biased, because people simply interpret information from their point of view. This biased approach to decision making is largely unintentional and often results in conflicting information being ignored. Conspiracy theories, for example, are often influenced by various prejudices. Even the smartest people are biased in their judgments and choices. [Sources: 4, 11]

To avoid maladaptive bias towards changing choices, you must 1) acknowledge that you may be subject to such bias and 2) ensure that you have the data you need to make an objective choice. While nothing really exists in a vacuum, it is important to envision innovative decision making without reference to the past. Therefore, being able to look back and assess our past choices allows us to change future behavior and, apparently, make better decisions. We and others have previously found that these biases in choice history exhibit several hallmarks of rational and adaptive learning – for example, they are flexible in adapting to environmental stability and are governed by confidence in previous decisions (Urai et al. [Sources: 1, 5, 8]

Taken together, perceptual choice is imbalanced with respect to previous choice, modulation that grows with confidence in previous decisions, and from the direction of previous evidence, modulation that grows with the strength of previous evidence. These results indicate that previous choices and previous incentives can induce bias at certain stages of perceptual decision making. These results indicate a simultaneous bias in repetition of choices modulated by certainty in decisions and in adaptations of evidence modulated by the strength of the evidence that skew current perceptual decisions in opposite directions. Previous research shows that this repetition bias increased after previous decisions with a high degree of confidence, as indicated by response times (Urai, Braun & Donner, 2017), but also when previous decisions were based on weak sensory data ( Akaishi, Umeda, Nagase, Sakai, 2014). [Sources: 3]

These results suggest that characteristic attributes of sensory stimuli may influence selection bias, even if they are not predictive in the task [2AFC-2AUC]. These results demonstrate that gradients of stimulus similarity did not influence the generation of selection bias in our tasks [2AFC-2AUC] in mice and humans. Taken together, these results demonstrate how discriminating stimulus reduces choice bias in the actions of 2AFCs in mice and humans (see also Supplementary Figure S2). Using these adaptations, we found that stimulus similarity increased choice lateral bias in the 2AFC tasks but not in the 2AUC tasks. [Sources: 6]

In addition, by reinforcing lateral preference and alternation, we found that selection biases readily adapt to non-visual manipulation. These results demonstrate that selection bias in our tasks is consistent with recent reward history and that different levels of choice stereotypes can be exacerbated in mice and humans. Thus, selection bias was robust and relatively stable, but it was also adaptable, allowing both mice and humans to update their problem-solving strategies to cope with the specific demands of experimentation. Individuals’ tendencies to repeat or change their choices were recorded by changing their history-dependent drift bias (Figure B). [Sources: 6, 8]

The second study examined the mechanism underlying this bias, and the results supported the hypothesis that this maladaptive change in choice is caused by inhibition of the previous decision (a direct effect of experienced regret), and not by increased sensitivity to regret. subsequent choice (indirect effect of experienced regret mediated by expected regret). Non-adaptive change in choice [75] After experiencing a negative outcome of a decision problem, the tendency to avoid choices made earlier when faced with the same decision problem, even if the choice was optimal. Pseudo-Confidence Effect Prospect Theory The tendency to make non-risk choices when the expected outcome is positive, but to make risk-based choices to avoid negative outcomes. This learning process results in the constant updating of previous expectations from one decision to the next, which then distorts the current choice. [Sources: 5, 8, 10]

We agree that changing bias is usually important, but we also believe that understanding the components of decision-making is important to understanding perceptual decision-making. However, we believe that although control bias is a very important aspect of perceptual research, it is also important to describe selection bias because they are an integral part of perceptual decision-making. As we described in the introduction of the manuscript, we believe that the existence of global selection bias in the perceptual recognition problem has been recognized and incorporated into the current decision-making model, but we have been unable to find evidence to unravel the process of perception and composition. In literature. In addition, since the above analysis focuses on the distortion effects of previous selections, it is not clear that the evidence of previous stimuli affects subsequent visual processing. [Sources: 0, 3]

We then fit a number of more complex models to the data, showing that selection history bias most likely stems from imbalanced inputs (recall selective neural responses to stimuli in the sensory cortex) to the accumulators that drive behavioral choice (Figure C, right). [Sources: 8]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://elifesciences.org/articles/43994

[1]: https://cult.honeypot.io/reads/10-cognitive-biases-stop-inovation/

[2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844021011002

[3]: https://jov.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2771979

[4]: https://www.britannica.com/science/confirmation-bias

[5]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4476096/

[6]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2020.00099/full

[7]: http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/neutral-theory-the-null-hypothesis-of-molecular-839

[8]: https://tobiasdonner.net/choice-history-biases-subsequent-evidence-accumulation/

[9]: https://www.healthline.com/health/self-serving-bias

[10]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

[11]: https://theambitiouswriter.substack.com/p/cognitive-biases-and-how-to-outsmart

Their results showed that moral authority produced nearly identical effects under both conditions, suggesting that the influence of moral character may have been due more to self-perception motives than to impression management problems. Moral qualification refers to the act of asserting oneself as a virtuous or moral person, and recent research has shown that it can indeed foster selfish or ethically questionable behavior, whether the act of attestation occurs in public or private and whether it involves real or simple behavior imaginary (eg, Khan and Dhar, 2006; Monin and Miller, 2001). Research on morality has shown that by upholding egalitarian standards (Monin and Miller, 2001) or by reflecting on prosocial behavior (Khan and Dhar, 2006), people can increase their moral reserves and thus gain a license to express their opinions. their inegalitarian preferences or selfish behavior. In contrast to the moral trust model, which does not imply a change in the perceived meaning of permitted bad behavior, the moral criteria model shows that good behavioral stories of people provide a license for subsequent bad behavior by changing the way they are interpreted (Miller and Effron, 2010). [Sources: 5, 6]

Likewise, individual differences in self-esteem can also be explored as potential moderators of moral character in the area of ​​ethical misconduct, licensing, prejudice, or other problem areas related to values. Prevention-focused participants with positive attitudes between groups were less likely to support affirmative action when they acquired morality than when they did not (i.e. self-licensed), t (329) = -3.79, p < 0.001, d = -, 42, 95% CI [-, 64, -, 20]. A prospective researcher may attempt to explore the mechanisms underlying the moral license effect by directly incorporating moral worth and moral values ​​into the research model (Lin et al., 2016). We also found that when subordinates believed that executives’ previous ethical behavior was motivated by intrinsic rather than extrinsic motives, the impact of moral liberties was stronger. [Sources: 0, 5, 6]

For example, when non-sexist participants were offered the opportunity to shape their own moral character (for example, disagree with sexist statements or select a member from a stereotypical group), they were more likely to exhibit sexist behavior in subsequent tasks (Monin and Miller, 2001). More specifically, we assume that the greatest effect appears in samples drawn from participants from countries where moral issues are considered more important to the person’s personality. In another experiment, subjects who confirmed their reputation (at least in their minds) as good people by buying “green” products, not ordinary ones, later allowed themselves to deceive not only the subjects, but also in one experiment. moral norms. The perceived motivation of the executives’ previous moral behavior will influence the consequences of the license. [Sources: 2, 4, 6]

The state of moral freedom in which the participant is required to do or remember a good thing can be compared with the neutral state in which the participant performs or remembers a neutral behavior or the unethical state in which the participant performs or remembers a bad behavior. Regarding the problem-solving type of the experiment on the influence of moral freedom, the second task, which is used to measure the strength of the moral freedom obtained in the first task, may be more related to oneself or to the whole society. …Due to the phenomenon of moral cleansing (Conway and Peetz 2012), the comparison between the morally free group and the neutral control group should result in a smaller effect size than the group where the participants perform unethical tasks. In Study 3, when participants are motivated to make choices, the influence of choice will be weakened. [Sources: 1, 2]

Therefore, research on moral freedom shows that moral behavior will lead to lower moral standards and lower moral behavior. In a study published by Stanford University in the online journal “Guide to Social and Personality Psychology,” researchers wrote that when people face the ethical uncertainty of social life, moral freedom will emerge. This kind of psychological bargaining is called “moral freedom”, and it explains that when people initially show morality, they are more likely to show unethical, unethical, or problematic behavior in other ways. If people do things that do not meet their normal moral standards, their psychological billboards will become scarce, and they can actually look for good deeds (such as donations or volunteering to help charities) to put their billboards back on the scale. [Sources: 2, 3, 4]

In the second task, they also have the opportunity to demonstrate moral behavior. Third, this study emphasizes the internal balance of moral behavior in individuals. The next time someone you admire or think is morally good behaves contrary to this rule, don’t be surprised. [Sources: 2, 3, 6]

On the other hand, if they do something in which they feel good enough, such as doing a great service to a stranger, their scoreboard shows a positive result and they may give themselves permission (just this time) to not live up to their normal ethical standards. … … [Sources: 4]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/spanish-journal-of-psychology/article/moral-credentials-intergroup-attitudes-and-regulatory-focus-interactively-affect-support-for-affirmative-action/5159B25090F68AEA5AAFB92B8FFE958C

[1]: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0146167210385920

[2]: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11301-017-0128-0

[3]: https://www.businessinsider.com/what-moral-licensing-means-2017-11

[4]: https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/do-you-walk-the-talk-the-impact-of-moral-credentialing

[5]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3077566/

[6]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00484/full

[7]: https://nlpnotes.com/2014/04/06/moral-credential/

[8]: https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Moral+Credential+Effect

We assume that people often think of economic transactions in both nominal and real terms, and that the monetary illusion arises from the interaction between these representations, resulting in a bias towards nominal valuation. Key Points The money illusion posits that people tend to view their wealth and income in nominal dollar terms rather than recognizing their true value when adjusted for inflation. [Sources: 5, 7]

The illusion of money is a psychological problem because people are biased and think in name rather than actual monetary value, because it may indicate the illusion of higher purchasing power. The monetary illusion is an economic theory that assumes that people tend to view their wealth and income in nominal dollars rather than actual values. Currency illusion, also known as price illusion, is an economic theory that states that people tend to view their income and wealth in name rather than reality. However, although they can distinguish between surface value and actual value, why they suffer from the illusion of money has not been well debated. [Sources: 0, 5, 8, 12]

The tendency to think in terms of the face value of a coin, without taking into account changes in its real value, underlies the phenomenon known as money illusion (MI). It is sometimes said that employers take advantage of this by modestly raising wages in nominal terms without paying more in real terms. Although it is impossible to give an answer about the existence or absence of MI and about determining the speed of propagation in a given economic context, the impact on the economy resulting from the effects of the money illusion, it is undeniable that the decisions made by the agents are equally important. Economic depends largely on the ability / ability to distinguish between nominal and real value. [Sources: 2, 5]

In particular, in an environment where economic entities are prone to currency illusions, the decline in inflation may lead to the impact of rising housing prices. Some people disagree with this theory, believing that people will automatically consider their money in actual value to adapt to inflation, because they will see price changes every time they walk into the store. Another way to think about the concept of monetary illusion is to assume that people do not consider the effects of inflation. Inflation is an economic concept, which refers to the increase in the level of commodity prices over a period of time. [Sources: 0, 2, 5]

In Monetary Illusion and Housing Madness, economists Brunnermeier and Juilliard examined the relationship between property values ​​and inflation by compiling price-rent ratios and identifying an adequate measure of mispricing in the real estate market. The increase in the nominal amount of money creates the illusion that you have become richer. These phenomena exacerbate a lack of information about how much our incomes need to grow to stay flat, creating further negative bias in how we value ourselves. The illusion of money is prized by entrepreneurs and economists precisely because it is dangerous for people: it allows employers to “appear” to be increasing wages to workers, when in fact they may or may not pay the same once, which takes inflation into account. [Sources: 2, 6, 9]

This is a constant occurrence, even for highly capable people such as professional investors, and causes significant cumulative nominal inertia. In investment, higher inflation makes people less afraid of losing money, as they tend to value losses in nominal terms. The money illusion is a key concept that Milton Friedman included in his version of the Phillips curve. The Phillips curve is a graphical representation of the short-term relationship between unemployment and inflation in an economy, which is one of the economic tools that describe the inverse relationship. between unemployment and inflation. Fischer concluded that people think of their wealth in nominal terms and not in reality, which creates a false sense of security for personal wealth. [Sources: 0, 8, 10]

If we think about money in nominal terms and are attached to the past, we will underestimate ourselves. There are many possible psychological biases that confuse economic agents in their decisions when they are made through the veil of money. If this is not corrected for inflation, more and more people will be attracted to the system over time. Thus, we confuse the nominal value of money with its purchasing power. [Sources: 2, 6, 9, 10]

No one seems to realize that with the existing formula, older people have achieved what can be described as unjustifiable adjustments to their benefits, measured in real rather than nominal terms. For example, prior to the 1980s, income tax thresholds were not indexed, with the result that when inflation increased the nominal incomes of people, they were automatically transferred to higher tax categories and the income went to the treasury, without which no one particularly complained. Suppose you invested a certain amount of money in stocks, say 1,000. As a result, many people who receive a wage increase believe that their wealth will increase regardless of the actual rate of inflation. [Sources: 6, 9, 10]

This shows that people are very willing to accept data that supports their biased bubble theory. A basic principle of economics is that people always like wider opportunities. Now, of course, just because most people believe in bubbles even if they do not exist, there is no evidence that they do not exist. Research has shown that even in data generated following a random walk, people will see bubbles. [Sources: 4, 11]

However, I will make some positive suggestions in terms of economic policy and economic research. The British economist John Maynard Keynes was praised for helping popularize the term. I wrote a series of posts saying that people are programmed to look for patterns that don’t exist. [Sources: 4, 5, 11]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/economics/money-illusion/

[1]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2951239

[2]: https://www.bankpedia.org/index_voce.php?lingua=en&i_id=114&i_alias=m&c_id=23294-money-illusion-encyclopedia

[3]: https://www.yourdictionary.com/money-illusion

[4]: https://www.themoneyillusion.com/confirmation-bias-and-bubbles/

[5]: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/money_illusion.asp

[6]: https://breakingdownfinance.com/finance-topics/behavioral-finance/money-illusion/

[7]: https://collaborate.princeton.edu/en/publications/money-illusion-3

[8]: https://doaj.org/article/8dddc71b7bb54192be4a0f2d7e81e7fb

[9]: https://www.stayingeven.com/what-are-money-illusion-and-anchoring

[10]: https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/money-illusion-the-chained-cpi-and-the-benefits-of-inflation/

[11]: https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/222009

[12]: https://policonomics.com/money-illusion/

Individual differences in almost every aspect of inner feelings related to hunger, satiety, and thirst are documented, including how participants use, prioritize, and integrate instinct, motivation, emotion, and cognitive information. These results, combined with recent advances in our understanding of how the brain works,3 indicate the need for a better understanding of how individual differences interact with the key processes behind interception. In summary, these results indicate that the effect of interception on self-awareness may exceed its known effects on emotion and phenomenon awareness, and the awareness of the inner receptive body may be the core of self-awareness. Because interception is necessary for the experience. A unified, non-empty self and its stability, because interception can offset the influence of changes in external sensory signals. This would be useful because current methods of assessing consciousness are almost entirely focused on responses to external stimuli, and the integration of internal and external sensations can provide a way to assess the external and internal perception aspects of self-related consciousness. [Sources: 0, 4, 6, 12]

There is a lack of evidence to show that there is a relationship between our ERP effect and the participants’ introductory abilities during the internal attention period. This is inconsistent with the previous evidence that the HEP response is regulated by the fidelity of introductory perception (Schandry et al., the perception of heart rate can be seen For the difference in our fidelity), the expected accuracy and inner perception consciousness will similarly regulate the inner perception prediction mechanism. However, we found that there is no relationship between introductory abilities and the differences in HEP ​​observed in our tasks. This explanation is consistent with the hypothesis proposed by Garfinkel et al. [4] The relative balance between accuracy, sensitivity, and consciousness can explain the cognitive, emotional, and clinical associations of internal perception. [Sources: 2, 12]

As expected, the emotional changes of the endosensory signals captured by the endosensory evaluation are only related to the anxiety after the suppression of the anterior insula. Here, we use this effect to determine whether it can be used to identify people who are most likely to respond subjectively to unexpected intracompetence. After high DIF participants consumed glucose (sweetness provides calories) or low DIF participants, the same effect was not observed (Figure. Interestingly, random emotional states and anxiety did not relieve them of hunger, interception, CRT Situational judgments where there is a lack of correlation between performance and morality. [Sources: 0, 2, 11]

The insignificant relationship between hunger / thirst and moral judgment has not been investigated for the mitigating effects of emotional states. An unexpected and new finding in this study was that hunger bias had a unique influence on judgments about the acceptability of unfavorable harmful actions, whereas “intuitive” decision-making tendencies only predicted judgments about the adequacy of harm. In line with previous research, physiological changes associated with hunger conditions can affect how seriously we judge the acceptability of moral disturbances from an allocentric point of view (Vicario et al., 2018), but the exclusivity of this effect for harmful actions is not profitable. … a new discovery for dealing with moral dilemmas based on harm. [Sources: 3, 11]

This suggests that hunger can have a unique effect on the judgments of allocentrists about disadvantageous harmful actions. Continuing with previous work, we investigated whether the roles of hunger, interoceptive process, and emotional state were equally related to moral appropriateness (egocentrism) and moral acceptability (allocentric) of harm judgments. The hunger bias, independent of IS and emotional state, influenced unfavorable judgments about the acceptability of harmful actions. [Sources: 3, 11]

An important observation in the present study was that after participants consumed the congruent sensory drink, the discrepancy in satiety (SD) and the expected confidence in satiety (ESC) were inversely related to the correlation between changes in hunger and changes in glycemia (interoceptive coherence; CI) ( Table 1). [Sources: 0]

Therefore, although the subjective state of hunger and thirst will affect moral decision-making due to the physical experience that usually accompanies them, individual differences in internal sensitivity are likely to determine how these internal states are transformed into psychological and emotional states. The tendency to focus on gut sensation, internal sensory sensitivity (IS), and emotional and physiological states associated with visceral states may be important in the relationship between hunger, thirst, and moral judgment. Although several states of internal feeling can affect digestion (for example, body temperature, fatigue, stress, excitement), hunger, satiety, and thirst may be the most important (it should be noted that drinking has a significant effect on energy intake) Contributions; for example, De Ruyter, Katan, Kuijper, Liem, and Olthof, 2013; De Ruyter, Olthof, Seidell, and Katan, 2012). Hunger and thirst are two daily internal competencies, especially many studies have shown that hunger affects moral decision-making. [Sources: 3, 4, 11]

Emotional states are fundamentally related to internal feeling processes and hunger (Macht and Simons, 2000; Barrett, 2016; MacCormack and Lindquist, 2016) and can influence moral judgments (for example, Valdesolo and Desteno, 2006; Zhang et al., 2017b). Some theories believe that emotions and self-awareness stem from the integration of internal and external signals and their corresponding weighted expectations. From this perspective, interception is not a pure bottom-up process; it mainly involves the brain’s prediction of the internal state of the body. Active reasoning is not only suitable for the evaluation and control of external states, but also for the evaluation and control of internal sensory flow (for example, 2019; Pezzulo, 2013; Pezzulo et al., 2018b, 2015b; G. Pezzulo et al., 2018). (Seth, 2013 ) And the occurrence of pathological conditions (Barrett et al., 2016; Friston et al., 2014; Murphy et al., 2017; Paulus et al., 2019a; Quadt et al., 2018). [Sources: 8, 11, 12]

This may have more to do with the effects of interoceptive metacognition and interoceptive sensitivity and their relationship with the effects of ACI, since there is sufficient evidence for the laterality of the hemispheres of emotion processing and cognitive functions, as well as interhemispheric interactions [72]. Our results strongly suggest that cTBS is an effective tool for exploring neural networks that support communication processes. These same cortical centers also facilitate the integration of intrinsic sensory information into states of attraction (eg, pain, sex, hunger, thirst) and emotion (Harshaw, 2014). [Sources: 2, 4]

Thus, individual differences in IAC accuracy can be explained by variations in the “accuracy” with which interoceptive signals from within the body are presented (Fotopoulou, 2013; Friston, 2010; Seth, 2013), and this accuracy-dependent reporting may also explain the effect that levels IAcc can have exteroceptive self-presentation. An alternative prediction, motivated by how interception is conceptualized here, argues that understanding others requires a “good enough” (that is, accurate) representation of our (interoceptive) states, because a key element in representing other states is our understanding of how their states affect. on us. For example, decisions should not be influenced by the order in which cases are presented, or whether the judge is tired or hungry. [Sources: 1, 6]

However, judges have been shown to exhibit the same errors and biases as other people (e.g. Englich, Mussweiler & Strack, 2006; Guthrie, Rachlinski & Wistrich, 2000, 2007). Bias can be applied in any situation where people are making consistent decisions, such as medical advice, college admissions, or grant review committees. One chance for parole hinges on the last time the trial judge takes a break, say researchers who have studied Israeli court decisions. As judges get tired and hungry, the researchers say they lean toward the simpler option of not taking probation. [Sources: 1, 5]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-89417-8

[1]: http://journal.sjdm.org/16/16823/jdm16823.html

[2]: https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2016.0016

[3]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7530233/

[4]: https://docksci.com/individual-differences-in-the-interoceptive-states-of-hunger-fullness-and-thirst_5a3adea1d64ab287ada0b597.html

[5]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hungry-judges-dispense-rough-justice/

[6]: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/17470218.2016.1181768

[7]: https://www.nationalaffairs.com/blog/detail/findings-a-daily-roundup/felt-something

[8]: https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13415-020-00777-6

[9]: https://molecularbrain.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13041-020-00674-6

[10]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungry_judge_effect

[11]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02261/full

[12]: https://academic.oup.com/cercorcomms/article/1/1/tgaa060/5900217

Missing data can be a major cause of misrepresentation, whereby certain groups of people are more likely to have missing data. This can lead to biased decisions as you do not take into account all the necessary information. This makes confirmation bias a potentially serious problem that must be overcome when a statistically based decision is to be made. As we showed above, confirmation bias occurs when you seek information that supports your existing beliefs and reject data that goes against what you believe. [Sources: 0, 6]

This bias is the tendency to jump to conclusions, that is, to base the final judgment on information obtained at the beginning of the decision-making process. Thus, you interpret market information in such a way as to confirm your biases – instead of seeing them objectively – and, therefore, make the wrong decisions. Background and History Confirmation bias is an example of how people sometimes process information in an illogical and distorted way. [Sources: 4, 6]

The process of making decisions and processing information by people is often biased, because people simply interpret information from their point of view. People need to make sense of information quickly, and it takes time to form new explanations or beliefs. We have adapted to take the path of least resistance, often out of necessity. [Sources: 4, 5]

In life, we often face situations where we need to make decisions under imperfect information, and we unknowingly rely on prejudice or prejudice. In this book, Kahneman reveals some of the most common biases we face when making decisions. Cognitive Bias and Bad Decisions-This Atlantic article explores the way the human brain tricks itself into making wrong decisions based on information based on bias. [Sources: 1, 7]

Bias Information Handbook-Bias Detection-This interesting resource from the University of Wisconsin Green Bay covers topics related to information bias, including how to research and test the authenticity and content of opinions. In this article, we will examine common types of biases and outline what you can do to avoid them. In the past 6 years, cognitive science, social psychology, and behavioral economics research on human judgment and decision-making has revealed a series of constantly changing cognitive biases. [Sources: 1, 6, 9]

Cognitive bias is an unconscious thinking error that leads to misunderstanding of external information and affects the rationality and accuracy of decision-making and judgment. Cognitive bias is the limitation of objective thinking caused by the tendency of the human brain to perceive information through personal experience and preference filtering. When we receive approximately 11 million bits of information per second, the brain’s attempts to simplify information processing often lead to cognitive biases, but we can only process approximately 40 bits of information per second (Orzan et al., 2012). This is because you are using a sophisticated cognitive machine to analyze information, which also processes every experience in your life. [Sources: 3, 9, 12]

These biases affect the information you look at, what you remember about past decisions, and the sources you choose to trust when looking for options. These biases distort thinking, influence beliefs, and influence the decisions and judgments people make every day. Many researchers speculate that unconscious bias occurs automatically when the brain makes quick judgments based on past and background experience. [Sources: 2, 3, 15]

Psychological prejudice is contrary to common sense and clear and balanced judgment. Cognitive errors in the way people process and analyze information can lead to unreasonable decisions, which can negatively affect business or investment decisions. Unlike emotional prejudice, cognitive errors have nothing to do with emotions, but are more related to the way the human brain has evolved. [Sources: 6, 11]

Again, these biases appear to simplify the complex world and make information processing faster and easier. The main types of information bias include misclassification bias, observer bias, memory bias and signal bias. This may be a mistake in observational research, especially retrospective research, but it can also affect experimental research. [Sources: 0, 12]

More generally, deviations refer to any deviations in the process of data collection, analysis, interpretation, and release that lead to conclusions that systematically underestimate or overestimate the truth between a specific exposure and a specific disease or any other result. Relationship [2]. Bias is any error caused by the method that researchers use to recruit researchers, factors that affect participation in the study (selection bias), or systematic bias in the collection of exposure and disease information (information bias). Information bias refers to any systematic deviation from the truth that results from collecting, recalling, recording, and managing information (including how to deal with missing data) in research. [Sources: 0, 14]

On the other hand, bias or bias reflects a problem in the validity of the study and arises from any bias caused by the methods used by the researcher in selecting subjects for the study, factors affecting participation in the study (selection bias), or bias in the collection of information about impact and results (information error). Since the selection of participants is not random, the credibility of the research can be compromised as a result. Selection bias occurs due to any selection bias in research participants and / or factors that influence participation in the research. This bias occurs when a researcher decides what type of person or the number of persons to participate in the research. [Sources: 10, 14]

Once an opinion is formed, new information obtained in litigation is likely to be processed in accordance with confirmation bias, which could lead to unfair verdicts. Importance Confirmation bias is important because it can cause people to forcibly hold false beliefs or give more weight to information that supports their beliefs than the evidence supports. Confirmation bias causes people to ignore or deny information that is contrary to their beliefs. Confirmation bias, in which people seek information to support existing beliefs, discarding or discarding information that might contradict them. [Sources: 3, 4, 11]

This prejudice is difficult to overcome, but actively seeking conflicting information or conflicting opinions can help eliminate it. This biased decision-making method is largely unintentional and often leads to conflicting information being ignored. This prejudice is based on seeking or reassessing information that confirms our beliefs or expectations (Edgar and Edgar, 2016; Nixon, 1998). By interacting with people they believe to have certain personalities, they will ask questions of those who prejudice the beliefs of the recipient. [Sources: 4, 7, 11]

People are better able to process information rationally, giving equal weight to multiple points of view if they are emotionally distant from the problem (although low confirmation bias can still occur when the person has no vested interests). [Sources: 4]

Anchor bias is the human tendency to “rely too much on the first information offered when making decisions.” Anchor Offset Anchor Offset is closely related to decision making and occurs when we rely too heavily on pre-existing information or first information (anchor) to make a decision. Once the anchor is established, other judgments are made by moving away from that anchor, and bias arises in interpreting other information around the anchor. Anchoring or focusing Anchoring shifting The tendency to rely too heavily on or “anchor” a line or piece of information when making decisions (this is usually the first information received on this issue). [Sources: 10, 12, 15]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://catalogofbias.org/biases/information-bias/

[1]: https://guides.monroeccc.edu/c.php?g=1129182

[2]: https://www.verywellmind.com/cognitive-biases-distort-thinking-2794763

[3]: https://www.healthline.com/health/mental-health/cognitive-bias

[4]: https://www.britannica.com/science/confirmation-bias

[5]: https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/confirmation-bias/

[6]: https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/avoiding-psychological-bias.htm

[7]: https://positivepsychology.com/cognitive-biases/

[8]: https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/cognitive-biases

[9]: https://www.techtarget.com/searchenterpriseai/definition/cognitive-bias

[10]: https://uxdesign.cc/cognitive-biases-you-need-to-be-familiar-with-as-a-researcher-c482c9ee1d49

[11]: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/022015/how-cognitive-bias-affects-your-business.asp

[12]: https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-bias.html

[13]: https://tactics.convertize.com/definitions/information-bias

[14]: https://www.karger.com/Article/Fulltext/312871

[15]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

Due to exposure of prejudice, people cannot make correct decisions about their emotional reactions to future events. Impact bias is our tendency to overestimate our emotional response to future events. People often overestimate the intensity and duration of their emotional responses to future events. [Sources: 1, 7]

Emotional bias usually occurs spontaneously based on the individual’s personal feelings when making a decision. They can also be deeply rooted in personal experiences that also influence decision-making. Emotional bias is usually not based on broad conceptual reasoning. [Sources: 9]

Cognitive and emotional biases may or may not be effective in influencing decision-making. For example, from a personal perspective, cognitive biases can help people make the best decisions in the face of uncertainty. Generally speaking, although cognitive biases can negatively affect people in different ways, they can also be beneficial in certain situations. In a sense, prejudice is very useful and adaptable. It allows us to use previous knowledge to make new decisions. [Sources: 5, 9, 14]

As we have seen, cognitive biases can be problematic because they can distort our thinking and cause us to make wrong judgments and make wrong decisions. Cognitive bias can be helpful because it doesn’t require a lot of mental effort and allows you to make decisions relatively quickly, but as with conscious bias, unconscious bias can also take the form of harmful bias that harms an individual or group. For example, beliefs about conspiracy theories are often influenced by a wide variety of prejudices. [Sources: 0, 5, 8]

Unfortunately, these biases sometimes cause us to stumble, leading to wrong decisions and wrong judgments. Science has shown that we are prone to make all kinds of mental mistakes called “cognitive biases” that can affect both our thinking and our actions. Hence, cognitive biases make us irrational in how we seek, evaluate, interpret, judge, use, and remember information, and in how we make decisions. Rather, cognitive biases can sometimes positively influence our thought process, which helps us make optimal decisions. [Sources: 3, 5, 8]

Cognitive biases tend to arise at a more basic level of thinking, especially when they are rooted in people’s intuition and can lead to the exploitation of various logical fallacies. People tend to think in a certain way, which can lead to systematic deviations from rational judgment. Cognitive bias is a systematic thinking error that occurs when people process and interpret information in the world around them and influence their decisions and judgments. Cognitive bias is an unconscious error in thinking that leads to misinterpretation of information from the outside world and affects the rationality and accuracy of decisions and judgments. [Sources: 0, 3, 5, 8]

Prejudice distorts our critical thinking and can lead to irrational decisions. Bias distorts and interrupts objective consideration of a problem, introducing influences into decision-making that are separate from the decision itself. In fact, distorted thinking makes it difficult to share accurate information. This may induce us to avoid information that we do not like and not to recognize the information, which may lead to a more accurate result. [Sources: 10, 12]

When we know that there are factors that can change the way we see things, we are more likely to be careful when making judgments or making decisions. This requires careful observation of people and a lot of flexibility in approach and presentation. As a manager, being aware of these biases allows us to think about how we think and reduce the potentially negative impact of these biases. [Sources: 10, 13, 14]

And, just like in hindsight, this bias is associated with a memory error. Explanations Cognitive hindsight bias can result from distorted memories of what we knew or thought we knew before the event occurred (Inman, 2016). [Sources: 0]

Due to various reasons, your way of remembering events may be biased, leading to biases in thinking and decision-making. Retrospective biases can distort memories, make people overconfident, and change their predictions of future events. Generally speaking, prejudice is usually the result of bias in choosing one topic over another. [Sources: 7, 8, 9]

For example, confirmatory bias is a cognitive bias that causes people to seek, prioritize, interpret, and remember information in ways that confirm their pre-existing beliefs. As we showed above, confirmation bias occurs when you seek information that supports your existing beliefs and reject data that goes against what you believe. This can lead to biased decisions as you do not take into account all the necessary information. This makes confirmation bias a potentially serious problem that must be overcome when a statistically based decision is to be made. [Sources: 4, 5]

Ask yourself what makes you react in this way, and if you might have a bias that affects your point of view. Trying to understand a problem from both sides can make you a stronger critical thinker and help you see the world with more empathy. [Sources: 10]

You need to make fair and rational decisions about important things. Do your research, list the pros and cons, consult experts and trusted friends. Only by filtering out the cognitive biases that inevitably occur when making a decision can you be sure that the best decision for you and your employees is based on the best information available. Since ethical decisions are often associated with very high individual and collective interests, analysis of how cognitive biases affect them is expected to produce important results. [Sources: 6, 11, 14]

We believe that discussions about CE will benefit from investigating the role of cognitive bias in judgments about CE and the subsequent development of methods that help people make less biased judgments about significant issues. Within this new perspective, we hope that future research can develop this hypothesis and develop effective imbalance techniques that can help increase the rationality of public debate on CE and thus improve our ethical decisions. Research on cognitive biases affecting human judgment has primarily been applied to the field of economic decision making. Key Points Identifying and understanding unprofitable cognitive and emotional biases can help a trader increase his overall profit. [Sources: 9, 11]

In the workplace, unconscious bias may be reflected in business processes such as recruitment and performance analysis, causing decision makers to unfairly benefit some people and disadvantage others. In this article, we will study common types of biases and outline what you can do to avoid them. Psychologists Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovich, and Amos Tversky introduced the concept of psychological prejudice in the early 1970s. They explained that psychological bias—also called cognitive bias—is the tendency to make illogical decisions or behaviors. [Sources: 4, 14]

In one study, researchers provided feedback and information to help participants understand these biases and how they influence decisions. Since then, researchers have described a number of different types of biases that affect decision-making in a wide range of areas, including social behavior, cognition, behavioral economics, education, management, healthcare, business, and finance. Decision making is inherently a cognitive activity, the result of thinking, which can be rational or irrational (i.e. based on unconfirmed hypotheses). [Sources: 8, 12]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-bias.html

[1]: https://reflectd.co/2013/12/01/the-impact-bias-this-is-why-we-overestimate-the-emotional-impact-of-future-events/

[2]: https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Impact+Bias

[3]: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/every-single-cognitive-bias/

[4]: https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/avoiding-psychological-bias.htm

[5]: https://effectiviology.com/cognitive-biases/

[6]: https://www.healthline.com/health/mental-health/cognitive-bias

[7]: https://www.spring.org.uk/2021/08/cognitive-biases.php

[8]: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-cognitive-bias-2794963

[9]: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/051613/behavioral-bias-cognitive-vs-emotional-bias-investing.asp

[10]: https://www.betterup.com/blog/cognitive-bias

[11]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnsys.2014.00195/full

[12]: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-management/chapter/barriers-to-decision-making/

[13]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/cognitive-bias

[14]: https://blue-sky.co.uk/blog/how-do-cognitive-biases-impact-the-workplace/

First, we often distort their memory of past events by selectively recalling information that confirms what we already know. Second, when people find it easy to think and understand past judgments or events (previous thoughts), they may confuse ease with self-confidence. [Sources: 13]

It includes the tendency of people to assume that they know the outcome of an event after the outcome has been determined. After an incident, people usually think that they know the result before it actually happens. This is why the phenomenon of “I have always known” is often mentioned. [Sources: 11]

We talk about this as a limitation of our learning because we tend to believe after the fact that we always knew something. Hence, retrospective knowledge distorts our perception of what we remember knowing in anticipation. In addition, to the extent that different event data differ in support of an actual outcome, evidence consistent with a known outcome may become more cognitively meaningful and therefore more memory accessible. [Sources: 6, 8]

The essence of understanding the knowledge of the result is to rethink the processes and conditions that led to the reported event. After the event has occurred, we use knowledge of the outcome as an anchor to link our previous judgments to the outcome. According to this explanation, knowledge of the outcome of an event functions as an anchor by which people interpret their previous judgments about the likelihood of events. This can lead people to conclude that they can accurately predict other events. [Sources: 6, 12]

Hindsight bias occurs when people feel that they “always know everything,” that is, when they believe that an event is more predictable after it is known than it was before it was known. Retrospective bias can distort memories of what a person knew or believed before an event occurred, and is a significant source of overconfidence in a person’s ability to predict the outcome of future events. The term bias refers to the tendency of people to view events as more predictable than they actually are. [Sources: 5, 10, 11]

Before an event takes place, although you can guess the outcome, there is really no way of knowing exactly what will happen. Having learned the result, the person will exaggerate the extent to which he predicted the result. These biases can be found in almost any situation, including the weather forecast or elections. [Sources: 11, 12]

Flashback bias stems from (a) cognitive input (people selectively recall information that is consistent with what they now believe to be real information, and participate in meaning creation to understand their knowledge), (b) metacognitive input (they understand The ease of use) past results may be incorrectly attributed to their perceived prior possibilities) and (c) motivational input (people should treat the world as orderly and predictable, and avoid blaming problems). Retrospective bias, also known as the effect phenomenon [1] or creeping determinism [2], is a general trend that people believe that past events are more predictable than actual conditions. Hindsight is our tendency to look back at unpredictable events at the time and believe that the results are easy to predict. Incidents occurred one after another, and hindsight prejudice made us think that even if we were not sure before the incident, we had predicted the outcome. [Sources: 2, 5, 10, 13]

Therefore, if we feel that we already knew what should have happened from the very beginning, we cannot carefully analyze the result (or the cause of the result). This can give the person the idea that the outcome of the event was inevitable and that nothing could have prevented it. First of all, the person believes that he or she thought that the event would happen (memory distortion), and then, in hindsight, is able to determine the factors that determined that it should have happened (inevitable). Research has shown that in tightly controlled situations, people tend to use inevitability as a coping mechanism (I never got a chance). [Sources: 2, 10, 12]

This creates overconfidence in its ability to predict other future events and can lead to unnecessary risks. Surprise affects the differences in prediction and retrospective in temporal estimates of animated car accidents. [Sources: 5, 12]

In order to understand how a person can easily change the knowledge and belief basis of an event after receiving new information, three cognitive models of hindsight bias are studied. Rose and Boos believe that, from the basic memory process to higher-level reasoning and beliefs, there are three levels of hindsight bias between each other. [Sources: 4, 10]

In this sense, it can be predicted that children who exhibit less retrospective bias should be more able to suppress or postpone their knowledge in the context of the false belief task, allowing them to believe that someone else (or their former self) may have had a false belief. about the situation. This combination of factors may cause older children and adults to access deeply ingrained past beliefs that contradict current reality (success on tasks with false beliefs) while continuing to do poorly on assignments in hindsight. We found that retrospective analyzes were less biased if reasons were given and if correct information was provided earlier. [Sources: 0, 3]

In order to test the relationship between hindsight bias and ToM more conservatively, we performed a multi-level regression on age, language ability, executive function (card sorting, day/night, and working memory), and finally hindsight bias (discrete and continuous). ). Hindsight bias, real object hindsight bias) to predict ToM performance. Our Real Object Hindsight business is related to Computer Hindsight business, and both are related to ToM testing. Although both of these skills are related to performing ToM tasks, only the second skill is related to performing standard retrospective analysis tasks (adults understand that the brain can distort reality). Brain interruptions in certain areas of the brain can also affect a person’s thinking process, which may cause hindsight. [Sources: 3, 10]

When the jury believes that the outcome of a particular act is more likely to occur “reasonably” after knowing the outcome, it believes that the defendant can know more than they knew at the time of the litigation, thus preventing the “bad” outcome. New techniques for visualizing and understanding data sets may have undesirable consequences that increase hindsight bias, but interventions that induce people to consider alternative causal explanations for a given result can reduce hindsight bias. Obstacles to accurate clinical judgment and possible ways to minimize its impact. [Sources: 5, 6]

Pillemer, D.B., Goldsmith, L.R., Panther, A.T., White, S. (1988). MPTs have been used to investigate a wide range of issues in cognitive and social psychology, such as source monitoring (Batchalder & Riefer, 1990; Batchelder, Riefer, & Hu, 1994; Bayen, Murnane, & Erdfelder, 1996; Klauer & Ehrenberg, 2005; Klauer & Meiser 2000), social categorization (Klauer & Wegener, 1998), illusory truth (Begg, Anas & Farinacci, 1992), retrospective bias (Erdfelder & Buchner, 1998), gender bias (Buchner & Wippich, 1996), age-related false memories (Jacoby, Bishara, Hessels, & Toth, 2005), stereotypes (Meiser & Hewstone, 2004), and propositional reasoning (Klauer & Oberauer, 1995); Oberauer, 2006) and many others. This section of the chapter is not intended to provide a complete list of MPTs that have been applied to conflict response problems, or even a complete discussion of the MPTs described here. [Sources: 5, 15]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03197054

[1]: https://www.psychologytools.com/resource/hindsight-bias/

[2]: https://boycewire.com/hindsight-bias-definition-and-examples/

[3]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649066/

[4]: https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/i-knew-it-all-along-didnt-i-understanding-hindsight-bias.html

[5]: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691612454303

[6]: https://fs.blog/what-is-hindsight-bias/

[7]: https://www.nirandfar.com/hindsight-bias/

[8]: https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/trading-investing/hindsight-bias/

[9]: https://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-hindsight-bias.html

[10]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias

[11]: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-hindsight-bias-2795236

[12]: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hindsight-bias.asp

[13]: https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/hindsight-bias/

[14]: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20190430-how-hindsight-bias-skews-your-judgement

[15]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/hindsight-bias

The “hard-easy effect” is a known cognitive bias in self-confidence calibration that refers to the tendency to overestimate the likelihood of success in difficult perceived tasks and underestimate it in easily perceived tasks. Moreover, we found that the phenomenon of the “simple versus complex” phenomenon follows the phenomenon of overconfidence bias. While there is strong evidence of bias in judgment, it seems unlikely that they fully explain the systematic nature of the effect. Few studies have tried to determine the cause of the “hard-to-easy” effect, but it may also be related to another cognitive bias – cycling. [Sources: 1, 2, 4, 6]

Thus, if lottery X promises high stakes, all above or equal to the external milestone, then the agent tends to be uncertain about easy-to-understand tasks and overly trust tasks that are perceived as difficult. Most people who study the hard / easy effect assume that it is due to other biases. Target. This article attempts to investigate how the overconfidence bias affects the forecast accuracy of financial market participants based on the concept of an easy and easy effect of overconfidence research. [Sources: 4, 7, 8]

Thus, if lottery X promises negative results that are less than or equal to the external control point m, then the agent is prone to low confidence in hard-to-understand tasks and over-confidence in easily-perceived tasks. Cognitive biases range from the tripping effect – where truths are accepted because even a large number of people accept them – to confirmation bias – where people believe information that confirms what they think or believe. The cyclist describes our tendency to spend a disproportionate amount of time on daily activities. Many studies have shown that overconfidence is one of the cognitive biases that prevent people from making such decisions. [Sources: 2, 3, 4, 7]

The relationships between country, gender, science education, cognitive bias, and self-confidence bias are discussed. We need to examine these biases to overcome them and make sure we think as clearly and critically as possible when it comes to decision making and information processing. We can also get to know them and even appreciate that we have at least some ability to process the universe with our own mysterious brain. While it is impossible to list all the potential cognitive biases in every life decision, there are actions you can take to train our brains to cope with these phenomena on a more general level. [Sources: 2, 3, 11]

If you visit this page from time to time to refresh your mind, the spacing effect will help highlight some of these thought patterns to keep our prejudices and naive realism in check. Thinking that you are rational despite the obvious irrationality of others is also known as the blind spot bias. Some things that we recall later make all of the above systems more biased and more detrimental to our mental processes. During the experiment, the authors measure and record the accuracy of the participants’ predictions and their individual level of confidence. [Sources: 8, 10, 11]

While the latter is by far the more difficult task, you will eventually have to do it, and you won’t be given the task if you can’t complete it completely. Becoming that “thought leader”, if you will, is beneficial in many ways, including being able to gain the trust of those with whom you want to communicate and authority in the space in which you gained your experience. [Sources: 3]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095920413

[1]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597896900746

[2]: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1207685

[3]: https://www.verizon.com/business/small-business-essentials/resources/learning-learn-fighting-cognitive-biases-030221622/

[4]: https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/hard-easy-effect/

[5]: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Naive-empiricism-and-dogmatism-in-confidence-a-of-Juslin-Winman/3e195dae70996ff707ffeaa2941b4ab057219d03

[6]: https://www.springerprofessional.de/en/a-target-based-foundation-for-the-hard-easy-effect-bias/11035798

[7]: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-46319-3_41

[8]: https://ro.uow.edu.au/buspapers/1601/

[9]: https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Hard-Easy+Effect

[10]: https://www.businessinsider.com/cognitive-biases-2015-10

[11]: https://betterhumans.pub/cognitive-bias-cheat-sheet-55a472476b18

Belief bias An effect whereby someone’s assessment of the logical strength of an argument is influenced by the validity of an inference. Tripping effect The tendency to do (or believe) something because many other people do (or believe) the same thing. Researchers or expectations bias. The tendency of experimenters to believe, validate, and publish data that are consistent with their expectations for an experimental outcome, and not believe, reject, or downgrade appropriate weights for data that appear to contradict those expectations. [Sources: 9]

Module function attribution is incorrect. In human-computer interaction-people tend to have system errors when interacting with robots. Humans’ expectations and perceptions of robots may be based on their appearance (shape) and attribute functions, which do not necessarily reflect the true functions of the robot. It believes that humans expect and perceive robots based on their shape and functional attributes, and these attributes do not necessarily reflect the true functions of the robot. [Sources: 1, 9]

The term shape function attribution bias (FFAB) refers to the cognitive bias that occurs when humans are prone to perceptual errors, resulting in a skewed interpretation of the robot’s functionality. We argue that instead of objectively perceiving the capabilities of robots, humans choose a cognitive label using information available to them through visual perception. These cognitive biases often determine how a person interacts with the world around them. In the business world, understanding these biases and understanding how they affect your behavior is critical to becoming a better manager. [Sources: 1, 7]

Basic attribution error is a kind of cognitive bias that causes people to underestimate the influence of contextual factors on human behavior and overestimate the influence of personality tendency factors. The final attribution error is cognitive bias, which makes people more likely to attribute positive behaviors to the situational factors performed by someone in the external group rather than someone in the internal group. It also makes people more likely to attribute the negative The behavior is attributed to negative behavior. The tendency factor when it is executed by someone in the external group rather than by someone in the internal group. The asymmetry of attribution between the subject and the observer is a kind of cognitive bias, which causes people to attribute their own behavior to situational reasons and the behavior of others to character factors. [Sources: 0]

Selfish bias refers to people’s tendency to attribute success to internal factors and failure to external factors. If a person uses selfish prejudice, attribute the positive things to oneself, and attribute the negative side to external forces, it will help them maintain positive self-esteem and self-esteem. [Sources: 3, 4]

For example, you might encourage the person exhibiting this bias to think about similar situations in which they behaved like the person they are judging due to situational factors. In other words, people have a cognitive bias in believing that a person’s actions depend on the “type” of that person, and not on the social forces and environmental factors that affect him. Jones and Harris (1967) hypothesized that people would attribute overtly freely chosen behavior to a predisposition (personality) and overtly random directional behavior to a situation. [Sources: 0, 6]

The theory was formed as a comprehensive explanation of how people interpret the foundations of behavior in human interactions; however, there have been studies that point to cultural differences in attribution biases between people of eastern collectivist societies and western individualist societies. Given these large differences in the weight given to internal and external attribution, it is not surprising that people in collectivist cultures tend to exhibit fundamental attribution error and comparison bias less frequently than in individualistic cultures, especially when situational causes of behavior are created. outstanding (Choi, Nisbett & Norenzayan, 1999). Fundamental attribution error (also known as matching bias or over-attribution effect) is the tendency for people to over-emphasize dispositional or personal explanations for observed behavior in others, while underestimating situational explanations. [Sources: 4, 5, 6]

In social psychology, attribution is the process of establishing the causes of events or behavior. In real life, attribution is something we all do every day, usually without realizing the underlying processes and biases that lead to our conclusions. For example, over the course of a typical day, you are likely to repeatedly ascribe to yourself your own behavior and the behavior of those around you. [Sources: 8]

This is also due to what the researchers found in these studies that selfish bias is influenced by a person’s age and whether they are trying to attribute success or failure. Other Factors That May Determine Male and Selfish Bias in Female This is not only because conflicting results have been obtained with gender differences in attribution. [Sources: 3]

External attributes are attributes attributed to situational power, while internal attributes are attributed to personal characteristics and traits. The second form of group attribution bias is closely related to basic attribution errors, because people begin to attribute group behaviors and attitudes to everyone in these groups, regardless of the degree of disagreement or decision-making methods within the group. Like selfish prejudice, group attribution can also have a self-improvement function, making people feel better by creating favorable explanations for their behavior within the group. People in these communities recognize that individual behavior is intertwined with the larger whole. [Sources: 3, 5, 8]

Attribution theory also provides explanations for why different people may interpret the same event differently, and what factors contribute to attribution bias. In psychology, attribution bias or attribution bias is a cognitive bias that refers to systematic errors that people make when people evaluate or try to find reasons for their own or other behavior. It is important to note that such methods are primarily intended for people who inadvertently exhibit a fundamental attribution error, such as cognitive bias. [Sources: 0, 4]

Each of these biases describes a specific tendency that people show when reasoning about the reasons for different behaviors. The researchers speculate that bias bias leads people to mistakenly believe that victims should have been able to predict future events and then take steps to avoid them. Hindsight bias This is sometimes called the “knew it all” effect — the tendency to view past events as predictably as they happened. Research has shown that there is a link between hostile attribution bias and aggression, so people who are more likely to interpret other people’s behavior as hostile are also more likely to behave aggressively. [Sources: 4, 8, 9]

Hostile attributions of intent are discussed in relation to the development and maintenance of aggressive behavior in children over thirty. When it comes to other people, we tend to attribute reasons to intrinsic factors, such as personality characteristics, and ignore or minimize extrinsic variables. This error is closely related to another attribution trend, matching bias, which occurs when we attribute behavior to the intrinsic characteristics of people, even in very limited situations. The differences in attribution made in the two situations were remarkable. [Sources: 2, 5, 8]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://effectiviology.com/fundamental-attribution-error/

[1]: https://waseda.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/ffab-the-form-function-attribution-bias-in-human-robot-interactio

[2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359178917302720

[3]: https://www.healthline.com/health/self-serving-bias

[4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_bias

[5]: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-social-psychology/chapter/biases-in-attribution/

[6]: https://www.simplypsychology.org/fundamental-attribution.html

[7]: https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/the-fundamental-attribution-error

[8]: https://www.verywellmind.com/attribution-social-psychology-2795898

[9]: https://uxinlux.github.io/cognitive-biases/

While these studies do well show that in such experimental paradigms, intimidating people often exaggerate the risk of adverse events, it is less clear whether this skewed risk perception is (a) related to fear-related stimuli or (b) related to unpleasant consequences that can to have such a meeting. In addition, it is unclear whether distorted risk perceptions are specific to individual fear or generalized to all negative events. In an online survey (N = 630), we assessed the perceived risk of facing stimuli related to fear and expectations of negative outcomes from such encounters. [Sources: 9]

Dissociation between covariance bias and expectation bias for fear-related stimuli. Bias in anticipation of threat and outcome of treatment in patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia. Perceptual confirmation bias The tendency of expectations to influence perception. [Sources: 9, 11]

Confirmation bias, the tendency to process information by seeking or interpreting information in accordance with existing beliefs. This biased approach to decision-making is largely unintentional and often results in conflicting information being ignored. Existing beliefs can include expectations in a given situation and predictions about a particular outcome. [Sources: 0]

By interacting with people who, in their opinion, have certain personalities, they will ask questions to those people who biasedly support the beliefs of the recipients. Additionally, by treating someone as expected, that person may inadvertently alter their behavior to meet expectations, thereby providing additional support for the confirmation bias on the part of the perceiver. Defeat can be encouraged by using absolute words such as “always” or “never” to create anticipatory bias. Exaggerating these offsets can cause a switching bias or a change in the direction of the association (for example, a true OR> 1 becomes <1) .2 There are several classifications of bias. [Sources: 0, 4, 6]

Sometimes the term bias is also used to refer to a mechanism that causes a lack of intrinsic confidence.1 Errors can be classified according to the direction of change they cause in a parameter (eg, odds ratio (OR)). Offset to zero or negative bias gives estimates that are close to zero (for example, OR is lower and closer to 1), while deviations from zero bias give opposite and higher estimates than true ones. This bias occurs in longitudinal studies that analyze the underlying definitions of a continuous variable (eg, diastolic blood pressure (DBP)) for an outcome (eg, stroke). [Sources: 6]

There is no bias in a matched study with a matched analysis if the risks of exposure-induced disease are constant over time and there are no sociable, select individuals from more than one case. The frequency of exposure is higher than expected in the control group, resulting in zero bias. [Sources: 6]

A study that looked at the two biases together showed that biases associated with meeting and outcome were correlated, meaning that arachnophobic women overestimated the risk of spiders in the room, and also exaggerated the likelihood of negative consequences of this meeting. [Sources: 9]

Confirmation bias also manifests itself in the tendency of people to look for positive examples. Importance Confirmation bias is important because it can cause people to forcibly hold false beliefs or give more weight to information that supports their beliefs than the evidence supports. Confirmation Bias Confirmation Bias A tendency to seek, interpret, focus, and remember information in a way that confirms your biases. [Sources: 0, 11]

Confirmation bias React to rebuttal evidence by reinforcing previous beliefs. Observer Expectation Confirmation Bias Effect When a researcher expects a certain outcome and then unconsciously manipulates the experiment or misinterprets the data to find it (see also “Object Expectation Effect”). Researchers or expectations bias. The tendency of experimenters to believe, validate, and publish data that are consistent with their expectations for an experimental outcome, and not believe, reject, or downgrade appropriate weights for data that appear to contradict those expectations. Researchers or expectations bias. The tendency of experimenters to believe, confirm, and publish data that are consistent with their expectations for experimental results, and to disbelieve, reject, or downgrade appropriate weights for data that appear to contradict those expectations. [Sources: 2, 8, 11]

Result deviation judges the tendency of a decision based on the final result of the decision rather than the quality of the decision. Exaggerated expectations. The tendency to expect or predict results that are more extreme than the actual situation. Exaggerated expectations. The tendency to expect or predict results that are more extreme than the actual situation. Pessimistic prejudice. Some people, especially those with depression, tend to overestimate the possibility of bad things happening to them. [Sources: 2, 8]

Pseudo-Confidence Effect Prospect Theory The tendency to make non-risk choices when the expected outcome is positive, but to make risk-based choices to avoid negative outcomes. Offset projection. The tendency to overestimate how our future shares our current preferences, thoughts, and values, leading to sub-optimal choices. Ironically, this is when we think other people have more biases than ourselves. [Sources: 2, 3, 11]

We found 7 cognitive biases that affect classroom learning, independent learning, and the feelings of many students. However, these thinking biases can have more impact on us than we could imagine, especially since many of us may suffer from the blind spot of bias. Understanding expectation bias is critical to being able to think clearly. [Sources: 3, 4]

This article identifies and describes some ST strategies that manipulators try to influence or control behavior, or shape the ideas and preconceived expectations of others. ST technology can be used in media, organizational management or advertising companies to create prejudices and influence personal decisions and/or the nature of relationships and judgments in the context by creating deliberately pre-formed expectations. The word “stinky thoughts” may sound a little derogatory or even funny, but the proven strategy is designed to negatively affect your thoughts and behavior. It’s okay to use words and phrases to influence your expectations and influence your behavior. Ridiculous. [Sources: 4]

Avoiding positive thinking by insisting that a positive example “doesn’t count” is another way to negatively influence and reduce expectations. Polarizing perceptions to establish black and white thinking with no room for grayscale is another expectation bias tactic. [Sources: 4]

For example, people with an optimistic bias tend to be overly optimistic and overestimate the likelihood of good events, while people with a selfish bias tend to remember the past in a way that reflects on them better than it actually did. On the other hand, this bias can make students worry about upcoming exams and over-exaggerate how awful they will be when imagining the worst-case scenario. This can cause unnecessary stress and anxiety about exams and exam preparation. [Sources: 3]

Unfortunately, this can cause students to expect their feedback to have a greater impact on their exam performance than it actually does. When this happens, students may put too little effort into revision and find themselves unprepared for exams. In other words, even if the search strategy cannot guarantee the content of my beliefs (since there is no way of knowing whether one day the evidence obtained will actually be favorable or unfavorable to my preferred hypothesis), my beliefs may be systematically less significant. accurate because they have not received evidence that one would expect to be more informative. [Sources: 3, 10]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.britannica.com/science/confirmation-bias

[1]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22122235/

[2]: https://cognitive-liberty.online/list-of-cognitive-biases/

[3]: https://blog.innerdrive.co.uk/7-cognitive-biases-holding-your-students-back

[4]: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-media-psychology-effect/201311/stinking-thinking-and-expectation-bias

[5]: https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2219

[6]: https://jech.bmj.com/content/58/8/635

[7]: https://hbr.org/2014/05/is-the-possibility-bias-keeping-us-from-having-crazy-fun

[8]: https://uxinlux.github.io/cognitive-biases/

[9]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01676/full

[10]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/confirmation-bias

[11]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases