Dissonance can affect the way people act, think, and make decisions. Dissonance usually occurs when people are encouraged or forced to behave in ways that are inconsistent with their beliefs and views. When conflicts arise between cognitions (thoughts, beliefs, opinions), people take action to reduce dissonance and discomfort. [Sources: 7, 10]

Changing the perception of conflict is one of the most effective ways to deal with disharmony, but it is also one of the most difficult, especially in the case of deep-rooted values ​​and beliefs such as religion or political tendencies. Cognitive dissonance can make people feel uncomfortable and uncomfortable, especially if the mismatch between their beliefs and behaviors is related to the core of their self-awareness. More personal, highly valued beliefs, such as beliefs about yourself, tend to cause more disharmony. [Sources: 10]

There are several ways people can reduce dissonance when making decisions (Festinger, 1964). This method of reducing disharmony may be the most effective, but it is also the most difficult to implement. It involves changing a person’s behavior to make it consistent with their other beliefs. [Sources: 1, 6]

Reconciling differences between conflicting beliefs or between actions and beliefs is a form of personal growth. In our efforts to reduce dissonance, we distort our choices to make them look better, we begin to appreciate what we have suffered in order to achieve, and we change our attitudes to match our behavior. [Sources: 0, 1]

Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance states that when we experience conflict in our behavior, attitudes, or beliefs that runs counter to our positive self-perception, we experience psychological distress (dissonance). According to the theory, a mismatch between attitude and behavior causes an unpleasant emotional state called cognitive dissonance, and people try to reduce this undesirable state by changing their attitude. Thus, students change their attitudes to reduce the cognitive inconsistency between their attitude (I don’t like the idea of ​​higher tuition fees) and behavior (I wrote a supporting essay). [Sources: 5, 8]

Examples include “explaining things” or rejecting new information that conflicts with their existing beliefs. By invoking memories of the past as a source of potential adverse effects, the theory of cognitive dissonance can provide a theoretical basis for behavioral change efforts to improve physical and mental health. [Sources: 1, 4]

The concept of dissonance was once highly controversial, but its support through five decades of research has made it one of the most widely accepted concepts in social psychology. Psychologist Leon Festinger (1957) defined cognitive dissonance as psychological discomfort resulting from the persistence of two or more inconsistent attitudes, behaviors, or cognitions (thoughts, beliefs, or opinions). More than 60 years ago, Leon Festinger made the humble proposal that people with two or more psychologically incompatible cognitions experience a state of psychological stress called cognitive dissonance. In The Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Leon Festinger, the psychologist who first described the phenomenon, gave an example of how a person can cope with health-related dissonance by discussing people who continue to smoke even if they know it is bad. for their health. [Sources: 0, 4, 8, 10]

Festinger suggested that people feel uncomfortable when they have conflicting beliefs or when their actions are contrary to their beliefs. Festinger used the term “cognitive” to precede dissonance, arguing that all kinds of thoughts, behavior, and perceptions are represented in people’s thinking through their cognitive representations. Leon Festinger was the first to propose the theory of cognitive dissonance, focusing on how people try to achieve inner consistency. Subsequent research has documented that only conflicting cognitions that threaten a positive self-image cause dissonance (Greenwald & Ronis, 1978). [Sources: 1, 4, 8, 10]

Further research has shown that not only is dissonance psychologically uncomfortable, it can also induce physiological arousal (Croyle & Cooper, 1983) and activate areas of the brain important for emotion and cognitive functioning (van Veen, Krug, Schooler & Carter, 2009). Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance (1957) suggests that we have an inner urge to keep all our relationships and behaviors in harmony and to avoid disharmony (or dissonance). Festinger’s theory suggests that a mismatch between beliefs or behavior causes uncomfortable psychological stress (Comrade Aronsons Reconsidering the idea of ​​dissonance as a mismatch between a person’s self-esteem and cognition of one’s behavior makes it likely that dissonance is nothing more than a mistake. [Sources: 2, 6, 8]

There are also individual differences in whether people act according to theoretical predictions. Many people seem to be able to deal with obvious dissonances without experiencing the pressure of theoretical predictions. Critics of this theory believe that it depends on a complex social background (which can lead to disharmony), but studies have shown that it has the same effect on children (with less understanding and therefore less susceptible to social background) and even pigeons. [Sources: 3, 6]

In their study, the degree of cognitive dissonance was quantified on a trial basis during the second assessment item, as indicated by the mismatch between participants’ preferences for each item and their past (selected or rejected) selection behavior. Left DLPFC activity was higher when participants wrote a countertitle essay without sufficient justification, compared to the condition when sufficient justification was provided (and thus the cognitive dissonance was much less) (Harmon-Jones, Gerdjikov, et al., 2008) … Since it was impossible to change the fact that they had already passed the test, the best way to reduce dissonance is to develop a more supportive attitude towards the group. [Sources: 5, 7]

Those who were in a state of “low confusion” experienced much less dissonance because they did not have to put in so much effort or endure so much discomfort to join the group. Hence, they did not need to change their perception of the group. [Sources: 7]

Their behavior confirmed the predictions of his theory of cognitive dissonance, the premise of which was that people needed to maintain consistency between thoughts, feelings and behavior. His research in social psychology focused on how people resolve conflict (group dynamics), ambiguity (social confrontation), and inconsistency (cognitive dissonance) – all manifestations of a desire for uniformity. The criticism proved to be useful not only because it attracted attention to the theory of cognitive dissonance, but also mainly because it led to numerous studies by a new group of dissonance researchers, which eventually confirmed many of Festinger’s unorthodox predictions. Cognitive dissonance was first explored by Leon Festinger through the joint observation of a cult that believed the earth would be destroyed by flooding and what happened to its members, especially those who truly dedicated themselves to someone who gave up their homes and jobs for the sake of to work for worship when there was no flood. [Sources: 2, 4, 6]

Em Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) studied whether forcing people to complete a boring task could create cognitive dissonance due to forced submission. One of the earliest and most classic examples of justification for effort is the study by Aronson and Mills. This monetary incentive was intended to prevent cognitive dissonance by providing the participant with an external justification for behavior that was inconsistent with their beliefs (by saying that the task was enjoyable when it was not). [Sources: 3, 5, 6]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: http://psychology.iresearchnet.com/social-psychology/social-psychology-theories/cognitive-dissonance-theory/

[1]: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/326738

[2]: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Leon-Festinger/Cognitive-dissonance

[3]: https://psynso.com/effort-justification/

[4]: https://www.rips-irsp.com/articles/10.5334/irsp.277/

[5]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/cognitive-dissonance-theory

[6]: https://www.simplypsychology.org/cognitive-dissonance.html

[7]: https://www.alleydog.com/cognitive-dissonance-theory.php

[8]: https://opened.cuny.edu/courseware/module/78/student/?task=2

[9]: https://thedailyomnivore.net/2012/02/28/effort-justification/

[10]: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-cognitive-dissonance-2795012

Normalcy Bias or Normal Bias, is a cognitive bias that causes people to disbelieve or minimize threat warnings. Optimism biased (or optimistic bias) is a cognitive bias that makes you believe that someone is less likely to experience an adverse event. Scammers thrive on this bias by dressing up and convincing people of their sincerity. [Sources: 5, 6]

Therefore, avoid normal prejudice, be proactive and be aware of this so that you can use the best opportunities and options to develop your career in animal health or veterinary medicine. Then decide if you need to do something to have a healthier and more balanced view of emergencies and disasters. I will provide you with three important tips, which are more related to your emotional and mental health. [Sources: 1, 3]

America, I will explain this as concisely and clearly as possible. On the other hand, we have an undefined state that has never existed, and the U.S. government says it is impossible under the Constitution. On the one hand, we have states, which are normal states in the former territories such as Arizona and Kentucky. On the other hand, we have one of the craziest conspiracy theories based on physical impossibility. [Sources: 7, 14]

“This instinct to do nothing in the presence of danger is deeply rooted in our instincts; it is associated with a cognitive feature in our brains that psychologists call normal bias. [Sources: 12]

And today, any person without cognitive dissonance is simply abnormal or outdated. In particular, I have seen people who are reluctant to move forward in the interest of developing their careers in animal health or veterinary medicine because they consciously or unconsciously believed that their current professional life will remain exactly the same as in the foreseeable future. … As a result, they turned down other job opportunities that could give them a chance to improve their current situation. The optimism bias suggests that people often underestimate the risk of negative outcomes. [Sources: 3, 6, 12]

This means that some people will be much better off than you are trending. People are less likely to experience an optimism bias when they encounter very close people, such as friends or family. Researchers have proposed a variety of reasons leading to optimism bias, including cognitive and motivational factors. [Sources: 6]

Sharot also suggests that while this optimism bias can sometimes lead to negative outcomes, such as foolish participation in risky behaviors or poor health choices, it can also have benefits. Department of Psychology, Social Work and Public Health, Oxford Brooks University, Oxford, UK; Following the pioneering work of Weinstein (1980), many studies have found that people have an optimistic bias about future life events. Apparently, many expect in the near future a return to something more or less similar to the pre-COVID electoral past, that is, to “normalcy.” There is nothing “normal” about these events, but many people seem to be convinced that soon everything will return to “normal”, as in the “past.” [Sources: 6, 12]

And in fact, we can see hot news something like this: for the first time about an unprecedented number of COVID-19 cases in 24 hours. The end is near messages are sent straight to the trash can in our brains. [Sources: 9, 13]

They can see what is happening, but they think or believe that if they remain silent and stoic, the threat will disappear without any interaction on their part. I guess most of them will settle for a combination of normal bias and cognitive dissonance responses – basically doing what they’ve always done and hoping for the best. So, to be fair and balanced, we could point out that there are people who believe that COVID-19 vaccines implant 5G microchips that allow Bill Gates to track all vaccinated people. [Sources: 7, 12, 14]

Mainframes were often not prepared enough to prevent or detect serious threats such as ransomware because administrators underestimated the likelihood of a worst-case scenario. The ransomware threat does not differ by platform, and obscurity is just one layer of security. In the coming weeks, we will discuss additional prevention and detection mechanisms such as privileged access control, dataset monitoring, and others. [Sources: 10]

Simply put, attackers cannot execute code or do unintended work on the mainframe unless they gain internal access. One of the most vulnerable vectors of initial login on a mainframe is credential reuse. [Sources: 10]

White Star Line officials were not ready to evacuate the Titanic passengers. The passengers refused the evacuation order because they underestimated the possibility of the worst-case scenario and minimized its potential impact. [Sources: 10]

When you have a White House making deals that allow an enemy state to create nuclear weapons (whose intent is to use them against our allied nations), it might get your attention, but it isn’t. Harding’s promise was to restore the pre-war mindset to the United States without allowing the thought of war to pollute the minds of the American people. [Sources: 5, 7]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://vikinglifeblog.wordpress.com/2020/06/26/normalcy-bias/

[1]: https://sallieborrink.com/3-important-emergency-preparedness-tips/

[2]: https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Normality+Bias+%28Normalcy+Bias%29

[3]: https://thevetrecruiter.com/animal-health-jobs-the-normalcy-bias-and-your-animal-health-career-or-veterinary-career/

[4]: https://riskacademy.blog/49-cognitive-biases-in-risk-management-normalcy-bias-alex-sidorenko/

[5]: https://wordnerd.fun/normalcy

[6]: https://rehobothbaptistassociation.org/3owq5/iy80t5/archive.php?tag=what-is-optimistic-bias-in-psychology

[7]: https://conservativedailybriefing.com/will-normalcy-bias-be-our-destruction/

[8]: https://www.pawneerepublican.com/opinion/normalcy-bias

[9]: https://www.tobysinclair.com/post/change-management-mistakes

[10]: https://www.bmc.com/blogs/mainframe-ransomware-initial-access-normalcy-bias/

[11]: https://cognitivebiases.net/normalcy-bias

[12]: https://ai-ecoach.com/is-normalcy-bias-plus-cognitive-dissonance-part-of-the-new-normal/

[13]: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/normalcy-bias-prashant-bhosale

[14]: https://www.pr51st.com/false-balance-and-puerto-rico/

When you estimate how long it takes to walk a familiar path, you usually underestimate it. Due to the fact that he is familiar, the travel time seems to be shorter than it actually is. [Sources: 0]

Familiarity with routes, holidays and work tends to speed up our perception of time. Frequently used routes are estimated to take less time than unknown routes. When we follow a well-known path, since we do not need to concentrate too much, time seems to pass faster. [Sources: 0, 5]

In fact, the well-traveled effect is a concrete example of the fact that we tend to underestimate the duration of routine activities. The results of the assessment show that the sequence of travel significantly affects the preference for travel mode in the travel package, which has significant cross effects with individual attributes and attributes of the travel context. COVID-19 risk perception limits travelers to being close to home; therefore, if restrictions on inbound and outbound travel are lifted, people will still have problems traveling. Influence of conflict on risk perception and travel intentions of young tourists. [Sources: 0, 1, 2]

This study explores the relationship between risk perception, media communication, interpersonal communication, risk awareness, and behavior in Chinese travelers. The proposed scoring model recommended that all factors account for 66% variation in intent for travel behavior. Real-time scoring and post-judgmental scoring have been used to clarify situations in which the backtravel effect occurs. This study is one of the few that looks at the underlying mechanism between the perception of health risks and the behavioral intentions of travelers. [Sources: 1, 6]

This short communication strategy allows travelers to remember destinations and feel worthy of them. Route analysis showed that knowledge of risk has a positive relationship with the intention to travel. Determinants of perceived health risk among low-risk tourists traveling to developing countries. Hence, individual risk perception and travel intentions are sensitive to new information and can be easily changed (Bikhchandani and Sharma, 2000). [Sources: 1]

“There will be a lot less travel and a lot more emphasis on face-to-face contact (or face mask) when we do. Time and pollution. We will find that it is becoming cheaper to do many things, including the many varieties of telemedicine, less travel and jet lag for wealthy and high-class workers, and that we can indeed afford to invest in human capital in a cost-effective way. As the roads wear down in our lives, we pay less attention to the landscape. [Sources: 0, 4]

More and more people will be forced to lead dangerous lives, devoid of predictability, economic security and prosperity. Another 14% said that the life of most people in 2025 will not be very different from how it would have been if it were not for the pandemic. One of the consequences of the coronavirus will be the realization that American children need Internet access to do well in school, but many families do not. [Sources: 4]

In 2025, we will work differently (positively) because of COVID-19. Overconfidence is when some of us are overly confident in our abilities, and this makes us take more risks in our daily life. Ideas like these are also changing everything from marketing to criminology. [Sources: 3, 4]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.spring.org.uk/2013/06/the-well-travelled-road-effect-why-familiar-routes-fly-by.php

[1]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.655860/full

[2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856421001634

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

[4]: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/02/18/experts-say-the-new-normal-in-2025-will-be-far-more-tech-driven-presenting-more-big-challenges/

[5]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well_travelled_road_effect

[6]: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/469306/what-describes-the-effect-of-the-way-back-seeming-faster-than-the-way-there

To illustrate this, he hypothesizes what would happen if a hundred psychology professors read Rhine’s work and decided to conduct their own tests; he said that trauma to the survivor would eliminate the typical failed experiments, but encourage the lucky ones to continue testing. By pointing out the survival bias, Randall effectively argues the results by pointing out that they were obtained at random and ignoring any other people who might (foolishly) go through the same process and never win the lottery. Taking it one step further, survival bias could be used to challenge the results of any process, be it research (each research process is bound to produce SOME good results, and since these are the only published results it is difficult to know if it will be published). the research process itself contributed to good results), business decisions (some companies fail and others succeed, but since only successful ones remain, it can be difficult to determine WHY they failed or were successful), etc. [Sources: 0, 6]

For example, it could be argued that higher education does not make you successful on the basis that highly successful people like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Mark Zuckerberg dropped out of college but became billionaires. If you look at everyone who does not study at universities, and not just examples of success, a completely different picture emerges. We don’t hear or see those who tried and failed because usually people don’t talk about it. Regardless of where it is applied, survival bias describes a distorted and more positive outlook on things, especially because we can only hear the incidents they have overcome, leaving those who have failed an isolated silence of unverified or long-forgotten events. [Sources: 5, 7, 11, 12]

People can focus on the survivors without analyzing the sources and problems that allow only a select few to succeed, while preventing many people from doing so despite the same efforts. And those who have done both, more often talk about successes than about failures and failures. [Sources: 0, 7]

Survival bias applies in this situation, as people who ultimately win (and presumably win more than they spent on lottery tickets in the time it took to win) are much more likely to give motivational speeches than those he never won or won. win enough to recoup the “investment”. Survival bias is the tendency to focus on the companies that have succeeded while forgetting about all the companies that have failed at the time. This happens when we assume that success tells the whole story, and when we ignore past failures. [Sources: 0, 2, 13]

For every great success in the world, there will be thousands or even tens of thousands of failures. Whenever you read a success story in the media, think about all the people who have tried to do something that the person has done but failed. If you only learn from survivors in your life, buy books about successful people, and carefully study the history of companies that shook the planet, your understanding of the world will be highly prejudiced and very incomplete. [Sources: 3, 13]

The problem with falling prey to survival data is that it dilutes your judgment and distracts you from finding the root cause of a problem in your love life, your team, or your product. This makes it easier to match models and merge correlation with causation. [Sources: 8]

This bias can sometimes affect the results of your focus group research. This bias can be especially dangerous when you do market research and only look at data that supports your beliefs and close your eyes to data that contradicts the assumptions. Its not-so-uncommon cousin – cherry picking – also known as hiding evidence or incomplete evidence bias – is the act of pointing out individual cases or data that appear to support a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of the related cases. or data that may conflict with this position. [Sources: 14]

This is why we make opinions, structure companies and make decisions without examining all the data, which can easily lead to failure. Simply put, the survival bias describes our tendency to focus on people or things that have gone through some sort of selection process – whether it’s literally surviving in gladiatorial pits or getting top marks on a test. Standardized – and forgetting other important factors. The survival bias explains why people often assume that cars made 50 years ago last longer than those made today, even if those notions are empirically false. While technology has made it easier to track deaths during a pandemic, a survival bias may explain why a person can’t take the virus seriously because only the survivors are talking about it. [Sources: 8, 10, 11]

Survival bias or survival bias is a logical fallacy in focusing on people or things that went through a selection process and ignoring those that didn’t, usually because they were invisible. Survival error. Survival error or survival error is the logical fallacy of focusing on people or things that have gone through a selection process and ignoring those that have not, usually because they are invisible. This type of bias, also often called survival rather than bias, occurs when we focus on people or things that have gone through a selection process. And when we do this, we tend to overlook those that have been ignored, usually because they are invisible. [Sources: 1, 4, 9, 12]

Often our attention is drawn to people who succeed despite difficulties, or who take great risks. In this context, successful people are often put on a pedestal as if they were born to greatness, as in the Disney story from rags to riches. When we hear success stories in any area, we are inspired by companies, portfolios and people who have reached the top. We first look at successful people who followed their passions and actually got what they wanted in the end. [Sources: 5, 7, 12]

If so, then we can conclude that following your passion is the key to success. However, the truth is that there are many people who have followed their passions and yet have failed. If you think about it, you are probably making this mistake, too, and you probably think of a few close friends and family who regularly fall into this deep and wide pit of prejudice. However, as funny as it sounds when your friend tells you he wants to buy this famous tech gadget, because all Instagram videos seem super fun and trendy, you can sleep with the enemy and the survival bias can be too big. inside your machine learning algorithms. [Sources: 4, 12]

As you can see, this particular type of bias can be very dangerous both in our daily life and in our work as a data scientist. But more importantly, it can also be dangerous for the people involved in our predictions if we do not assess the issue as a correspondent. People will avoid risk when it is well presented and look for risk when it is poorly presented, which means that our decision-making logic can be easily skewed. [Sources: 4, 14]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1827:_Survivorship_Bias

[1]: https://vitaminac.github.io/Survivorship-bias/

[2]: https://www.cantorsparadise.com/survivorship-bias-and-the-mathematician-who-helped-win-wwii-356b174defa6

[3]: https://www.richardhughesjones.com/survivorship-bias/

[4]: https://towardsdatascience.com/survivorship-bias-in-data-science-and-machine-learning-4581419b3bca

[5]: https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20200827-how-survivorship-bias-can-cause-you-to-make-mistakes

[6]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

[7]: https://mad.co/insights/survivorship-bias/

[8]: http://blog.idonethis.com/7-lessons-survivorship-bias-will-help-make-better-decisions/

[9]: https://dev.to/ben/the-developer-feedback-you-are-actually-getting-is-survivorship-bias-4b54

[10]: https://blog.hubspot.com/sales/survivorship-bias

[11]: https://iuliangulea.com/survivorship-bias/

[12]: https://www.deanyeong.com/article/survivorship-bias

[13]: https://fs.blog/survivorship-bias/

[14]: https://accelerator.copernicus.eu/cognitive-mistakes-that-jeopardise-success/

The shift in focus causes shoppers to ignore secondary items and choose more emotionally significant items, even if objective differences are usually not important. In this case, the correlation bias is at risk, because the characteristics of the package of items force consumers to make decisions that do not consider whether the item is a healthy choice. [Sources: 11]

The researchers suggested that giving people real-time feedback about the choices they are about to make is one solution to avoid the relevance bias trap. Policymakers can also take into account importance bias in the hope of mitigating its negative impact on society. In the area of ​​resource consumption, an awareness of relevance bias can motivate people to make environmentally sound decisions. [Sources: 10]

The use of contrast is one way to help in the occurrence of visibility bias; for example, shoppers are now so insensitive to most in-store conditions that it’s important to focus on making your environment so atypical and different so that it doesn’t grab the attention of shoppers. The visibility bias arises from unexpected contrasts between objects and their surroundings. This appeals to our “bias” (or so-called perceptual significance) – a cognitive bias that “predisposes people to focus on issues that are most important or emotionally unexpected, and ignore those that are not relevant, even if it is the distinction is often irrelevant to objective criteria. ” [Sources: 9, 11]

Our tendency to think more about negative events is another example of this kind of behavioral bias. According to the concept of negative forces, prejudice leads us to interpret negative events as more important than positive events. Even if we experience many positive events in a day, negative prejudice will make us focus on a negative event that happened. [Sources: 5]

We can think of this as an asymmetry in the way we process negative and positive events to understand our world, in which “negative events elicit faster and more obvious reactions than non-negative events” (Carretie et al., 2001, p. 75). By directing our conscious attention more towards the positive events and feelings we experience, we can begin to address the preconceived asymmetries of negativity. While there is little we can do about our psychology, we can still prevent attacks by becoming more aware of our biases. Thinking that you are rational despite the obviousness of the irrationality of others is also known as the blind spot bias. [Sources: 5, 9, 12]

This premise, in turn, is based on a number of assumptions about the nature of human inference and the respective roles of cognition and motivation in social judgment and decision making. Confirmation bias, as the term is commonly used in the psychological literature, refers to seeking or interpreting evidence in ways that partially match existing beliefs, expectations, or assumptions. The author examines the evidence for this bias in various forms and provides examples of its functioning in various practical contexts. [Sources: 7, 8]

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). Confirmation Bias Confirmation Bias A tendency to seek, interpret, focus, and remember information in a way that confirms your biases. Availability heuristic Accessibility bias The tendency to overestimate the likelihood of events with increased “availability” in memory, which may depend on how recent memories are or how unusual or emotionally charged they may be. Importance bias Accessibility bias The tendency to focus on the elements that are most important or emotionally unexpected and to ignore those that are irrelevant, even if the distinction is often irrelevant to objective standards. [Sources: 2]

Visibility bias (also known as perceptual significance) is the tendency to use available traits to make judgments about a person or situation. Importance describes how important or emotionally amazing something is. Visibility usually arises from novelty or unexpected events, but it can also be achieved by focusing on this characteristic. [Sources: 1, 3, 6]

This suggests that perceived relevance can influence decisions about preferences. In addition, in the case of high cognitive load and lack of time, a strong influence on food choices was observed. Previous studies have shown that for rapid decision-making speed, significant bias has a greater impact on decision-making than preference (Milosavljevic et al., 2012), and time constraints generally directly affect selection behavior (eg Reutskaja, Nagel, Camerer, and Rangel, 2011; Su And Hertwig, 2011). [Sources: 6]

Such differences are likely to lead to differences in how these emotions are processed and used later in the developmental process, and may themselves be a partial explanation for the negative bias. Moreover, while we have focused on areas of development that are closely related to the emotional sphere in this article, it is likely that negative bias also exists in many areas that are not so closely related to this area. [Sources: 0]

First, it is surprising that the negativity bias that has been observed and studied so widely in one area of ​​psychology (social, emotional and cognitive psychology of adults) has received so little systematic attention in another area (child social, emotional and cognitive psychology). psychology). We hope this article makes it clear that this phenomenon fulfills some important developmental and developmental functions in infants and children and deserves the widest possible study. Finally, we have argued that negativity bias serves as an important developmental adaptive function in helping children avoid potentially harmful stimuli, and is likely to also perform important socio-emotional and socio-cognitive functions. [Sources: 0]

The conspicuous effect examines why, when, and how which elements are “visible” to different people, or which elements we are most attracted to and which we will focus on. Then, in one of the conditions, we manipulated cognitive load to test whether increased cognitive load affects the effect of visibility on food decisions. [Sources: 6]

Participants were more likely to choose foods that showed longer, suggesting that longer exposure and therefore more time spent attending a meal could influence decisions about that product. The visibility bias states that the brain prefers to pay attention to the basic elements of the experience. Motivational relevance is a cognitive process and form of attention that motivates or pushes a person’s behavior towards or from a particular object, perceived event or result. Importance determines which information is most likely to grab attention and have the greatest impact on the perception of the world. [Sources: 1, 6]

The importance of a sign, when viewed in the context of others, helps a person quickly rank large amounts of information based on importance, and then pay attention to what is most important. The WebNeuro online battery also includes self-assessment elements that can be used to assess attribution bias towards anticipation and perception of negative outcomes and events (Rowe et al., 2007; Williams et al., 2008). The Future Events Scale (FES) is a 26-point subjective measure of negativity bias that measures optimism and pessimism across two separate subscales (Anderson, 2000). [Sources: 1, 5]

Pessimistic prejudice. Some people, especially those suffering from depression, tend to overestimate the possibility of bad things happening to them. Proportionality bias We are naturally inclined to assume that there are good reasons for major events, which can also explain our tendency to accept conspiracy theories. [Sources: 2]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3652533/

[1]: https://theinfinitekitchen.com/faq/readers-ask-why-is-salience-used/

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

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

[4]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/cognitive-theory

[5]: https://positivepsychology.com/3-steps-negativity-bias/

[6]: https://mcen.com.br/if2pj/salience-bias-psychology-definition

[7]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1229191

[8]: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175

[9]: https://www.cyberbitsetc.org/post/perceptional-invariance-5-psychological-reasons-why-we-keep-believing-cybercriminals

[10]: https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/salience-bias/

[11]: https://www.adcocksolutions.com/post/what-is-salience-bias

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

The Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures the strength of associations between concepts (eg, people of color, gay) and grades (eg, good, bad) or stereotypes (eg, athletic, awkward). The IAT measures the strength of associations between concepts (eg, black, gay) and grades (eg, good, bad) or stereotypes (eg, athletic, awkward). [Sources: 1, 3]

Using these theoretical ideas, stereotypical associations (such as “black” and “aggression”) can be stored in semantic memory and automatically activated, producing an implicit stereotypical effect. As a method, the IAT can be applied to any combination of word pairs and therefore can be used to examine a range of implicit stereotypes such as “white” and “black” for ethnic stereotypes or “men” and “women”. “” For gender stereotypes, combined with any words associated with stereotypical attributes such as aggression or addiction. [Sources: 0]

Different interventions have different effects on implicit stereotypes (measured by IAT). Because of their widespread distribution in society, in a culture, more or less everyone, even an unbiased person, has implicit stereotypes in semantic memory. Subsequent use of IAT has always shown implicit stereotypes of a range of different social categories, most notably gender and race (Greenwald et al., 2015). [Sources: 0]

In the first part of the IAT, words related to concepts (eg, fat people, thin people) are sorted into categories. The view of the stereotype as a fixed set of attributes associated with a social group dates back to the seminal study of experimental psychology by Katz and Braley (1933). In the third part of the IAT, the categories are combined and you are asked to arrange both the concept and the scoring words. In the second part of the IAT, the words related to assessment are ordered (eg, good, bad). [Sources: 0, 3]

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. was founded in 1807 and has been a valuable source of information and understanding for more than 200 years, helping people all over the world meet their needs and aspirations. [Sources: 2]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201786

[1]: https://askinglot.com/what-is-implicit-association-test-in-psychology

[2]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23027284

[3]: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/iatdetails.html

There are not many scientific papers on frequency illusion, but the effect is very similar to the memory-driven work grab that was studied to understand how attention is directed. There are two reasons for this phenomenon: first, selective attention, which means that your brain is subconsciously looking for additional information on the subject. Second, confirmation bias, which means that every time you see something relevant to a topic, your brain tells you that it’s proof that the topic has caught on in the blink of an eye. One part is higher frequency perception; the second part is confirmation bias, where you feel like it hasn’t happened before with the same frequency. [Sources: 0, 3]

Every time you encounter it, it confirms that your perceptual frequency has increased, and you are more confident that you have been seeing it now. At the same time, you might have seen the same thing 20 times in the last week, but don’t remember why it didn’t pass the attention filter. The fact that you don’t remember can be interpreted as confirming that it didn’t happen, but it’s impossible to extract something from your memory that was not originally coded. [Sources: 17]

The illusion of novelty makes us think that what we have just noticed or learned is a recent phenomenon. The illusion of novelty. The illusion that the phenomenon was observed quite recently has arisen recently. Often used to refer to linguistic phenomena; the illusion that a word or linguistic usage that has only recently been noticed is an innovation when it has actually been established for some time (see also frequency illusion). [Sources: 13, 17]

Select deviation availability deviation. When something makes us know more about something, we tend to pay more attention to something. For example, when we buy a car, we tend to notice similar cars more frequently than before. Selective attention-the brain is very good at eliminating irrelevant information, so we suddenly notice and appear relevant information. In fact, we all process information selectively, even if we think it is not. Confirmation bias occurs when people selectively process information that confirms their beliefs while ignoring information that may challenge or provide evidence against these beliefs, instead of selectively focusing on any information in the environment that seems important or relevant. [Sources: 7, 13, 16]

In terms of confirming bias, people with schizophrenia can “confirm their suspicions” if they begin to pay attention to aspects of their experience that are consistent with the misconception they currently have. If you have certain mental disorders, such as schizophrenia or paranoia, frequency bias can lead you to believe things that are not true and make your symptoms worse. [Sources: 5, 10]

The Baader-Meinhof phenomenon accessibility distortion frequency illusion is that once something is noticed, every instance of the object will be noticed, leading to the belief that it has a high frequency of occurrence (a selection bias). “The Baader-Meinhof phenomenon, also called frequency illusion or novelty deviation, is a situation where what you have learned recently seems to be suddenly everywhere. [Sources: 12, 13]

There are two reasons for this phenomenon: First, selective attention, which means that your brain is subconsciously looking for additional information on the subject. First, your brain seems to be excited about what you have learned, and selective attention is happening. [Sources: 3, 4]

According to Stanford linguist Arnold Zwicky, who coined the term “frequency illusion” for this phenomenon in 2006, there is more before your confirmation bias kicks in. When something new triggers an emotional response, your brain starts looking for something. was something that you actively noticed. [Sources: 9]

Suddenly, what you noticed for the first time in your life yesterday begins to appear out of nowhere, here and there, like a short deja vu on steroids. You will probably start to think that what just happened is supernatural, but it is not. However, there is nothing accidental about this, and the explanation is really simple. [Sources: 1, 9, 12]

The frequency illusion is a product of selective attention and confirmation bias, often with a hint of the illusion of novelty. This distorts your perception of frequency, making you think the frequency has changed. [Sources: 17]

The frequency illusion occurs when a person experiences something, for example, finds a song they like on Spotify or gets pregnant, and then believes that this experience or phenomenon is happening all the time. Basically, the illusion of frequency is the feeling that something that you have been thinking about or recently learned suddenly seems much more frequent in your environment than it used to be. The frequency illusion can overlap with social proof because if you hear people argue about something multiple times, seemingly out of the blue, you attribute that sudden attention to the importance of that particular thing. Once something grabs your attention, you are likely to notice almost every case you come across. [Sources: 0, 16, 17, 18]

Pattern recognition is important for many diagnoses, but frequency offset allows you to see patterns without patterns. There are always new things to learn, but they should beware of noticing a patient’s disease just because they have recently read about a certain disease. The scientific community is made up of people, so they are not immune to frequency deviations. [Sources: 10]

When this happens, it is easier to see evidence supporting bias when evidence against it is lacking. A bias can refer to an object, event, concept, idea, word, and so on. As soon as you find something that you didn’t know before, you start noticing it in the weirdest places. Zwicky defined the Frequency Illusion as before he notices … and then believes that something is happening. [Sources: 6, 7, 10]

If a detective trying to solve a crime learns about a certain suspicion through the frequency illusion, then the detective’s mind is ready to pay attention to this suspicion when new relevant information appears. Frequency illusion, also known as the Baader-Meinhoff phenomenon, is a cognitive bias that describes our tendency to see new information, names, ideas, or patterns everywhere as soon as they are brought to our attention. It was named Baader-Meinhoff after this curious psychological fact was first described by a reader of St Paul Pioneer Press. Having just heard about the far-left terrorist group Baader-Meinhoff in West Germany, he saw Baader-Meinhoff everywhere. [Sources: 5, 8]

The Baader-Meinhof phenomenon, also known as frequency deviation (or illusion), is the recent concept of internalization (or attention) that has apparently appeared in unexpected places. The more popular term “Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon” is the first online discussion after a commentator heard about the ultra-left terrorist organization Baader-Meinhof Gang (also known as the Red Army faction (RAF)) twice in 24 hours Use on forums. Named after the Baader-Meinhof Group (also known as the Red Army faction), this is a notorious West German radical leftist organization founded in 1970. [Sources: 2, 7, 9]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://lighthouse.mq.edu.au/article/july-2020/What-is-the-Baader-Meinhof-Phenomenon

[1]: https://blog.yaware.com/frequency-illusion-or-why-some-words-are-chasing-us/

[2]: https://interestingengineering.com/experiencing-the-baader-meinhof-phenomenon

[3]: https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/baader-meinhof-phenomenon

[4]: https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/baader-meinhof-phenomenon.htm

[5]: https://news.ucdenver.edu/what-is-the-frequency-illusion/

[6]: https://productiveclub.com/baader-meinhof-phenomenon/

[7]: https://dqydj.com/baader-meinhof-phenomenon-frequency-bias/

[8]: https://medium.com/gravityblog/16-the-frequency-illusion-388d0a92cd81

[9]: https://doctorspin.org/media-psychology/psychology/baader-meinhof-phenomenon/

[10]: https://www.healthline.com/health/baader-meinhof-phenomenon

[11]: https://moviecultists.com/when-you-start-noticing-something-everywhere

[12]: https://www.adcellerant.com/2019/10/baader-meinhof-phenomenon-and-marketing/

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

[14]: https://www.sciencealert.com/you-know-how-when-you-learn-a-new-word-you-see-it-everywhere-here-s-why

[15]: https://beyond.britannica.com/can-you-please-explain-the-baader-meinhof-phenomenon

[16]: https://web.colby.edu/cogblog/2018/04/24/that-band-is-really-cool-but-i-swear-its-everywhere/

[17]: https://mentalhealthathome.org/2021/12/03/what-is-frequency-illusion/

[18]: https://www.adzooma.com/blog/marketing-the-frequency-illusion/

Anthropocentric Thinking Is The Tendency To Reason About Unfamiliar Biological Species Or Processes By Analogy To Humans

This confirms and expands the depth of the alleged biopsychological roots of mental anthropomorphism and lays the foundation for studying the presence of anthropomorphism in the philosophy of biology and in the doctrine of evolution, taking into account the mosaic of three hyperactive psychological tendencies. [Sources: 6]

Three of the cognitive structures-teleological thinking, essentialist thinking, and human-centered thinking-are particularly important for understanding common problems and misunderstandings in biology courses. At the same time, cognitive and developmental psychologists described the intuitive concept systems that humans use to reason about biology-teleology, essentialism, and human-centered thinking. We hypothesize that apparently unrelated biological illusions may have common roots in these intuitive cognitive models called cognitive structures. To evaluate the spontaneous use of teleological thinking, essentialist thinking, and anthropocentric thinking in biological scientific reasoning, we constructed 12 misunderstanding statements. [Sources: 3, 4]

Their focus on protecting wild plants and animals and preserving vital parts of species and habitats (1 | -3) included an emphasis on preserving natural resources for humanity (cover of Biological Conservation, Vol. Most natural scientists who followed Darwin) turned to the opposite direction, moving away from humans to other species with a longer evolutionary history and more accessible biological structures, not because of lack of interest, but as a result of the belief that only humans are capable of thinking. [Sources: 0, 5, 7]

First, psychological processes of any kind can be realized only in a biological system, and the mind can only be secreted by the brain. Many scientists think about this, but we know little about how the mind works. How language is processed or how learning works – we know little – consciousness or search for memory, not much. [Sources: 2, 7]

The cognitive explanation we propose may be the basis of these misunderstandings and is called human-centered thinking; it is just a tendency to reason about unknown biological processes or species in a way similar to humans. The second component of anthropocentric thinking is the tendency to reason about unfamiliar biological species or processes by analogy with humans. [Sources: 3, 4]

1) a tendency to view humans as unique and biologically unrelated to the rest of the animal kingdom, and 2) a tendency to reason about other organisms by analogy with humans. In these examples, anthropocentric thinking can lead to a distortion of the role of a person in the biological world, an over-attribution of human (or animal) functions to different organisms (for example, plants), or the personification of physiological processes. Conversely, thinking about non-human species by analogy with humans can also lead to children underestimating the biological properties of species that are very different from humans. [Sources: 3, 4]

In the opposite direction, sociobiology erroneously assumes that if practices in human culture are similar to the behavioral patterns of other species, then if they are (more or less) similar, they are more likely to be explained biologically. Less) is common in humans. A simpler explanation may have other advantages, such as easier to understand or describe, but since animal behavior is the result of natural selection, not the result of an intelligent design process that always provides the best solution, there is no reason to believe that it may be caused by Caused by a simpler process (Mikhalevich, Powell, Logan, 2017). Although the general reasoning model that constitutes psychological anthropomorphism is usually defined as teleological reasoning, that is, thinking that produces an explanatory style that deals with goals, goals, and causes (for example, Mahner and Bunge, 1997; Broaddus, unpublished; Engvild, 2015), and It does not necessarily mean that the underlying biological, cognitive, and evolutionary processes must be unified. [Sources: 0, 6, 7]

This hypothesis may derive from a cognitive concept known as essentialist thinking. When you look at the misconceptions listed at the beginning of this section through the prism of anthropocentric thinking, things like “worry” and “death” are harmful to humans and therefore easily viewed as inevitably harmful to a biological system or organism. [Sources: 4]

The emphasis on “intelligent domestication” demanded by new conservation science is overlooked because even in “domesticated” ecosystems, most of the species present are wild (87), and the processes that support these systems are almost entirely controlled by humans. This respect for the wilderness itself, wherever it may be, underlines the need for efforts to save what is left of the wilderness, parts of the world where human goals are not the primary driving forces and which are often necessary for the conservation of native species. with narrow ranges (94). [Sources: 5]

In this way, the concept of respect for nature and natural sites can act as an open horizon that can be characterized in different contexts and different audiences and cultures to form new relationships with nature that are sustainable for both people and others. [Sources: 5]

We will see that, moving from one of these theories to another, the sphere of moral values ​​extends from people to animals, then to plants, and then to ecosystems. Animal husbandry research is another example of value accusations, given that a fascination with human culture is the driving force, and an attempt to map the cognitive differences between our own monkey species and other monkey species that may explain the origin of our uniqueness. Since non-human animals share some biological and psychological characteristics with humans, and we share communities, land, and other resources, the consideration of non-human animals can greatly contribute to our philosophical endeavors. [Sources: 0, 1]

If, as Wilson and others have argued, “homo sapiens is a common animal,” then there is much to be learned by viewing human experience as part of a broader biological continuum. In biology, humans are a familiar and approachable biological type and therefore are a very tempting source of knowledge that is often misapplied to non-human living things. Those of us who stick to “copy of humans” in AI take our time to think about what humans can do. [Sources: 2, 4, 7]

On the other hand, biological and technological processes will be viewed as similar systems that respond to certain constraints and are likely to have similar basic characteristics. Design, underlying purpose and belief positions benefit biology by providing a cognitive foundation, expressing a powerful explanatory system, facilitating functional generalization, promoting new research questions and results, allowing metaphorical / analogical thinking, and didactically explaining in a concise manner. Ideally, this approach should be developed for teleological thinking in biology. In short, for Norton’s vision to be viable, we need to know how far in the future we need to extend our commitment to the human species and whether we are psychologically capable of doing so. [Sources: 1, 6, 7]

It is wrong to harm the environment through pollution or destruction of habitats because of the damage it is doing to our species that goes beyond the damage it is doing to individuals right now. According to him, environmentalists believe that policies that serve the interests of all mankind in general and in the long term will also serve the interests of nature, and vice versa. However, anthropocentric collectivism goes beyond the human personality and believes that any moral responsibility to the environment rests solely on the interests of the human species as a whole, especially for future generations of people. Anthropocentrism can lean towards the environment, making large sacrifices, and biocentrism towards people who make sacrifices. [Sources: 1]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cognition-animal/

[1]: https://www.utm.edu/staff/jfieser/class/160/10-environment.htm

[2]: https://www.edge.org/responses/what-do-you-think-about-machines-that-think

[3]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4353083/

[4]: https://www.lifescied.org/doi/10.1187/cbe.12-06-0074

[5]: https://www.pnas.org/content/113/22/6105

[6]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01839/full

[7]: https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft338nb20q;chunk.id=0;doc.view=print

Attentional Bias refers to how a person’s perception is affected by selective factors In their attention

Three voluntarily moving stimuli had two empty spaces, while the controlled stimulus had one empty space. If the choice of attention is biased towards controlled stimuli, the response time should be inversely proportional to the participant’s degree of control over the target stimulus. From these results, it can be seen that healthy volunteers, therefore, showed a bias in maintaining attention towards averting stimuli in the first 1000 ms of exposure, and not in the last 1000 ms of exposure. Thus, under these conditions, attention chose controlled and uncontrolled stimuli at approximately the same speed. [Sources: 2, 8]

Finally, in a state of 100%, the target stimulus continually follows the keystroke, creating a strong bias in the choice of attention against it, resulting in faster response times. Under 0% control, the stimulus never moved in the direction of keystroke by the participants, and therefore attentional selection was biased towards the other three stimuli, which actually moved in the direction of keystroke 50% of the time. Under 40% and 60% conditions, the target stimulus was as likely to move in the direction of the keystroke as the uncontrolled stimulus. [Sources: 8]

According to this model, people with high levels of anxiety are more likely to target adverse stimuli, while people with low levels of anxiety may tend to divert attention away from those stimuli. Based on this, we hypothesize that a shift in attention to threat and, in particular, a deficit in withdrawal from interaction will be associated with better results than a shift in attention away from the threat or lack of bias, since these biases can influence attention to the threat or not. characteristics of the stimulus. We also expect that attention to threat and, in particular, deficits in disengagement from threat will not outweigh any bias, as narrowing of attention (Eysenck et al., 2007) and a reduction in context coding can occur in people with whom they interact more. with terrible irritants during exposure sessions. [Sources: 2, 3]

Thus, attentional bias can lead to more active interactions with the threat and increase the likelihood that a person may know that fear-inducing stimuli or their fear-inducing characteristics do not necessarily predict the occurrence of something repulsive. Thus, elucidating the phenomenological characteristics of attention-threatening bias may provide information for researchers studying the factors that modulate the effect of attention-related bias. Subsequent research may establish whether anxiety and other features of attentional bias are causing anxiety or whether a causal relationship between attentional bias and anxiety is specific to the characteristic of attention relief. [Sources: 3, 7]

Attention bias can pose particular problems for people with anxiety disorders, as they can focus their attention on stimuli that seem threatening and ignore information that can calm their fears. Attention bias means that a person selectively works with a certain category or categories of stimuli in the environment, trying to ignore, ignore, or ignore other types of stimuli. [Sources: 0, 1]

For example, a person may selectively pay attention to food stimuli (especially foods that seem particularly tasty). Sexual stimuli can be especially distracting for the other person; fashion-related stimuli can attract the attention of another person. Most relevant to this chapter is that some people are distracted by addictive signals. In any case, when a person has a goal to consume alcohol, he selectively affects the stimuli in the environment that are associated with the production and consumption of alcohol. [Sources: 1]

This feature suggests that after attention has been paid to one threatening stimulus, it will be difficult to divert attention to another stimulus. A third component of attention bias involves threat avoidance, in which the person secretly filters out threats or thoughts from attentional choices and openly avoids dealing with them if they do appear (Hofmann et al., 2012). Attention bias towards negative stimuli occurs after initial focusing of attention, then temporarily intensifies with increasing sign anxiety and appears to last longer only in individuals with high anxiety, while people with low signs of anxiety instead show a bias in keeping attention away from negative images in a later period. stages of processing. In fact, negative information seems to hold attention longer than a neutral stimulus once recorded. [Sources: 2, 3, 7]

Thus, overall, the results support the attention maintenance hypothesis, 34 which postulates, in contrast to the avoidance-vigilance hypothesis, 26 that there is no relief in focusing on threat-related stimuli that maintain attention after detection 33. For example, Mogg and Bradley (2005) investigated the shift in attention to threat as a function of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) versus depression, focusing on the duration of stimulus presentation. Second, the review will focus on threat attention bias in relation to anxiety rather than other types of stimuli that are also associated with attention bias (eg, pain, addiction, depression, or associated cues. To food). In the following sections: (a) we briefly review this study, (b) we describe how dual process models help explain decisions about whether to use an addictive substance, (c) we discuss how different brain loci are involved in distorting attention. … and other types of cue reactivity, and (d) suggest how the results of neurocognitive research can be applied to cognitive learning and future research. [Sources: 1, 2, 7]

There are many evolutionary and cognitive explanations for why certain things continue to distort our attention. Similarly, some psychologists explain how we process different stimuli at different levels of attention, which affects our ability to process multiple stimuli at the same time. [Sources: 6, 9]

The researchers found that people with eating disorders tend to pay more attention to food cues, while people with drug addiction tend to be hypersensitive to drug cues. For people trying to recover from an eating disorder or addiction, this tendency to pay attention to some cues and exclude others can make recovery much more difficult. By working to expand your focus and minimize unnecessary distractions that will use up your mental resources, you can work to overcome this bias. [Sources: 6, 10]

These biases can affect the information you view, your memory of past decisions, and the sources you trust when looking for options. You need to make fair and rational decisions about important things. In your life, like everyone on earth, you have developed some subtle cognitive biases. [Sources: 0]

When psychologists selectively interpret data or ignore unfavorable data to obtain results that support their original hypotheses, this form of bias usually permeates the research field itself. Confirm the deviation. Confirmation bias refers to the tendency to interpret new information as a confirmation of pre-existing beliefs and opinions. Real-world examples Since the Watson experiment in 1960, real examples of confirmation bias have attracted attention. For example, people who are depressed tend to have negative stereotypes about themselves and the world11 and tend to focus on negative information rather than positive information. 12 On the contrary, people who are not depressed tend to be positive. [Sources: 6, 9]

First, the response times are exceptionally long compared to the complexity of the task, suggesting that they may not be diagnostic for when the participants found the research objective. This happens when a person does not notice a stimulus that is in full view of everyone, because his attention is directed to another place. [Sources: 6, 8]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

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

[1]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/attentional-bias

[2]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-68490-5

[3]: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00968/full

[4]: https://lesley.edu/article/what-the-stroop-effect-reveals-about-our-minds

[5]: https://www.kirtanleader.com/blog/reduce-attentional-biases-with-enneagram

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

[7]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2901130/

[8]: https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13414-020-02004-3

[9]: https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/attentional-bias/

[10]: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-an-attentional-bias-2795027

Apophenia Is The Tendency To Perceive Meaningful Connections Between Unrelated Things.

Now, when it comes to events in our life that can be randomly distributed over time, from the point of view of our mind, looking for patterns, it seems that they happen in groups, and therefore we can believe that bad things happen to three, that God is testing our faith that we were born under a bad sign. We can imagine that conspiracies arise from the fact that several bad things happen in a row. [Sources: 9]

And it can motivate us to make sense of completely unrelated life events. This means that we often see patterns in random information, and this can be a serious problem. But this means that we can overcome and interpret what is not really there. [Sources: 9]

This is a useful thing in the natural environment, because we do not have a straight line from our brain to reality, we always interpret models. Surprisingly, our brains are very good at picking up these hidden patterns and messages. [Sources: 5, 9]

Thus, apophenia has both sides: it is a deeply human mental habit that can underlie adaptive behavior and reward flights of fantasy or cause all kinds of paranoia and stupidity. There is a strange connection between apophenia, “a potentially pathological tendency to perceive meaningful connections between apparently unrelated things,” and the artist’s receptive mood when creating art. This may be the difference between psychotic and creative use of patterns and connections. [Sources: 0, 6, 8]

However, in extreme cases it can be a symptom of mental dysfunction, for example, as a symptom of paranoid schizophrenia [6], in which the patient sees hostile patterns (eg, a conspiracy to persecute him) in ordinary actions. Apophenia also began to describe the human tendency to unreasonably look for patterns in random information, for example, during gambling. Ultimately, apophenia is associated with a person’s tendency to look for patterns in random information, for example, when gambling. [Sources: 7, 12]

The experience of observing patterns or relationships in random or meaningless data was invented by apophenia by the German neurologist Klaus Conrad. He initially described this phenomenon as a mentally ill thought process, although it is now seen as a ubiquitous feature in human nature. [Sources: 2]

He defined this as “an unmotivated consideration of connections [accompanied by] a particular sense of abnormal meaning.” He defined this as “an unmotivated consideration of connections [accompanied by] a particular sense of abnormal meaning.” [Sources: 12]

He described the early stages of delusional thinking as referential overinterpretations of real sensory perceptions, as opposed to hallucinations. He described the early stages of delusional thinking as referential overinterpretations of real sensory perceptions, as opposed to hallucinations. [Sources: 12]

So, according to the theory, the human brain has evolved into “belief machines” and “pattern recognition machines” that seek to organize messy sensory inputs into meaningful data. Our brains are pattern-discerning machines that connect dots, allowing us to discover meaningful relationships between the mass of sensory inputs we encounter. Rather than simply viewing apophenia as a kind of unfortunate side effect of our cognitive architecture, psychoanalysis encourages us to look at meaning where it seems less obvious. [Sources: 2, 8]

This type of pattern recognition can induce apophenia on the grounds that because the brain is not looking for exact matches, it can detect some characteristics of the match and assume that they are the same. The deletion, distortion, and generalization that occurs at the subconscious level of people make this flow of information manageable, but sometimes at the expense of inaccurate recognition patterns, and this is where the concept of apophenia comes into play. In statistics, apophenia is an example of a Type I error – misidentifying patterns in data. [Sources: 7, 11]

The problem of apophenia in finance has been covered in scientific articles. Personal descriptions of manic patients are almost obsessive, but research on the link between apophenia and bipolar disorder is scarce. For a person whose first understanding of something is usually visual, apophenia is an invaluable tool. Merriam-Webster defines it as the tendency to perceive a meaningful connection or pattern between unrelated or random things. [Sources: 5, 6, 7, 8]

There is another form of apophenia, called pareidolia, which fills the gap in our vision. A common phenomenon caused by hallucinations is seeing a face on a random part of the wall. Many people perceive faces in seemingly random places, such as dirt patterns left in clouds, cars, or on the moon. [Sources: 2, 5]

Motivation is usually used in visual arts, but you use it in your own way, finding patterns between everyday objects and obviously unmodeled places. In 2008, Michael Shermer coined the term “pattern” and defined it as “the tendency to find meaningful patterns in meaningless noise.” In Believing Brain (2011), Shemer writes that people “tend to instill meaning, intention, and freedom of action into models,” which he calls “motivation”. Good novelists certainly understand this and rely on the expectations and expectations that seemingly unrelated associations evoke in their readers. [Sources: 0, 2, 7]

In fact, all conspiracy theory and other erroneous conclusions, such as player error, are based on a usually useful tendency to piece things together. This is not an exploratory use of joins, where many disparate inputs can be used. However, this is perhaps the most reliable method of preventing distorted thinking and misconnecting unrelated events. [Sources: 5, 6]

Your perception seems important, but it exists in your fantasy. Defending it can lead to harmlessness, which is harmful and harmless depending on the context. In fact, we have never seen other people; on the contrary, we only see those aspects of ourselves fall on them. Today, too many people in our human family insist on seeing connections and meanings in things and events that do not actually exist, leading to delusions and crazy and dangerous conspiracy theories. However, today’s atheism finally forces our society to link unrelated things together and formulate conspiracy theories on this basis. [Sources: 1, 3, 5]

Apophenia is also manifested in the most complex pattern in our human relationship world. Apophenia () is a tendency to perceive meaningful connections between unrelated things. Confidence in QAnon depends on trying to establish connections where there is no connection. Brugger explained that when a concept is ignited in the right hemisphere, a distantly related concept will also come to mind, creating a meaningful sense of connection. [Sources: 2, 6, 7, 8]

He described the acute phase of schizophrenia, during which irrelevant details seemed to be full of connections and meaning. The term (German: Apophanie) was coined by the psychiatrist Klaus Konrad in a 1958 publication on the early stages of schizophrenia. [Sources: 8, 12]

In statistics, a problem similar to apophenia is a Type I error or false positive. We are deceived by optical illusions – apophenia of the visual cortex – but we don’t take these cognitive errors personally. [Sources: 2, 8]

You, I, and even the most logical person in the world are subject to confirmation bias; this is how our brain works. Unfortunately, confirmatory bias is just one of the cognitive biases that are hardcoded in our brains; this is what strikes us the most when it comes to conspiracy theories. When combined with our penchant for confirmation bias, conspiracy theories essentially become a powerful predator that preys on people who want to feel like geniuses. Therefore, when you express hatred or lack of empathy towards others, you are not only a reaction, but also a stimulus. [Sources: 1, 5]

— Slimane Zouggari

##### Sources #####

[0]: https://www.romanovgrave.com/one-question-one-answer/greg-drasler

[1]: https://medium.com/@ankitkoul26/life-without-apophenia-481606fa9fb0

[2]: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/reality-play/201207/being-amused-apophenia

[3]: https://ohart.agency/collect/efg-apophenia

[4]: https://soundcloud.com/adamdunetz/sets/apophenia

[5]: https://zilbest.com/psychology/why-we-love-conspiracy-theories/

[6]: https://uxdesign.cc/apophenia-a-patterned-life-45e50bdd5b5f

[7]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia

[8]: https://slate.com/technology/2014/09/apophenia-makes-unrelated-things-seem-connected-metaphors-paranormal-beliefs-conspiracies-delusions.html

[9]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/ideas/videos/why-we-are-so-prone-to-seeing-patterns-in-randomne/p0bb6sj8

[10]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apophenia

[11]: http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/651026-apophenia-aka-its-rigged/

[12]: https://dbpedia.org/page/Apophenia