Study sets, textbooks, questions
Upgrade to remove ads
Cognitive Biases: Problem 2: Not Enough Meaning
Terms in this set (63)
We believe personal, specific examples vs. general, statistical information.
We attribute human traits, emotions, and intentions to non-human entities.
Appeal to probability fallacy
We take something for granted because it will probably be the case.
Argument from fallacy
We conclude the argument is false because the argument contains a fallacy.
We believe authority figures and be more influenced by their opinions.
We favor suggestions from automated decision-making systems and ignore contradictory information made without automation, even if it is correct.
We do things because other people are doing them, regardless of our own beliefs.
We think individuals are more attractive when they are in a group.
We erroneously consider "streaks" or "clusters" arising in small samples from random distributions to be non-random.
We unknowingly confuse imagined scenarios with actual memories.
We tend to recognize the faces of the race we are most familiar with.
Curse of knowledge
We unknowingly assume that someone has the knowledge or background to understand something.
We believe (without evidence) that a society or institution is going towards decline or failure.
We are less likely to spend larger bills than the equivalent value in smaller bills.
We believe every entity has a set of attributes that are necessary to its identity and function.
Extrinsic incentive bias
We attribute more extrinsic incentives than intrinsic incentives when evaluating the motives of others vs. ourselves.
We only use an object in the way it was intended to be used.
We believe that if something happens more frequently for a period of time, it will happen less frequently in the future.
Group attribution error
We believe characteristics of an individual are representative of a group, or that a group's decision is representative of all individuals within it.
Our overall impression of someone / something influences our feelings about that entity's character or properties.
After an event has occurred, we believe we could have predicted the event, despite little or no objective basis for predicting it
We believe that a person who has experienced success with a seemingly random event has a greater chance of further success in additional attempts.
Illusion of asymmetric insight
We think we perceive more about other people than they perceive about us.
Illusion of external agency
We search for and hold onto the most rewarding view of an event.
Illusion of transparency
We overestimate the degree to which our personal mental state is known by others.
Illusion of validity
We overestimate our ability to use data to accurately predict an outcome, especially when the data analyzed tells a coherent story.
We perceive relationships that don't exist between variables.
We overestimate the length/intensity of future feelings states.
We favor members of our in-group over out-group members.
Insensitivity to sample size
We judge the probability of obtaining a sample statistic without respect to the sample size.
We attribute consequences to—or expect consequences as the result of—a universal force that restores moral balance.
Magic number 7+-2
We can only hold 7+/-2 objects in our short term memory.
Masked man fallacy
We conclude that if one object has a certain property, while another object does not have the same property, the two objects cannot be identical.
We code, categorize and evaluate the same resource (i.e. money) differently based on how we frame the related transaction.
Moral credential effect
We use a history of doing good and altrustic things to create an unconscious license that increases our likelihood of less altruistic decisions later.
We assign blame or praise to a moral agent for consequences that are uncontrolled.
We think, "Anything that can go wrong will go wrong."
Neglect of probability
We disregard probability when making a decision.
We underestimate the possibility of disaster and assume things will always function as normal.
Not invented here
We avoid using products, ideas, or services of external origin.
Out-group homogeneity bias
We perceive people outside our group lack the diversity of those within our group.
We let the outcome of a decision affect our evaluation of the decision quality.
We perceive familiar patterns where none exisits (specifically in sounds or images).
We exaggerate the likelihood that negative things will happen to us.
We perceive an improvement in condition due to personal expectations, rather than the treatment itself.
We underestimate how long it will take us to complete a future task.
As we age, we attend to and remember more positive than negative information.
We believe innovation should be adopted by all society and cannot see that innovation's weaknesses.
We project current preferences onto future events.
We devalue an idea if it appears to come from an antagonist.
We believe a concept is of recent origin when in fact it is long-established.
We overestimate our ability to control impulsive behavior.
We judge the past disproportionately more positively than we judge the present.
We think we are more consistent in our attitudes, opinions, and beliefs than we actually are.
We think we're being noticed more than we really are.
We overgeneralize group characteristics or behaviors.
We judge the probability of the whole to be less than the probabilities of the parts.
We focus on the people who made it past the selection process and ignore those who did not.
We perceive recent events as being more remote than they are and distant events as being more recent than they are.
We misestimate the time that could be saved (or lost) when increasing (or decreasing) speed.
Ultimate attribution error
We explain an outgroup's negative behaviour as flaws in their personality and a positive behaviour as a result of chance or circumstance. We do the opposite for ingroup behavior.
Well-traveled road effect
We think well-traveled routes are are shorter than they actually are. We do the opposite for unfamiliar routes.
Zero sum bias
We judge a situation to be zero-sum when it is actually non-zero-sum.
Sets found in the same folder
Cognitive Biases: Problem 1: Too Much Information
Cognitive Biases: Problem 3: Need to Act Fast
Cognitive Biases: Problem 4: What Should We Rememb…
Cognitive Biases: Memory Errors and Biases
Sets with similar terms
Cognitive Biases: Problem 3: Need to Act Fast
Similarity to (identification with) the persuader
if the income elasticity for spam is -0.15, then spam is considered
How can the Loss Aversion bias be used as a motivational tool?
Imagine that you are hired to offer advice to an online movie rental company. How would you apply the concept of hyperbolic discounting.