Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

Closest for me would be:Belief biasTruthinessAn effect where...

First 120 Last

gumUnderfoot

20,976 Posts.

178

17/06/21

19:54

Post #: 53909747

Originally posted by DBT9: ↑
''I wasn't asking about them or other folks, I was asking about you.''

Why are you trying to make it personal? Considering the issue happens to be, what drives belief...isn't it that what you should trying to understand and address?

Are you looking for comfort in sharing personal experiences? Is this a social club where we all confide and share our personal lives? Hug and cry?

Perhaps you should join a mothers club or a knitting circle?

Meanwhile, here is a part of a list of cognitive biases to chew on:

Belief, decision-making and behavioral

These biases affect belief formation, reasoning processes, business and economic decisions, and human behavior in general.
Name Type Description
1 Agent detection False priors The inclination to presume the purposeful intervention of a sentient or intelligent agent.
2 Ambiguity effect Prospect theory The tendency to avoid options for which the probability of a favorable outcome is unknown.^[11]
3 Anchoring or focalism Anchoring bias The tendency to rely too heavily, or "anchor", on one trait or piece of information when making decisions (usually the first piece of information acquired on that subject).^[12]^[13]
4 Anthropocentric thinking Availability bias The tendency to use human analogies as a basis for reasoning about other, less familiar, biological phenomena.^[14]
5 Anthropomorphism orpersonification Availability bias The tendency to characterize animals, objects, and abstract concepts as possessing human-like traits, emotions, and intentions.^[15] The opposite bias, of not attributing feelings or thoughts to another person, is dehumanised perception,^[16] a type of objectification.
6 Attentional bias Availability bias The tendency of perception to be affected by recurring thoughts.^[17]
7 Attribute substitution Occurs when a judgment has to be made (of a target attribute) that is computationally complex, and instead a more easily calculated heuristic attribute is substituted. This substitution is thought of as taking place in the automatic intuitive judgment system, rather than the more self-aware reflective system.
8 Automation bias False priors The tendency to depend excessively on automated systems which can lead to erroneous automated information overriding correct decisions.^[18]
9 Availability heuristic Availability bias The tendency to overestimate the likelihood of events with greater "availability" in memory, which can be influenced by how recent the memories are or how unusual or emotionally charged they may be.^[19]
10 Backfire effect Confirmation bias The reaction to disconfirming evidence by strengthening one's previous beliefs.^[20] Note: the existence of this bias as a widespread phenomenon has been disputed in empirical studies.
11 Base rate fallacy orBase rate neglect Extension neglect The tendency to ignore general information and focus on information only pertaining to the specific case, even when the general information is more important.^[21]
12 Belief bias Truthiness An effect where someone's evaluation of the logical strength of an argument is biased by the believability of the conclusion.^[22]
13 Berkson's paradox Logical fallacy The tendency to misinterpret statistical experiments involving conditional probabilities.^[23]
14 Clustering illusion Apophenia The tendency to overestimate the importance of small runs, streaks, or clusters in large samples of random data (that is, seeing phantom patterns).^[13]
15 Compassion fade Extension neglect The predisposition to behave more compassionately towards a small number of identifiable victims than to a large number of anonymous ones.^[24]
16 Confirmation bias Confirmation bias The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions.^[25]
17 Congruence bias Confirmation bias The tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, instead of testing possible alternative hypotheses.^[13]
18 Conjunction fallacy Extension neglect The tendency to assume that specific conditions are more probable than a more general version of those same conditions.^[26]
19 Conservatism bias(belief revision) Anchoring bias The tendency to revise one's belief insufficiently when presented with new evidence.^[5]^[27]^[28]
20 Continued influence effect Confirmation bias The tendency to believe previously learned misinformation even after it has been corrected. Misinformation can still influence inferences one generates after a correction has occurred.^[29] cf. Backfire effect
21 Contrast effect Framing effect The enhancement or reduction of a certain stimulus' perception when compared with a recently observed, contrasting object.^[30]
22 Curse of knowledge When better-informed people find it extremely difficult to think about problems from the perspective of lesser-informed people.^[31]
23 Declinism The predisposition to view the past favorably (rosy retrospection) and future negatively.^[32]
24 Decoy effect Framing effect Preferences for either option A or B change in favor of option B when option C is presented, which is completely dominated by option B (inferior in all respects) and partially dominated by option A.^[33]
25 Default effect Framing effect When given a choice between several options, the tendency to favor the default one.^[34]
26 Denomination effect Framing effect The tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts (e.g., coins) rather than large amounts (e.g., bills).^[35]
27 Disposition effect Prospect theory The tendency to sell an asset that has accumulated in value and resist selling an asset that has declined in value.
28 Distinction bias Framing effect The tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them simultaneously than when evaluating them separately.^[36]
29 Dread aversion Prospect theory Just as losses yield double the emotional impact of gains, dread yields double the emotional impact of savouring.^[37][1]
30 Dunning–Kruger effect The tendency for unskilled individuals to overestimate their own ability and the tendency for experts to underestimate their own ability.^[38]
31 Duration neglect Extension neglect The neglect of the duration of an episode in determining its value.^[39]
32 Empathy gap The tendency to underestimate the influence or strength of feelings, in either oneself or others.^[40]
33 End-of-history illusion The age-independent belief that one will change less in the future than one has in the past.^[41]
34 Endowment effect Prospect theory The tendency for people to demand much more to give up an object than they would be willing to pay to acquire it.^[42]
35 Exaggerated expectation The tendency to expect or predict more extreme outcomes than those outcomes that actually happen.^[5]
36 Experimenter's orexpectation bias Confirmation bias The tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations.^[43]
37 Forer effect orBarnum effect Egocentric bias The observation that individuals will give high accuracy ratings to descriptions of their personality that supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people. This effect can provide a partial explanation for the widespread acceptance of some beliefs and practices, such as astrology, fortune telling, graphology, and some types of personality tests.^[44]
38 Form function attribution bias In human–robot interaction, the tendency of people to make systematic errors when interacting with a robot. People may base their expectations and perceptions of a robot on its appearance (form) and attribute functions which do not necessarily mirror the true functions of the robot.^[45]
39 Framing effect Framing effect Drawing different conclusions from the same information, depending on how that information is presented.
40 Frequency illusion orBaader–Meinhof phenomenon Availability bias The frequency illusion is that once something has been noticed then every instance of that thing is noticed, leading to the belief it has a high frequency of occurrence (a form of selection bias).^[46] The Baader–Meinhof phenomenon is the illusion where something that has recently come to one's attention suddenly seems to appear with improbable frequency shortly afterwards.^[47]^[48] It was named after an incidence of frequency illusion in which the Baader–Meinhof Group was mentioned.^[49]
41 Functional fixedness Anchoring bias Limits a person to using an object only in the way it is traditionally used.^[50]
42 Gambler's fallacy Logical fallacy The tendency to think that future probabilities are altered by past events, when in reality they are unchanged. The fallacy arises from an erroneous conceptualization of the law of large numbers. For example, "I've flipped heads with this coin five times consecutively, so the chance of tails coming out on the sixth flip is much greater than heads."^[51]
43 Gender bias False priors A widely held^[52] set of implicit biases that discriminate against a gender. For example, the assumption that women are less suited to jobs requiring high intellectual ability.^[53] Or the assumption that people or animals are male in the absence of any indicators of gender.^[54]
44 Hard–easy effect The tendency to overestimate one's ability to accomplish hard tasks, and underestimate one's ability to accomplish easy tasks^[5]^[55]^[56]^[57]
45 Hindsight bias Sometimes called the "I-knew-it-all-along" effect, the tendency to see past events as being predictable^[58] at the time those events happened.
46 Hot-hand fallacy Logical fallacy The "hot-hand fallacy" (also known as the "hot hand phenomenon" or "hot hand") is the belief that a person who has experienced success with a random event has a greater chance of further success in additional attempts.
47 Hyperbolic discounting Extension neglect Discounting is the tendency for people to have a stronger preference for more immediate payoffs relative to later payoffs. Hyperbolic discounting leads to choices that are inconsistent over time – people make choices today that their future selves would prefer not to have made, despite using the same reasoning.^[59] Also known as current moment bias, present-bias, and related to Dynamic inconsistency. A good example of this: a study showed that when making food choices for the coming week, 74% of participants chose fruit, whereas when the food choice was for the current day, 70% chose chocolate.
48 IKEA effect Effort justification The tendency for people to place a disproportionately high value on objects that they partially assembled themselves, such as furniture from IKEA, regardless of the quality of the end product.^[60]
49 Illicit transference Logical fallacy Occurs when a term in the distributive (referring to every member of a class) and collective (referring to the class itself as a whole) sense are treated as equivalent. The two variants of this fallacy are the fallacy of composition and the fallacy of division.
50 Illusion of control Egocentric bias The tendency to overestimate one's degree of influence over other external events.^[61]
51 Illusion of validity Egocentric bias Overestimating the accuracy of one's judgments, especially when available information is consistent or inter-correlated.^[62]
52 Illusory correlation Apophenia Inaccurately perceiving a relationship between two unrelated events.^[63]^[64]
53 Illusory truth effect Truthiness A tendency to believe that a statement is true if it is easier to process, or if it has been stated multiple times, regardless of its actual veracity. These are specific cases of truthiness.
54 Impact bias The tendency to overestimate the length or the intensity of the impact of future feeling states.^[65]
55 Implicit association Availability bias The speed with which people can match words depends on how closely they are associated.
56 Information bias The tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect action.^[66]
57 Insensitivity to sample size Extension neglect The tendency to under-expect variation in small samples.
58 Interoceptive bias The tendency for sensory input about the body itself to affect one's judgement about external, unrelated circumstances. (As for example, in parole judges who are more lenient when fed and rested.) ^[67]^[68]^[69]^[70]
59 Irrational escalation orEscalation of commitment Logical fallacy The phenomenon where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong. Also known as the sunk cost fallacy.
60 Law of the instrument Anchoring bias An over-reliance on a familiar tool or methods, ignoring or under-valuing alternative approaches. "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."
61 Less-is-better effect Extension neglect The tendency to prefer a smaller set to a larger set judged separately, but not jointly.
62 Loss aversion Prospect theory The perceived disutility of giving up an object is greater than the utility associated with acquiring it.^[71] (see also Sunk cost effects and endowment effect).
63 Mere exposure effect Familiarity principle The tendency to express undue liking for things merely because of familiarity with them.^[72]
64 Money illusion The tendency to concentrate on the nominal value (face value) of money rather than its value in terms of purchasing power.^[73]
65 Moral credential effect Occurs when someone who does something good gives themselves permission to be less good in the future.
66 Neglect of probability Extension neglect The tendency to completely disregard probability when making a decision under uncertainty.^[74]
67 Non-adaptive choice switching^[75] After experiencing a bad outcome with a decision problem, the tendency to avoid the choice previously made when faced with the same decision problem again, even though the choice was optimal. Also known as "once bitten, twice shy" or "hot stove effect".
68 Normalcy bias Cognitive dissonance The refusal to plan for, or react to, a disaster which has never happened before.
69 Observer-expectancy effect Confirmation bias When a researcher expects a given result and therefore unconsciously manipulates an experiment or misinterprets data in order to find it (see also subject-expectancy effect).
70 Omission bias The tendency to judge harmful actions (commissions) as worse, or less moral, than equally harmful inactions (omissions).^[76]
71 Optimism bias The tendency to be over-optimistic, underestimating greatly the probability of undesirable outcomes and overestimating favorable and pleasing outcomes (see also wishful thinking, valence effect, positive outcome bias).^[77]^[78]
72 Ostrich effect Ignoring an obvious (negative) situation.
73 Outcome bias The tendency to judge a decision by its eventual outcome instead of based on the quality of the decision at the time it was made.
74 Overconfidence effect Egocentric bias Excessive confidence in one's own answers to questions. For example, for certain types of questions, answers that people rate as "99% certain" turn out to be wrong 40% of the time.^[5]^[79]^[80]^[81]
75 Pareidolia Apophenia A vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) is perceived as significant, e.g., seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon, and hearing non-existent hidden messages on records played in reverse.
76 Pessimism bias The tendency for some people, especially those suffering from depression, to overestimate the likelihood of negative things happening to them.
77 Plan continuation bias Logical fallacy Failure to recognize that the original plan of action is no longer appropriate for a changing situation or for a situation that is different than anticipated.^[82]
78 Planning fallacy Egocentric bias The tendency to underestimate one's own task-completion times.^[65]
79 Present bias The tendency of people to give stronger weight to payoffs that are closer to the present time when considering trade-offs between two future moments.^[83]
80 Plant blindness The tendency to ignore plants in their environment and a failure to recognize and appreciate the utility of plants to life on earth.^[84]
81 Prevention bias When investing money to protect against risks, decision makers perceive that a dollar spent on prevention buys more security than a dollar spent on timely detection and response, even when investing in either option is equally effective.^[85]
82 Probability matching Sub-optimal matching of the probability of choices with the probability of reward in a stochastic context.
83 Pro-innovation bias The tendency to have an excessive optimism towards an invention or innovation's usefulness throughout society, while often failing to identify its limitations and weaknesses.
84 Projection bias The tendency to overestimate how much our future selves share one's current preferences, thoughts and values, thus leading to sub-optimal choices.^[86]^[87]^[88]

List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia
Expand
Closest for me would be:

Belief bias Truthiness An effect where someone's evaluation of the logical strength of an argument is biased by the believability of the conclusion.^[22]
= 4

And you perhaps:

Curse of knowledge When better-informed people find it extremely difficult to think about problems from the perspective of lesser-informed people.^[31]

So what's your IQ, about 162?

There are more pages in this discussion • 1,081 more messages in this thread...

First 120 Last