background preloader


Facebook Twitter

Businessinsider. Bias. Rational Thinking. Stephen's Guide to the Logical Fallacies - by Stephen Downes. List of cognitive biases. Illustration by John Manoogian III (jm3).[1] Cognitive biases can be organized into four categories: biases that arise from too much information, not enough meaning, the need to act quickly, and the limits of memory. Cognitive biases are tendencies to think in certain ways that can lead to systematic deviations from a standard of rationality or good judgment, and are often studied in psychology and behavioral economics. There are also controversies over some of these biases as to whether they count as useless or irrational, or whether they result in useful attitudes or behavior.

For example, when getting to know others, people tend to ask leading questions which seem biased towards confirming their assumptions about the person. However, this kind of confirmation bias has also been argued to be an example of social skill: a way to establish a connection with the other person.[8] Decision-making, belief, and behavioral biases[edit] Social biases[edit] Memory errors and biases[edit] Notes[edit] Overcoming Our Aversion to Acknowledging Our Ignorance. Each December, The Economist forecasts the coming year in a special issue called The World in Whatever-The-Next-Year-Is.

Overcoming Our Aversion to Acknowledging Our Ignorance

It’s avidly read around the world. But then, like most forecasts, it’s forgotten. The editors may regret that short shelf-life some years, but surely not this one. Even now, only halfway through the year, The World in 2011 bears little resemblance to the world in 2011. Of the political turmoil in the Middle East—the revolutionary movements in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, and Syria—we find no hint in The Economist’s forecast. This is not to mock The Economist, which has an unusually deep bench of well-connected observers and analytical talent. That is all too typical. In the most comprehensive analysis of expert prediction ever conducted, Philip Tetlock assembled a group of some 280 anonymous volunteers—economists, political scientists, intelligence analysts, journalists—whose work involved forecasting to some degree or other. The same is true of resiliency. All Posts. How we (should) decide. Caspar Hare is interested in your choices.

How we (should) decide

Not the ones you’ve already made, but the ones you will make, and how you’ll go about making them. The more important, the better. By way of example, suppose you’re deciding between two careers: journalism and physics. You enjoy both, but for different reasons: Journalism lets you interact with a broad swath of society, exercise your passion for writing and reach a wider audience; physics, though, represents the allure of science, with the freedom to chart a research trajectory at the forefront of human knowledge. Suppose, too, for argument’s sake, that you had a pretty good idea of how each career would turn out.

In your mind, the two options — call them J and P — are so equally and oppositely attractive that you truly cannot decide. If you’re like most people, the answer is “not really.” Incommensurate values. Cognitive Biases. Cognitive bias. The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy. The Misconception: You take randomness into account when determining cause and effect.

The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy

The Truth: You tend to ignore random chance when the results seem meaningful or when you want a random event to have a meaningful cause. Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy were both presidents of the United States, elected 100 years apart. Both were shot and killed by assassins who were known by three names with 15 letters, John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald, and neither killer would make it to trial. Learning. Logic. Corpus.byu.

Understanding Data

Is Neuroscience the Death of Free Will? The Stone is a forum for contemporary philosophers and other thinkers on issues both timely and timeless. Is free will an illusion? Some leading scientists think so. Decision Making. Decoding The Science Of Decision Making. Don’t Blink! The Hazards of Confidence. A CONVERSATION WITH Daniel Kahneman - On Profit, Loss and the Mysteries of the Mind - Interview. ''Kahnemanandtversky.'' Everybody said it that way.

A CONVERSATION WITH Daniel Kahneman - On Profit, Loss and the Mysteries of the Mind - Interview

As if the Israeli psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky were a single person, and their work, which challenged long-held views of how people formed judgments and made choices, was the product of a single mind. Last month, Dr. Kahneman, a professor at Princeton, was awarded the Nobel in economics science, sharing the prize with Vernon L. Smith of George Mason University. ''I feel it is a joint prize,'' Dr. In Jerusalem, where their collaboration began in 1969, the two were inseparable, strolling on the grounds of Hebrew University or sitting at a cafe or drinking instant coffee in their shared office at the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute and talking, always talking. Every word of their papers, now classics studied by every graduate student in psychology or economics, was debated until ''a perfect consensus'' was reached. Wiry, charismatic, fizzing with intelligence, Dr.

But Dr. In a recent conversation, Dr. Q. A. Tools for Thinking. The Planning Fallacy. Harvard Decision Science Laboratory. Harvard Decision Science Laboratory. Harvard Decision Science Laboratory.