Cognitive Traps and Our Own Bias

Cognitive Traps and Our Own Bias

I was thinking of posting this in the science section, but I'd rather have a
broader audience. This thread is supposed to be about our own bias, how
our mind can trick us into believing false things and how decisions we think
we make freely, in reality are rather a reaction by our self-deluding nature.

Also I think this is wonderful for self-reflection and to question one's own
motives and reasons for believing, acting and doing things, the way we do.

My goals for this thread:
1. collecting sources and literature related to the OP for a bigger picture
(If this works out, I can also always edit this post and add them to a list)
2. discussion of examples that would affect us in our daily routine
3. self-analysis, (e.g. do you notice any traps you have fallen into before?
Do you see any in your recent behaviour? - maybe even through posting?)
4. Maybe learning something and avoiding these traps everyone falls into.
5. Maybe even discussion on further implications of our manipulative nature.

I would like to start this off with a Google Talk by Dan Ariely, a behavioral
economist, who is leading a research group at MIT. This focuses on our
irrationality in decision-making and how we are affected by, for example,
given alternatives. I have chosen this talk, because I believe that on the
one hand Ariely is very entertaining to listen to, on the other, he's very
informative and regarded as a leading researcher in this particular field.



If you'd like a shorter version, I'd also recommend his TED Talk.



================================================== =

The second article and the reason I created this thread, is a listing of the
Top 10 Thinking Traps that we fall into really often. Even though most of
them are common knowledge, it is still useful to collect, discuss and think
about them. (Here you could share own experiences with any of the points)

I just copy & paste a summarized version of the article, to avoid a wall of
text, but to still outline the key points. Please visit the link, if you want
more detail and the actual words. I have changed some of the sentences.

Top 10 Thinking Traps Exposed — How to Foolproof Your Mind
http://litemind.com/thinking-traps-2/

1. The Anchoring Trap: Over-Relying on First Thoughts

Spoiler for The Anchoring Trap:

Your starting point can heavily bias your thinking: initial impressions, ideas,
estimates or data “anchor” subsequent thoughts.

What can you do?
- Always view a problem from different perspectives
- Think on your own before consulting others
- Seek information from a wide variety of sources

2. The Status Quo Trap: Keeping on Keeping On

Spoiler for The Status Quo Trap:

We tend to repeat established behaviors, unless we are given the right
incentives to entice us to change them. The status quo automatically has an
advantage over every other alternative.

What can you do?
- Consider the status quo as just another alternative
- Know your objectives
- Avoid exaggerating switching costs

3. The Sunk Cost Trap: Protecting Earlier Choices

Spoiler for The Sunk Cost Trap:

(own summary)

You have already purchased a ticket to a concert, but you don't feel like
going, because of a blizzard. The best alternative to choose now, would
be to stay home, since the costs are already gone and not to be considered.
It’s a sunk cost, and it shouldn’t influence your decision.

further article on sunc costs

What can you do?
- Be OK with making mistakes.
- Listen to people who were not involved in the earlier decisions
- Focus on your goals

4. The Confirmation Trap: Seeing What You Want to See

Spoiler for The Confirmation Trap:

Confirmation Trap: looking for information that will most likely support your
initial point of view — while conveniently avoiding information that challenges
it. This confirmation bias affects not only where you go to collect evidence,
but also how you interpret the data.

What can you do?
- Expose yourself to conflicting information
- Get a devil’s advocate
- Don’t ask leading questions

5. The Incomplete Information Trap: Review Your Assumptions

Spoiler for The Incomplete Information Trap:

Overlooking a simple data element can make our intuitions go completely
astray. We keep mental images — simplifications of reality — that makes us
jump to conclusions before questioning assumptions or checking whether we
have enough information.

What can you do?
- Make your assumptions explicit
- Always favor hard data over mental simplifications

6. The Conformity Trap: Everybody Else Is Doing It

Spoiler for The Conformity Trap:

Asch conformity experiments

This “herd instinct” exists — to different degrees — in all of us. Even if we
hate to admit it, other people’s actions do heavily influence ours. We fear
looking dumb: failing along with many people is frequently not considered a
big deal, but when we fail alone we must take all the heat ourselves. There’s
always peer pressure to adopt the behaviors of the groups we’re in.

What can you do?
- Discount the influence of others
- Beware “social proof”
- Be courageous

7. The Illusion of Control Trap: Shooting in the Dark

Spoiler for The Illusion Of Control:

Curiously, even in situations we clearly can’t control, we still tend to irrationally
believe that we can somehow influence results. We just love to feel in control.

What can you do?
- Understand that randomness is part and parcel of life
- Beware of superstitions

8. The Coincidence Trap: We Suck at Probabilities

Spoiler for The Coincidence Trap:

Birthday Problem

This means that the “miracle” is not only possible but — given enough
attempts — its likelihood increases to a point of becoming almost inevitable.

What can you do?
- Don’t over-rely on gut estimates
- Beware of “after the fact” probabilities

9. The Recall Trap: Not All Memories Are Created Equal

Spoiler for The Recall Trap:

What happens is we analyze information based on experience, on what we
can remember from it. Because of that, we’re overly influenced by events
that stand out from others, such as those with highly dramatic impact or
very recent ones. The more “special” an event is, the greater the potential
to distort our thinking.

What can you do?
- Get hard data
- Be aware of your emotions
- Beware the media

10. The Superiority Trap: The Average is Above Average

Spoiler for The Superiority Trap:

A study surveyed drivers asking them to compare their driving skills to other
people in the experiment. Almost all the participants (93%!) rated themselves
as ‘above average’. With few exceptions, people have much inflated views of
themselves. They overestimate their skills and capabilities, leading to many
errors in judgment.

What can you do?
- Be humble
- Surround yourself with honest people
- Don’t go overboard

and last, but not least, here is an article that focusses on
"Ten Psychology Studies from 2009 Worth Knowing About".
I'm not sure how much it correlates, but I thought it was
fitting to the general context of the thread and is related
to the question of 'how we function'.

Spoiler for Summary:

1. If you have to choose between buying something or spending
the money on a memorable experience, go with the experience.

study

2. First impressions are all about value

study

3. The “money illusion”—the tendency to allow the nominal value of
money (amount of currency) to interfere with the real value (value
of goods the money can buy)—is all in your head.

study

4. Playing video games could be an unlikely cure for psychological trauma.

study

5. All of us spend time riding the moral self-regulation see saw.

study

6. If you’re preparing for a specific challenge, make sure you prep for that
challenge and not just ones like it.

study

7. If someone is trying to sell you something, be extra careful to keep your
psychological distance.

study

8. Turns out, saying you’re sorry really is important—and not just to you.

study

9. We can become bored with just about anything, but there may be a way
to reverse the habituation blues.

study

10. If you’re a man and find yourself in an argument with your significant other,
choose your words very carefully.

study

Congratulations, you have finished everything. Please discuss now.

:)

I really liked this whole post, its quite true for most of us. Even if we are careful, at some time or another we get caught up in out own bias. Whats that last number 10 mean though? I didnt get it from the abstract link.

10. If you’re a man and find yourself in an argument with your significant other,
choose your words very carefully.

either way, if we truly believe in equal rights...women should be just as nice to men.

Yes you are right, without context it's a little odd.

But here is what it said on the page:

10. If you’re a man and find yourself in an argument with your significant other, choose your words very carefully.
Not only do they affect the other person, but research in the journal Health Psychology suggests that they can also significantly impact your health. In the heat of stressful conflict, your brain is commanding the release of a stress-chemical cocktail comprised of proteins called cytokines–produced by cells in the immune system to help the body mount an immune response during infection. Abnormally high levels of these proteins are linked to cardiovascular disease, type-2 diabetes, arthritis and some cancers. This study suggests that how rational or emotional your communication is directly corresponds with the levels of those chemicals in your body and the damage they can do. Thing is, the same rules don’t apply to men and women—levels of cytokines in men show an increase over time, but in women they don’t. Why? Women may just be better at communication, or just luckier in this particular biological lottery.

Article

Basically - words and arguments can affect us physically. Men moreso then women.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tkdyo

I really liked this whole post, its quite true for most of us. Even if we are careful, at some time or another we get caught up in out own bias.

---

The issue would be that while we might avoid most of them, most of
the time, there will always be the danger of not thinking clearly at any point.
And I think events have shown that even intelligent people are not excluded.

And just like that I already stepped into number 9. :)

I agree and disagree! The real traps in our lives aren't something you can find out about by reading something on the internet that puts it so simply as the "top ten thinking traps".

The real traps we encounter in our lives are personal. They could be mental traps given to you by your parents, by your religion or culture, by your school, they could be traps given to you by friends, lovers, strangers, are ones you created all by yourself. These mental 'traps' are worldviews, ideas about life, about how things are supposed to work. Or how things don't work. They effect you virtually every moment. Only YOU can uncover what ever mental limit you have placed on yourself.

The problem with your Top Ten is they are superficial. Sure they offer alternatives to our daily behavior, but they don't even ask us why we have these behaviors to begin with. Your behavior WILL NOT CHANGE until you dig deep. Deeper. Our subconscious is the real force driving most of our activity. Our subconscious is the one pumping out these emotions, and our emotional responses. Which is why, since they don't come from the consciousness, that our emotions seem out of our control.

The relationship between the conscious and the subconscious is a constant feed-loop. If you really want to take conscious control of your decisions, activity and emotions - you need to make a conscious effort to get in tuned with your subconscious. When you do your subconscious will open up and expose your limiting behaviors and beliefs.

When you finally do expose the belief or behavior the subconscious is not going to give it up - unless you are first CONSCIOUSLY willing to accept a new one to replace it! If you DO NOT accept a new one, it WILL NOT give up the old one. Nature abhors a vacuum! Consciously accepting a new behavior to replace an old one, also means consciously accepting that you will change.



Are you comfortable with changing who you are?



Imagine a person who has been suffering from depression all their life:

Their room is a mess because they lack the motivation to clean it. But this mess frustrates them so much they also lack the motivation to do creative activities, like writing or drawing. They don't see the point in dressing up nicely and claim they don't care if other people think of them as ugly. But if other people do they will be emotionally hurt. They overly sensitive and take what everyone thinks or says about them super seriously. And even when they say they don't care what other people think about them, you know its a lie because they say it with bitter anger, or they will moan, whine complain about it later. They use any little thing that went wrong as an excuse to be miserable the entire day, not owning up to where this anger is really coming from.

(No........ do not tell me you've been pissed for the last three hours because you couldn't find a clean spoon!)

What if one day they do decide they want to feel peaceful, satisfied, happy? Is this individual really ready to choose to be happy?

But what does this choice mean? ITS MEANS YOU WILL CHANGE AS A PERSON! It means this depressed person they think they are WILL DISAPPEAR!

They will dress differently, in a way that makes them confident in happy. No, not to please other people or society. But to please them self. They will talk to people differently. They will laugh in public more. They will listen to different music. They might even start to hate their old musical tastes! They will eat differently. They will keep their room clean and BE the person who does create creative things. Rather than be the person who only wishes they were creative. They will be more open to admitting when someone does hurt them, rather then bottling it all up inside (self-honesty). They will have so much more self-respect and love, they can lighten up, and not take every little thing so seriously. And rather than taking every little thing so seriously, they can start to see the humor in mishaps! LIFE CAN BE VERY FUNNY! No more whining. No more moaning. No more excuses.


This is why choosing to be happy is so hard for depressed people. Not all depressed people believe THEY are the ones who need to change. They think happiness should be able to fit into their limiting lifestyle, when it can't. While the saying happiness is within you is true, that doesn't mean it can fit into any lifestyle. Changing a lifestyle is hard because we identify with it so strongly.

An even worse case scenario is an emo who thinks happy optimistic people are ignorant retards! Their false belief literally communicates to their subconscious to never allow them to feel optimistic. Here's why you need to dig deep. Not all emos realize they have this belief. Some of them are just grossed out by happy people :cheeky:





Dig deep into your subconscious. Let go and accept self-change. Otherwise you are never in control of your conscious activity. (or your emotions for that matter!)

It's interesting that somebody other than myself made this thread. I've been thinking about doing something like this thread for a long time (although I was considering focusing on just one or two "biases" and going into greater detail). This is literally almost exactly what I study. In fact, one of my graduating labmates just accepted a postdoc position under Dan Ariely.

Spoiler for better videos:

I enjoy Dan Ariely's speaking and his writing, but there are (IMHO) even better online videos that bear on similar topics. I'm thinking of Dan Gilbert; he's basically my hero when it comes to speaking and writing about psychology.
Here's a TED talk he gave on heuristics and biases, though he apparently wants to say that it's about well-being:

Here's a two part video on perceptions of and responses to global warming:

Anyway, I can't figure out if I am pleased or displeased that these things are being discussed so, erm, "casually" by nonscientists. I suppose the visibility is a good thing. It's just frustrating to see the way people describe some of these phenomena. The findings are so deflated. They come off as trivial and atheoretical. This is almost certainly the kind of thing that the physicist Ernest Rutherford had in mind when he made his infamous "stamp collecting" statement. This is unfortunate because the field of JDM (Judgment and Decision Making, the area from which most of these findings are drawn) is incredibly theoretically rich and highly relevant to so many aspects of life. Another frustrating thing, this time about the list of "top" psychology studies, is that while the findings are billed as cutting edge, most of them are actually just subtle methodological variations on ideas which haven't been new or profound for decades. For example, #1 is (believe it or not) actually a conceptual replication of my advisor's PhD thesis from more than 10 years ago, and #2 is a neuroscientist telling us what a psychologist named Bob Zajonc demonstrated exactly 30 years ago. (It's gratifying to see that this effect occurs somewhere within the brain--just as we suspected!--but it's not very informative. But that's another discussion entirely.) I mean sure, it's interesting stuff, but it isn't new, and the superficial treatment has stripped the findings of their underlying theoretical implications, which is where things really get interesting. (The videos I linked to above are popularized in similar ways--perhaps a little less so--but they're at least a lot more thought provoking, not to mention entertaining.)

That sounds pretty negative, but I don't want to be interpreted as trying to squelch the discussion--far from it. The biases are interesting even on their face. Sunk cost reasoning is utterly ubiquitous, and what makes it all the more interesting is that it's really easy to get people to realize the fallacious nature of their reasoning simply by getting them to think harder about it. ("You already spent 100 of your hard earned dollars which you will never get back, so what on Earth is the rational basis for making yourself even more unhappy by forcing yourself to do something you really don't want to do anymore?")

The blurb about the illusion of control is just the tip of the iceberg of a vast literature on perceptions of causality and correlation. It's been said that nature abhors a vacuum; well, the human mind abhors randomness.

What's really interesting to me about the "superiority effect" is how easily it can be reversed. You simply ask people about something they don't think they're any good at. Then not only do they say that they aren't superior to other people, they actually vastly overestimate the extent to which they are worse than average! This is one of many cases of egocentric reasoning: we place far too much weight on our own thoughts, beliefs and actions when making generalizations about others.

One of the most interesting questions in all of psychology, although only tangentially related to the heuristics and biases literature, is that of self-knowledge. Most people take comfort that, if we can never truly know anything else about any other person, we can at least know ourselves. It turns out that our insight into what actually influences or leads to our behavior is frighteningly limited, despite the fact that we feel so certain about it. If you only ever read one psychology paper in your entire life, it should be this classic.

Alright. Surprising answers.

I just want to make sure that you know that I very much appreciated the
long responses, although I don't have the time right now to answer with as
much detail as I want to. I will in a day or two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

I agree and disagree!

---

with what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

The real traps in our lives aren't something you can find out about by reading something on the internet that puts it so simply as the "top ten thinking traps".

---

I wasn't talking about " the real" traps. Or any other than cognitive ones.
While I do agree that a 'Top Ten' is probably not the best way to present it
in the most scientific or meaningful way, it was supposed to start this
discussion off. I'm not trivializing life, don't worry, but sometimes models
are helpful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

The real traps we encounter in our lives are personal.

---

I agree that a lot are. Nothing in my post suggested otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

They could be mental traps given to you by your parents, by your religion or culture, by your school, they could be traps given to you by friends, lovers, strangers, are ones you created all by yourself. These mental 'traps' are worldviews, ideas about life, about how things are supposed to work. Or how things don't work. They effect you virtually every moment.

---

I am very aware of all of this. But these are actually broader descriptions.

A way how you are being formed by culture, or school, (..) is even made
possible, because of our susceptible nature. What I am trying to describe
are (some of) the mechanisms that explain further how we are influenced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

Only YOU can uncover what ever mental limit you have placed on yourself.

---

Who else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

The problem with your Top Ten is they are superficial. Sure they offer alternatives to our daily behavior, but they don't even ask us why we have these behaviors to begin with.

---

I think you are misreading the depth or purpose of this article.

But I agree with you that a random top ten list is not going to be the road
to enlightenment or to self-control, but it is a way to start a thinking process.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

Your behavior WILL NOT CHANGE until you dig deep.

---

Believe me, I am.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

Deeper.

---

no really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

Are you comfortable with changing who you are?

---

Very, actually. It's kind of a hobby of mine.

I will respond to the last few paragraphs in this way:
There is someone, on the other side of the planet, who is also thinking
about all of the questions about our deeper nature. But with so much
variety in life, with all the different and personal experiences that form
the subconscious (and therefore guide us), there is clearly no one right
way of living and I just, mainly because all of this is very personal, form
my own ideas and guidelines, live my life as I whish to, but just the same
grant anyone else the possibility to do so. (I assumed that planet thing, btw)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

Imagine a person who has been suffering from depression all their life:

Their room is a mess because they lack the motivation to clean it. But this mess frustrates them so much they also lack the motivation to do creative activities, like writing or drawing. They don't see the point in dressing up nicely and claim they don't care if other people think of them as ugly. But if other people do they will be emotionally hurt. They overly sensitive and take what everyone thinks or says about them super seriously. And even when they say they don't care what other people think about them, you know its a lie because they say it with bitter anger, or they will moan, whine complain about it later. They use any little thing that went wrong as an excuse to be miserable the entire day, not owning up to where this anger is really coming from.

(No........ do not tell me you've been pissed for the last three hours because you couldn't find a clean spoon!)

What if one day they do decide they want to feel peaceful, satisfied, happy? Is this individual really ready to choose to be happy?

But what does this choice mean? ITS MEANS YOU WILL CHANGE AS A PERSON! It means this depressed person they think they are WILL DISAPPEAR!

They will dress differently, in a way that makes them confident in happy. No, not to please other people or society. But to please them self. They will talk to people differently. They will laugh in public more. They will listen to different music. They might even start to hate their old musical tastes! They will eat differently. They will keep their room clean and BE the person who does create creative things. Rather than be the person who only wishes they were creative. They will be more open to admitting when someone does hurt them, rather then bottling it all up inside (self-honesty). They will have so much more self-respect and love, they can lighten up, and not take every little thing so seriously. And rather than taking every little thing so seriously, they can start to see the humor in mishaps! LIFE CAN BE VERY FUNNY! No more whining. No more moaning. No more excuses.

---

I'm really not sure to whom this is directed towards.

No, why would I be pissed about not finding a spoon? I put my cell phone
in the washing maschine 2 weeks ago and haven't been pissed about it
being broken for even one second. I laughed at my stupidity and went on
living my live, enjoying the fact that I can not be reached every second of
every day.

As for the very colourful description of a depressed person coming out of
the depression,.. it's a very nice and also possible way, how it could happen.
I just fail to see the relevance and it is clearly just on of the possibilities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

This is why choosing to be happy is so hard for depressed people. Not all depressed people believe THEY are the ones who need to change. They think happiness should be able to fit into their limiting lifestyle, when it can't. While the saying happiness is within you is true, that doesn't mean it can fit into any lifestyle. Changing a lifestyle is hard because we identify with it so strongly.

An even worse case scenario is an emo who thinks happy optimistic people are ignorant retards! Their false belief literally communicates to their subconscious to never allow them to feel optimistic. Here's why you need to dig deep. Not all emos realize they have this belief. Some of them are just grossed out by happy people :cheeky:

Dig deep into your subconscious. Let go and accept self-change. Otherwise you are never in control of your conscious activity. (or your emotions for that matter!)

---

Now I have a tip for you:
Stop thinking in absolutes and stereotypes. Not only can your points
come off as preachy or sometimes misdirected (you assume lot of things
for not knowing me), but it also limits your own view of the world. I'm sure
you are just giving examples as to illustrate your points, even though I am
not sure this is the right thread, but it sounds as if you knew what happiness
or fulfillment were, but you just know what they are to you.

On a different note, even though we might disagree on specifics,
you are basically preaching to the choir.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuB

It's interesting that somebody other than myself made this thread. I've been thinking about doing something like this thread for a long time (although I was considering focusing on just one or two "biases" and going into greater detail). This is literally almost exactly what I study. In fact, one of my graduating labmates just accepted a postdoc position under Dan Ariely.

---

Jackpot. This is great. I would love a more insightful view of some of the
specifics. Since I wanted a broader discussion that does include science,
but would not be restricted to it, it may be a good idea to open up a more
detailed thread in the science section.

Also I don't want to feel like I have stolen your topic of expertise.

Quote:

---

Dan Gilbert

---

Thank you. Did not know him.

All you have to share will be greatly appreciated. I will read and view
everything you have linked to, although it might be a week or two until
I actually have.

If you don't mind, I would link the information you posted in the OP as well,
with reference of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuB

Anyway, I can't figure out if I am pleased or displeased that these things are being discussed so, erm, "casually" by nonscientists. I suppose the visibility is a good thing. It's just frustrating to see the way people describe some of these phenomena. The findings are so deflated. They come off as trivial and atheoretical.

---

I know what you mean and I understand.

It is not my intent to deflate any of this, at all. I wouldn't even have made
a thread about this, if I haven't thought of it being important. But as with
any sector, there needs to come a time when it is publicly acknowledged.

And it most likely is not going to be implented into mainstream thought in a
way that is satisfying to a specialist in this sector. Also there are many areas
that hold great importance, especially to those working on it.

The very act of opening up a thread like this on a non-psychology forum,
which you stated you would have done also, would subject the issue to the
public, non-scientific and 'casual' debate.

What I am trying to say is that you might as well just be happy about the
fact that it gets public acknowledgment, which is good for your future field
of work and, as getting mad about rain, you can't really do anything about
it anyway, since this is pretty normal for probably any complex, scientific
issue, making it out of the labs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuB

Another frustrating thing, this time about the list of "top" psychology studies, is that while the findings are billed as cutting edge, most of them are actually just subtle methodological variations on ideas which haven't been new or profound for decades. For example, #1 is (believe it or not) actually a conceptual replication of my advisor's PhD thesis from more than 10 years ago, and #2 is a neuroscientist telling us what a psychologist named Bob Zajonc demonstrated exactly 30 years ago. (It's gratifying to see that this effect occurs somewhere within the brain--just as we suspected!--but it's not very informative. But that's another discussion entirely.) I mean sure, it's interesting stuff, but it isn't new, and the superficial treatment has stripped the findings of their underlying theoretical implications, which is where things really get interesting.

---

I don't even really know why I posted this list.

I absolutely see your points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuB

That sounds pretty negative, but I don't want to be interpreted as trying to squelch the discussion--far from it.

---

I read your post quite a few times, and the more I read it, the less negative
it became. To the point that I can see nothing negative about it and find myself
agreeing with you and awaiting further insightful posts. :-)

Basically, your post was great. Better than I had hoped for. And great to think about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuB

("You already spent 100 of your hard earned dollars which you will never get back, so what on Earth is the rational basis for making yourself even more unhappy by forcing yourself to do something you really don't want to do anymore?")

---

Hehe, yes.
And realizing this, the nagging feeling about the already spent dollars
usually vanishes as well. It's really funny, how we make ourselves more
unhappy with this. (Also worrying about the sunk costs - they are gone,
there is no point).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuB

The blurb about the illusion of control is just the tip of the iceberg of a vast literature on perceptions of causality and correlation. It's been said that nature abhors a vacuum; well, the human mind abhors randomness.

---

Feel free to name a few. I'm always looking for good scientific books to read.
Especially this psychological area interests me and I would in fact read them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuB

What's really interesting to me about the "superiority effect" is how easily it can be reversed. You simply ask people about something they don't think they're any good at. Then not only do they say that they aren't superior to other people, they actually vastly overestimate the extent to which they are worse than average! This is one of many cases of egocentric reasoning: we place far too much weight on our own thoughts, beliefs and actions when making generalizations about others.

---

Absolutely agreed.

In a way, the inferiority complex often times seems to be connected to an
argument from authority. If people expect someone to be an expert in a
certain field, they quickly start underestimating their own abilities, even if
it was absolutely unneccessary, or the initial thought was correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuB

One of the most interesting questions in all of psychology, although only tangentially related to the heuristics and biases literature, is that of self-knowledge. Most people take comfort that, if we can never truly know anything else about any other person, we can at least know ourselves. It turns out that our insight into what actually influences or leads to our behavior is frighteningly limited, despite the fact that we feel so certain about it. If you only ever read one psychology paper in your entire life, it should be this classic.

---

Definitely.

This would even branch into neurology and seeing how incredibly complexe
our brains are, even just observing its functions.

But I love that as soon as you have opened a door in the sciences of the mind
and have gained further understanding, it seems that there are three new doors
that need three new keys, to grasp what we are seeing.

Thanks for the link to the paper, it's saved and will be read.

Sorry for the delayed response. Busy week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dajo

Also I don't want to feel like I have stolen your topic of expertise.

---

Haha... "expertise" is perhaps still a bit strong. It's my area of "interest." ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dajo

If you don't mind, I would link the information you posted in the OP as well,
with reference of course.

---

Here are some of the papers that I mentioned either directly or indirectly:
Feeling and Thinking: Preferences Need No Inferences
Skilled or Unskilled, but Still Unaware of It: How Perceptions of Difficulty Drive Miscalibration in Relative Comparisons
To Do or to Have? That Is the Question
The Sunk Cost and Concorde Effects: Are Humans Less Rational Than Lower Animals?
The Hot Hand in Basketball: On the Misperception of Random Sequences

If you're really into this stuff, there is a famous edited collection on the subject that is sort of like the Bible for this particular research tradition (although the Zajonc and experientialism papers are not considered part of that tradition). It's a hefty volume but a really great read, about half high-impact published articles and half original contributions:
Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment

And if you're feeling really ambitious, you should add to that its sister tomes:
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (The original H&B collection circa 1982 that the above is meant to update...the best introduction to the above text if you're up to it)
Choices, Values, and Frames (Work by Kahneman, Tversky and colleagues on Prospect Theory and related topics, research which ultimately culminated in a Nobel Prize in Economics... sadly Amos Tversky passed away before receiving his)

If that doesn't keep you busy I don't know what will! :panic:

Holy damn, it will keep me busy. Thanks! That's awesome.

I will report back :-)

Edit: Although the books sound very interesting, 50+$ for each is a little
out of my budget this month. That scientific books always have to be this
expensive... sigh.

I haven't read the papers yet, because I am in the middle of exams, so I
don't have the time right now. What I do have time for is to deflect a little.
So to do just that and to bump the thread, here's another fun cognitive bias:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bertrand Russel

The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wikipedia

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which "people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it". The unskilled therefore suffer from illusory superiority, rating their own ability as above average, much higher than in actuality; by contrast, the highly skilled underrate their abilities, suffering from illusory inferiority. This leads to a perverse result where less competent people will rate their own ability higher than more competent people. It also explains why actual competence may weaken self-confidence because competent individuals falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. "Thus, the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others."

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning_kruger_effect

Unskilled, unaware, or both? The better-than-average heuristic and statistical regression predict errors in estimates of own performance.

Lake Wobegon be gone! The "below-average effect" and the egocentric nature of comparative ability judgments.

Unskilled and unaware--but why? A reply to Krueger and Mueller (2002).