Cognitive bias

[ciphergoth]

Roughly, "cognitive bias" is the empirical study of systematic, irrational biases that we all show to some extent or other in the way we think about the world. These biases can be demonstrated in controlled experimental settings, where we can largely rule out rational explanations for the behaviours seen.

One example is anchoring: asked whether they thought an unknown quantity was more or less than a number produced in front of them using a roulette wheel, subsequent guesses at what the number was were irrationally close to the number the roulette wheel produced. Their guesses had been "anchored" on the number they'd previously been given, even though they knew it was a random number.

I'm curious to know whether this is something people think about much, hence this (fairly imperfect) poll. Where I say "people" below, I mean people demographically roughly like you.

For those not familiar with the convention "snowflake" means "none of these answers fit what I'd like to say, so I'll comment below and explain". thehalibutkid, we await your comment :-)

[Poll #1327489]

I'm thinking about this because I've just finished reading "Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)", and I'm about to start on "Predictably Irrational", both of which are pop science books in this field. See also Wikipedia's list of cognitive biases.

Please do comment with any thoughts the poll doesn't cover, of course!

Comments

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

Heh. I answered the last two differently because I don't think I'm nearly as rigorous in looking for bias in my own decision making as I am about other people's, and that's something I'd like to fix but I'm not certain of the best way to do so...

[wildeabandon.livejournal.com]

Hmm. I (think I'm) more rigorous at looking for my own bias, and suspect that comes from having views which are out of sync with a lot of the people I mix with. Clearly you need to start hanging out with more Xian Tories ;>

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure that's the right approach :-) For one thing, I've come to realise that one of the attractions of talking about atheism for me is that I could hardly be more confident about what I think or my ability to defend it, and it's likely I should spend more time talking about things where I feel on a less sure footing (which is practically everything else).

[palmer1984.livejournal.com]

Yes, I like talking about atheism for that reason.

[palmer1984.livejournal.com]

Well, actually not just that; also I'm much more certain about atheism than I am about my views on most other things!

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

I had meant my answer to imply that too!

[palmer1984.livejournal.com]

*looks again* You did indeed. I misread you!

[drdoug.livejournal.com]

By default I tend to think that I'm better than average about being rigorous about looking for my own biases (and correcting for them), and also better than average at looking for other people's. But I worry sometimes that it's just my fond imagination.

[djm4]

I tend to veer the other way, because I feel that I'm often more likely to be able to identify some of the biases in my own decision making. This means that while I can consider cognitive bias in other people's decisions, I may not have the information to do so productively.

[olethros.livejournal.com]

I'm sort of interpreting my behaviour into the questions above, but I reckon this applies.

I try to be as aware as possible of the margin for error in my understanding of others' actions (and reactions, when examining my own actions.) It really annoys people sometimes, because I've gotten awfully good at finding reasonable (not rational, reasonable) explanations for the behaviour of all sorts of annoying people. :-)

[bohemiancoast.livejournal.com]

Anyone who believes that they are as rigorous in seeking out their own bias as other people's should consider whether they know anyone else who can do that. It's very hard. I suppose the sovereign cure is to discuss things with other people before reaching conclusions, but still. I'm a very intuitive decision maker (that means I can rarely articulate the decision making process), and although that is not inherently a more biased approach than structured decision making, it's risky.