Transcript

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 1 02/12/16

Some Stumbling Blocks in Thinking, Judgment and Decision Making

• Representative heuristic • Availability heuristic

o Nostalgia (not in Schacter et. al.) o Ego-centric bias (not in Schacter et. al.) o Illusory correlations or illusion of correlation

• Framing Effects o Reason-based choice (not in Schacter et. al.)

• Prospect Theory • Confirmation bias (not in Schacter et. al.)

o Illusory correlations (Chapter 16) • Belief bias • Groupthink (Chapter 16) • Better than average belief (not in Schacter et. al.) • Fallacy of positive instances (not in Schacter et. al.) • Hindsight bias (not in Schacter et. al.)

As demonstrated with my own personal stories, just learning about these stumbling blocks in thinking and decision making does not automatically make you immune to their effects. You must

(1) know about the pitfall in thinking and decision making.

(2) recognize and notice when you are using the strategy.

(3) take measure to counteract their effects on your decision making process (eg. consider alternative explanations, or why you might be wrong).

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 2 02/12/16

Representative Heuristic

A thinking strategy where we make a judgment of likelihood based on how well it matches our mental representation, prototype or stereotype.

• If the person, event or object is similar to our mental representation, image, stereotype, or prototype, then we are likely to believe that event.

• If the person, event or object is dissimilar to our to our mental representation, image, stereotype, or prototype, then we are not likely believe that event.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 3 02/12/16

Availability heuristic The availability heuristic is a thinking strategy in which

the likelihood of an event is estimated on the basis of how easily we can recall instances of the event from memory. Memorable and vivid events are easier to recall. The availability heuristic is one thinking strategy that can lead to false conclusions and beliefs. Other pitfalls in thinking can arise from the availability heuristic such as the following:

• Nostalgia: The belief that things were better in the past than they actually were.

• Ego-centric bias: The tendency to think that you contributed more to a relationship or group effort than you actually did.

• Illusory correlations: The mistaken belief that two factor or events are related when they are not.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 4 02/12/16

Ego-centric bias

The belief that you contributed more to a group effort,

such as a marriage or team project than you actually did. This occurs because you can easily recall your

contribution (the availability heuristic), rather than someone else's contributions, thus overestimating the relative proportion of your contributions.

• Researchers Michael Ross and Fiore Sicoly (1970) found that couples overestimated the relative contribution to their relationship: o both would say they put the dishes away more

often than the other person, o the other person starts arguments more, etc.

• Basketball teams were more likely to attribute the turning point of the game to their own team than of the other team (regardless if it was a men's or women's team—there was no difference among gender).

• A student wrote that he thinks CEOs deserve an enormous salary because they think of all the thing they do for their corporation and not all of the other things everyone else does.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 5 02/12/16

Ego-Centric Bias Some people are motivated to overestimate the amount of work they contributed to a group effort, but the overestimation cannot be entirely explained by motivation. There is a cognitive component.

• Recognizing the ego-centric bias, makes it is easier to understand how disagreements about relative contributions to group efforts can lead to disagreements, arguments and conflict.

• Without recognizing the possibility of the ego-centric bias, it can make it difficult to work together in good faith and difficult to maintain good relations.

• It is difficult to gauge who is overestimating their contribution in hindsight. Most students always accuse the other person of overestimating their contribution.

References:

Ross, M. and Sicoly, F. (1979). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 37, 322-336.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 6 02/12/16

Student examples with explanations and impacts Example: Kris's brother John and her boyfriend Bill were building an entertainment center for her living room. When they had finished, John complained to his sister "I had to do practically all the work and your lazy boyfriend barely helped at all!" Later, when Kris was with Bill he told her "You know, your brother really didn't help out that much with the entertainment center. I had to do most of the real work." Explanation of egocentric bias: Both John and Bill thought that they had contributed more to the building project than they actually had.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 7 02/12/16

Example: I talked to my dad on the phone last night, and he told me that he wished I could have found out the bus schedule from Eugene to Portland for him, so he could choose to rent a car, or take the bus to Eugene (he flies in today). He said that he had already done so much in preparation for this visit, that the least I could do is check on the bus schedule. Explanation of ego-centric bias: He forgets that I have done a lot of work on this end to prepare for his visit. He only realized what he as done, and to him, he feels that he has contributed more than I have.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 8 02/12/16

Example: When I was young, my brother and I had to do chores around the house. One of these chores was to put away the dishes after the dishwasher finished washing them. Quite often my brother would disagree with me about “whose turn it is to put away the dishes”. He would claim that he seems to always put away the dishes, while I would think the same thing. Explanation of the ego-centric bias: When estimating how often each of us puts away the dishes, we easily think of all the times we put away the dishes and not the times the other person put away the dishes, thus inflating our own estimate.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 9 02/12/16

Student examples of the ego-centric bias without explanations or impacts

Last spring my old roommate and I decided to move in together. Starting form the end of March we started calling some places for information about the apartments. "You are not doing your part," said my old roommate, "you have not found any apartments yet." In fact, I had already called and went to see by myself the several apartments. She was by herself and did not notice how much effort I had contributed. My husband feels that he has done everything to get us ready for our move in August. He tells me that I have done nothing in preparation for this move. This is not true. He just is unable to see what I do because he is busy doing his part of the move. Alexis and I live together. I think Alexis is on the phone way too much and that I barely use it. One day, when I am on the phone, Alexis tells me that I should do something else besides being on the phone because that is all I ever do, and she hardly ever uses it. In truth, according to my last phone bill, we are on the phone about the same amount of time.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 10 02/12/16

Anchoring and Adjusting Anchoring: The tendency, in making judgments, to rely on the first piece of information encountered or information that comes most quickly to mind. The initial piece of information serves as an anchor, or reference point in decision making.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 11 02/12/16

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 12 02/12/16

Anchoring and Adjusting Scott is intelligent, industrious, impulsive, critical, stubborn and envious. Chris is envious, stubborn, critical, impulsive, industrious and intelligent.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 13 02/12/16

Framing Effects Framing effects are when people give different answers to the same problem depending on how it is phrased (or framed). In rational choice theory, two frames are logically equivalent, should have the same response.

Imagine that the U.S. is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs have been proposed. Assume that the exact scientific estimates of the consequences of the programs are as follows:

“Lives Saved”

72% prefer Program 1

However, when you describe it in the following way, which is logically equivalent to the first,

“Lives Lost”

78% prefer

Program 2

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 14 02/12/16

Framing Effects Unleaded Gas: $ 4.05 $ 3.95 cash discount Unleaded Gas: $ 4.05 credit card surcharge $ 3.95 Most people prefer a gas stations that provide the cash discount than the credit card surcharge.

Psychological Science, Fifth Edition Copyright © 2015 W. W. Norton & Company

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 15 02/12/16

Framing Effects According to rational decision theory, each of the four programs have the same expected value (probability x lives saved). In each of the first description, people tend to be risk aversive with gains (lives saved). In the second case, they are risk seeking with losses (lives lost). When college-aged female participants were randomly assigned to receive

• A pamphlet describing the negative consequences of not performing breast self-examination (BSE) or

• A pamphlet describing the positive consequences of performing breast self-examination (BSE).

Those receiving pamphlets describing the negative consequences of not performing the BSE had more positive BSE attitudes, intentions and behaviors.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 16 02/12/16

Framing Effects: Language In a CBS poll, people were asked how they felt about homosexuals or gay men and lesbians serving in the military using one of two questions.

• Do you favor or oppose homosexuals being allowed to serve openly?

• Do you favor or oppose gay men and lesbians being allowed to serve openly?

How you are asked the question affect how much you are in favor or opposed to gay men and lesbians or homosexuals being allowed to serve openly in the military. Other examples of how small changes in wording can affect you are the following:

• Death taxes or estate taxes • Freedom fighters or terrorists

• Taxpayers or middleclass

• Illegal immigrants or undocumented workers

• Home or a house

• Cash discount or credit card surcharge

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 17 02/12/16

Framing Effects: Reason-Based Choice Like framing effects, logically equivalent frames should not affect the outcome of a decision. Consider the following problem:

Imagine that you serve on the jury of an only-child sole-custody case following a relatively messy divorce. The facts of the case are complicated by ambiguous economic, social and emotional considerations, and you decide to base your decision entirely on the following few observations:

Parent A Parent B

• Average Income • Average health • Average working hours • Reasonable rapport with

the child • Relatively stable social life

• Above-average income • Minor health problems • Lots of work-related travel • Very close relationship

with the child • Extremely active social life

To which parent would you award sole custody of the child?

• 55% of the participants would award custody to parent B

However, when asked To which parent would you deny sole custody of the child?

• 64% of the participants would deny custody to parent B.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 18 02/12/16

Is a new drug shown to be safe? Is a new drug shown to be dangerous?

Women in military combat units have shown no improvement in combat readiness Women in military combat units have shown no declines in combat readiness

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 19 02/12/16

Prospect Theory Under economic theories of rational decision-making, you calculate the expected value of a choice by multiplying the probability of the option by the value: EV = (p x value) Problem 1: In addition to whatever you own, you have

been given $1000. You are now asked to choose between Alternative A and Alternative B.

Alternative A: A 50% chance of gaining $1000 Alternative B: A sure gain of $500

84% chose the sure gain

Problem 2: In addition to whatever you own, you have

been given $2000. You are now asked to choose between Alternative C and Alternative D.

Alternative C: A 50% chance of losing $1000 Alternative D: A sure loss of $500 70% chose the risky choice

Although each option has the same expected value, people tend to be risk aversive with regards to gain, and risk seeking with regards to losses.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 20 02/12/16

Prospect Theory To explain the finding that people tend to be risk aversive with regards to gains, and risk seeking with regards to losses, with regards to losses, Kahneman and Tversky developed Prospect Theory.

The value of a $1000 gain is less than the negative value of a $1000 loss. What does Prospect Theory help explain?

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 21 02/12/16

Prospect Theory Apartment A -$400 a month + $10 discount before the 5th of the month

Apartment B -$390 a month -$10 surcharge if you pay after the 5th of the month

5th of the month pay before = $390 pay after = $400

The price of Apartment A and B are the same before and after the 5th of the month. The difference is the reference point. The reference point influences whether we view something as a gain or a loss.

Apartment A Apartment B

$400 $390

$10 gain $10 penalty

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 22 02/12/16

Prospect Theory: Car Rebates

Pricing A Pricing B

$15,000 car $17,000 car + $2,000 rebate (-610 value) (-630 value) + (100 value) Even though the total price of the two cars are the same, the expected value of a $17,000 loss + a $2,000 gain is perceived as being greater than that of the expected value of a $15,000 loss.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 23 02/12/16

Confirmation bias

The strong tendency to search for information or evidence that confirms your belief, while making little or no effort to search for information that disconfirms your belief.

The confirmation bias can lead to incorrect beliefs,

including illusory correlations. It is also quite similar to the fallacy of positive instances—the tendency to remember information consistent with your belief.

• Assume you have the belief that women are bad drivers. To assess this belief, you think of all of the women who are bad drivers. What is wrong with this way of assessing this belief?

• When students take multiple choice tests, there is a tendency for students to think of all the reason why their choice is correct and not consider reasons why other choices may be correct.

• The internet, with all of its information will probably divide us, rather than bring us together. There is a tendency for people to look for information that is consistent with their beliefs, rather than information that is inconsistent with their beliefs. • For example, Democrat leaning voters will visit

Democrat leaning websites. Likewise, Republican leaning voters will visit Republican leaning websites.

In order to reduce the problem of the confirmation bias, we need to search for information that is inconsistent with our beliefs.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 24 02/12/16

Confirmation Bias

I agree with the sentiment of teaching people how to question what they read. However, we tend to seek information that is consistent with our beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our beliefs. In addition, we tend to question claims that are contrary to our beliefs and not apply the same standards to our own beliefs (the belief-bias).

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 25 02/12/16

The pitfalls in judgment and decision making are unconscious and automatic. Without being aware of these pitfalls,

(1) We continue to make them (2) We can’t take steps to minimize their effects. We

won’t think

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 26 02/12/16

The Belief-Bias

The belief bias is the tendency for a person (or group of people) to only accept the evidence that conforms to their belief and reject or ignore any evidence that is inconsistent with their belief.

Another way of looking at the belief-bias is that our beliefs influence how we evaluate evidence. Our standards for determining the quality of evidence is lower for consistent information and our standards for inconsistent information are higher.

When evidence that supports and does not support your belief is available to you,

• Evidence that is consistent is seen as more convincing and well done.

• Evidence that is inconsistent is explained away as irrelevant or ignored.

The belief-bias can be more pronounced with strongly held beliefs.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 27 02/12/16

Example 1: The Death Penalty A group of people who were for the death penalty and against the death penalty were presented with evidence that showed the effectiveness and the ineffectiveness of the death penalty. One would expect that when both groups saw the mixed evidence, their beliefs would become more moderate. However, the people who were for the death penalty became more convinced that their position was “right”, and those who were against the death penalty became more convinced that their position was “right”.

LP 8C2 Stumbling blocks 28 02/12/16

Some Pitfalls in Thinking, Judgment and Decision Making

• Representative heuristic • Availability heuristic

o Nostalgia o Ego-centric bias o Illusory correlations or illusion of correlation

• Framing Effects o Reason Based Choice

• Prospect Theory • Confirmation bias

o Illusory correlations • Belief bias

Who should learn about these pitfalls in decision making? Why should they learn about them?

Why is it important to study these pitfalls in the psychology of thinking? What else can these pitfalls help explain?


Recommended