15 cognitive distortions
People are faced with a large amount of information, some of which are reliable, and some illuminate the area of interest one-sidedly, and sometimes consciously distorted.
This article is about how to distinguish reliable information from distorted information, and how to properly submit information to convince other people.
')
To begin with, people do not always think rationally. This is a given, which is caused by the principles of the work of our intellect, developed in the process of evolution. Conventionally, imagine the mind, divided into two systems. The device of the mind is not so simple, but the described simplification will allow to understand the causes of distortion. The first system generates solutions and hypotheses quickly “if we touch a hot object, then we otterem hand”. The second one makes decisions by logical reasoning. The first system generates hypotheses, and the second accepts or rejects them. This way of thinking is slow and energy consuming. Logical reasoning is used by people less often and requires great effort. This is the cause of most cognitive distortions.
For example, a tick "default agrees" allowed to increase the number of consonants to donate up to 86% in Sweden, while in Denmark, where in obtaining rights, you need to independently agree, i.e., make an informed choice, the number of people willing to donate is 4%.
Consider some of the cognitive impairments:
Context forms the direction of thought. If the conversation is about food, recipes, taste, etc., then the word "m ... o" most people will continue as meat than as soap. Experiments show that if people are shown images or words associated with old age, people start walking more slowly. Money-minded people begin to behave independently and selfishly, and are less inclined to help others. This is due to the fact that the image gives rise to the associations that shape our behavior. The effect of priming is used in branding. Call without thinking the name of the fast food restaurant, or the most fashionable mobile phone.
The more recognizable the image, the more the statement is associated with security and truth. Thus, the frequent repetition of lies makes deception believable. Truth is like the feeling of a friend. Recognizable = lightness. The more contrasting the color, the simpler the perception, the more believable the statement. Simple words convince better than complex ones. Poems are perceived as information containing deep meaning. The font and rhythm of the prose affect the sense of believability.
Cognitive stress mobilizes System 2. If you want people to start analyzing information, use poorly readable text, blurred pictures, etc.
Context sets plausibility. Answer the question "how many animals of each species did Moses take with him to the ark?" Most will answer 2 without noticing that Noah built the ark, and Moses is present in another biblical story. If you put Steve Jobs in Moses' place, people will immediately notice the discrepancy.
The reference point affects our assessment. If you ask 2 questions to groups of people, “The height of the redwood is more or less than 365 meters, and what is the height, in your opinion?” And “The height of the redwood is more or less than 55 meters, and what is the height, in your opinion?” People will give different estimates. The numbers 365 and 55 are taken randomly. Those who were given a binding of 365, on average, will give an answer of 257 meters, and those who have been given a binding of 55 will answer 86 meters.
An example of binding is the restriction of the sentence “no more than X units of goods into one hand”.
People change their point of view with transference to the perception of the past. If an event occurs, the person overestimates the probability of his own forecast in the past and vice versa. The illusion of understanding the past gives rise to the illusion of a predictable future. People are wondering how it was possible to make such an obvious mistake, forgetting that the error was not obvious at the time of the decision.
People tend to find cause-effect relationships even where there is no connection. The sequence of events is endowed with a causal link. The illusion of skill, caused by the luck of brokers in the stock market, is perceived as professionalism. When a coin is tossed up, the O, O, O, O, P, and O, P, O, P, and P sequences are equally likely, but it seems to people that the second sequence is more likely. “His daughters were born 3 times, now a boy will be born” or “He has a light hand, Sergey has already scored 2 goals today, I will give him a pass to score a third one”.
The result consists of 2 factors: professionalism and luck. If the athlete performed very well, then with a great deal of confidence, it can be said that he is a professional and the day was very successful, and vice versa. But the level of luck tends to be average with an increase in the number of attempts. In the next attempt, the probability that the athlete will perform worse than on a good day is greater, and vice versa. This explains the illusion of the effectiveness of punishment. It seems to people that punishment affects the improvement of the future result, although this is simply a regression to the average.
Rare events causing vivid images and associations attract more attention and people exaggerate the likelihood of their appearance. Examples include plane crashes, terrorist attacks, cataclysms, etc. The media play a role in calling such images. People see less benefit in products that seem risky and are willing to overpay to minimize the risk of rare events. If a rare event does not cause bright images, then it is ignored. A rare event should be “overloaded with details” in order for us to present it and give more weight.
People ignore prior probability and judge by stereotype or reason. Man does not derive the particular from the general, but derives the general from the particular. Associative image prevails over statistics. Probability is harder to estimate than the value of "how many of."
Imagine a young man named Sergei. Sergey wears glasses, an introvert, understands technology and has Linux on his computer. Arrange the assumptions about Sergei in descending order: 1) Sergey is a designer 2) Sergey graduated from a technical university and a programmer 3) Sergey is a waiter 4) Sergey is a programmer. Points 2 and 4 are important here. Most will place answer 2 above 4, but this is a mistake. Programmers who have graduated from a technical university are only part of the programmers. Therefore, the probability that Sergei is just a programmer is higher. People ignore the prior probability and choose a vivid description, as a vivid description is easier to imagine.
A common mistake is to manipulate small samples. As a result of the study, it was found that small schools dominate among schools with high performance indicators. Casual explanations were found for this, and a large amount of money was invested in the creation of such schools. The mistake was that with a small sample (number of students), “abnormal situations” are more likely. It is more likely that all students are smart or stupid. A similar picture among oncological diseases. As the most healthy, and the least healthy are the residents of small settlements, but this is explained by the probability of an event on a small sample, and not by clean air or hard work.
The significance of the unlikely events is exaggerated, and the highly probable events are downplayed.
At the same time, the 0–5% transition (appearance of a chance) and 99–100% (unambiguity) are psychologically more significant than the transition of 50–55%.
If people are offered 2 service sets, where one consists only of items without defects, and the other of the same number of items without defects, to which items with small defects are added, then the majority will appreciate a large set more expensive than a small one. But if you make an assessment separately, people will appreciate a large service containing defects cheaper than a small one. This is due to the fact that people estimate the cost, not based on the principle of integrating the cost of individual objects, but on the basis of the average cost of parts. So, a set of expensive pen + Chinese pen will be less valuable than just an expensive pen.
The reluctance to lose is stronger than the desire to win. So, for games related to money, the ratio of the gain from loss is 2. For health issues, the coefficient is 50, which shows sensitivity to loss. People are less inclined to risk to win and tend to risk inevitable losses. This is the basis of the insurance business model. Danger is more important than possibility. Due to the difference in the price of losses, the poor will buy insurance from the rich more willingly, negotiate “fill the price” of concessions, etc. Playing with many attempts minimizes the effect of loss aversion (it’s easier to do business if you know there will be a second chance).
The expected value does not depend linearly with the gain. This is described by a logarithmic scale. It is important not a quantitative state, but the degree of change. The growth of the state from $ 1 to $ 10 million is emotionally more significant than the growth from $ 10 to $ 20 million, but is comparable to the growth from $ 10 to $ 100 million.
The effect of ownership is that things intended for personal use and that cause an emotional response cause a greater sense of loss. How much are you willing to sell your favorite mug or tickets to your favorite band's concert? But if the item was originally intended for sale or exchange, the feeling of loss does not occur. So, if a person is offered an equivalent choice an additional salary or vacation, after the first choice, changing the position is harder, as there is a point of reference and a change is perceived as a loss plus an acquisition, where the loss has more weight.
The error of irrecoverable losses - it is easier to continue to invest in an unpromising business than to fix a loss.
Regret is stronger if caused as a result of action, not inaction (Sergey sold the dollars and bought rubles in June 1998 or Sergey did not buy the dollars). The unusual situation increases the regret (Sergei decided to give a ride to his companion, although he never did this and was subjected to robbery).
Own experience is understandable. Because of this, a planning error occurs, people plan on the basis of available data, rather than statistical facts. The mistake of opinion is that people consider themselves smarter than others. Neglect of competition is due to the effect of exclusivity. Because their own experience is understandable, people tend to exaggerate their own contribution to the common cause. A useful technique for overcoming an optimist's mistake is “lifetime epicrisis” in the course of which failure appears and the reasons that led to it are analyzed.
People project an assessment of the known qualities of an object into unknown qualities. A good speaker is perceived as a professional, a pleasant person to communicate seems frank, etc. So, competence is associated with strength and reliability and people with a pronounced chin and a slight smile are perceived as more competent. The properties are projected onto the surrounding objects, so in order to increase the rating, the policy is beneficial to meet with champions and laureates of awards and avoid debates with unpopular colleagues. The professionalism of the manager is estimated by the financial performance of the company, although according to the research, the correlation between the leadership skills and the success of the company is 0.3. Competent leadership guarantees success with a probability of 60%.
Accuracy of 90% is perceived more positively than a statement about an error of 10%.
The wording changes the perception. Imagine 2 essentially identical questions "will you agree to a game with a 10% chance of winning $ 95 and a 90% chance of losing 5" or "Will you pay $ 5 for a lottery where 10% of tickets win $ 100?".
People are more willing to give up the "discount for ..." than agree to "surcharge for ...".
A kilometer per liter of gasoline distorts consumption (counting practice in the US). It is more correct to count in liters per kilometer.
The reminder that people are being watched makes them behave more decently.
People feel free from responsibility if they believe that others are aware of the situation.
Confidence in the statement falls with the number of arguments.
It is better to "save 50%" than to "lose 50%" of the state.
Better "95% patient survival" than "5% patient mortality."
When deciding on importance, people ignore quantitative indicators. When conducting a charity campaign, raising money for saving 100 tigers or 10,000 tigers will not affect the average amount of donations.
People tend to determine significance based on the place of the image within the category. Tigers occupy a high place of significance within the category “animals”, and people suffering from migraine among other sick people have a low position of importance (although migraine spoils life for people more often than other “significant”, but rare diseases). If you conduct a fundraising campaign for endangered tigers and for people suffering from migraines independently, then the average donation for tigers will be higher. But if both of these proposals are concluded in one context, donations for people will become higher, since the position of the category “people” is higher than the position of the category “animals”.
The effect of neglecting the denominator is that it is psychologically better to have 8 chances out of 100 than 1 in 10. The risk of a child dying is 0.001%, which is felt less worth attention than the death of ten children out of a million. A disease that kills 186 people out of 1 thousand seems more dangerous than a disease that kills 24% of people, and than kills 24 out of 100. The expression “every year mentally ill kill 1 thousand people” has a greater effect than “the risk of death at the hands of the mentally ill is 0.00036%, which is comparable to the risk of death at the hands of a normal person. "
Difficult questions are replaced by simple ones. When people ask "are you happy?", The person answers the question "What is my mood?" “Will the company succeed?” Is replaced by “Do you like the technology, the team, etc.”. The answer is affected by the effect of priming, if you ask “how many dates were you?”, And then “are you happy?” Then the second question will be replaced by the first one.
People tend to substitute the total - the private.
The illusion of focus creates a distortion in favor of goods and occupations attractive at first (auto, telephone), than occupations that take more time and experience (dancing). The focus effect enhances the defamatory effort directed at the weak point of the object.
Experiments have shown that people ignore the duration of exposure. In assessing the pleasure or suffering received, only the value of the peak of the impact and sensation at the conclusion plays a role. The rating of people is the average between the sensations at the peak and the end.
The rule also applies to impressions of stories heard, including stories of biographies. A short bright life is perceived better than a short bright life at the beginning and a less bright additional segment.
The article describes a number of examples of cognitive distortions caused by the way we think. People in a state of fatigue, engaged in another business, in high spirits, exhausted by self-control or endowed with power are at greater risk of cognitive distortion. Therefore, if you are a boss who is tired at work, trying to impress your partners and think about vacation, try to postpone fateful decisions for tomorrow!
Details on this area, research and approaches can be found by reading the book “Think slowly ... decide quickly” by Daniel Kahneman, which served as the basis for writing the article.
This article is about how to distinguish reliable information from distorted information, and how to properly submit information to convince other people.
')
To begin with, people do not always think rationally. This is a given, which is caused by the principles of the work of our intellect, developed in the process of evolution. Conventionally, imagine the mind, divided into two systems. The device of the mind is not so simple, but the described simplification will allow to understand the causes of distortion. The first system generates solutions and hypotheses quickly “if we touch a hot object, then we otterem hand”. The second one makes decisions by logical reasoning. The first system generates hypotheses, and the second accepts or rejects them. This way of thinking is slow and energy consuming. Logical reasoning is used by people less often and requires great effort. This is the cause of most cognitive distortions.
For example, a tick "default agrees" allowed to increase the number of consonants to donate up to 86% in Sweden, while in Denmark, where in obtaining rights, you need to independently agree, i.e., make an informed choice, the number of people willing to donate is 4%.
Consider some of the cognitive impairments:
Priming
Context forms the direction of thought. If the conversation is about food, recipes, taste, etc., then the word "m ... o" most people will continue as meat than as soap. Experiments show that if people are shown images or words associated with old age, people start walking more slowly. Money-minded people begin to behave independently and selfishly, and are less inclined to help others. This is due to the fact that the image gives rise to the associations that shape our behavior. The effect of priming is used in branding. Call without thinking the name of the fast food restaurant, or the most fashionable mobile phone.
Illusion of truth
The more recognizable the image, the more the statement is associated with security and truth. Thus, the frequent repetition of lies makes deception believable. Truth is like the feeling of a friend. Recognizable = lightness. The more contrasting the color, the simpler the perception, the more believable the statement. Simple words convince better than complex ones. Poems are perceived as information containing deep meaning. The font and rhythm of the prose affect the sense of believability.
Cognitive stress mobilizes System 2. If you want people to start analyzing information, use poorly readable text, blurred pictures, etc.
Context sets plausibility. Answer the question "how many animals of each species did Moses take with him to the ark?" Most will answer 2 without noticing that Noah built the ark, and Moses is present in another biblical story. If you put Steve Jobs in Moses' place, people will immediately notice the discrepancy.
Binding effect
The reference point affects our assessment. If you ask 2 questions to groups of people, “The height of the redwood is more or less than 365 meters, and what is the height, in your opinion?” And “The height of the redwood is more or less than 55 meters, and what is the height, in your opinion?” People will give different estimates. The numbers 365 and 55 are taken randomly. Those who were given a binding of 365, on average, will give an answer of 257 meters, and those who have been given a binding of 55 will answer 86 meters.
An example of binding is the restriction of the sentence “no more than X units of goods into one hand”.
Retrospective Distortion
People change their point of view with transference to the perception of the past. If an event occurs, the person overestimates the probability of his own forecast in the past and vice versa. The illusion of understanding the past gives rise to the illusion of a predictable future. People are wondering how it was possible to make such an obvious mistake, forgetting that the error was not obvious at the time of the decision.
Ignoring statistics and random events
People tend to find cause-effect relationships even where there is no connection. The sequence of events is endowed with a causal link. The illusion of skill, caused by the luck of brokers in the stock market, is perceived as professionalism. When a coin is tossed up, the O, O, O, O, P, and O, P, O, P, and P sequences are equally likely, but it seems to people that the second sequence is more likely. “His daughters were born 3 times, now a boy will be born” or “He has a light hand, Sergey has already scored 2 goals today, I will give him a pass to score a third one”.
Regression to average
The result consists of 2 factors: professionalism and luck. If the athlete performed very well, then with a great deal of confidence, it can be said that he is a professional and the day was very successful, and vice versa. But the level of luck tends to be average with an increase in the number of attempts. In the next attempt, the probability that the athlete will perform worse than on a good day is greater, and vice versa. This explains the illusion of the effectiveness of punishment. It seems to people that punishment affects the improvement of the future result, although this is simply a regression to the average.
Distortion of probability events
Rare events causing vivid images and associations attract more attention and people exaggerate the likelihood of their appearance. Examples include plane crashes, terrorist attacks, cataclysms, etc. The media play a role in calling such images. People see less benefit in products that seem risky and are willing to overpay to minimize the risk of rare events. If a rare event does not cause bright images, then it is ignored. A rare event should be “overloaded with details” in order for us to present it and give more weight.
People ignore prior probability and judge by stereotype or reason. Man does not derive the particular from the general, but derives the general from the particular. Associative image prevails over statistics. Probability is harder to estimate than the value of "how many of."
Imagine a young man named Sergei. Sergey wears glasses, an introvert, understands technology and has Linux on his computer. Arrange the assumptions about Sergei in descending order: 1) Sergey is a designer 2) Sergey graduated from a technical university and a programmer 3) Sergey is a waiter 4) Sergey is a programmer. Points 2 and 4 are important here. Most will place answer 2 above 4, but this is a mistake. Programmers who have graduated from a technical university are only part of the programmers. Therefore, the probability that Sergei is just a programmer is higher. People ignore the prior probability and choose a vivid description, as a vivid description is easier to imagine.
A common mistake is to manipulate small samples. As a result of the study, it was found that small schools dominate among schools with high performance indicators. Casual explanations were found for this, and a large amount of money was invested in the creation of such schools. The mistake was that with a small sample (number of students), “abnormal situations” are more likely. It is more likely that all students are smart or stupid. A similar picture among oncological diseases. As the most healthy, and the least healthy are the residents of small settlements, but this is explained by the probability of an event on a small sample, and not by clean air or hard work.
The significance of the unlikely events is exaggerated, and the highly probable events are downplayed.
At the same time, the 0–5% transition (appearance of a chance) and 99–100% (unambiguity) are psychologically more significant than the transition of 50–55%.
The distortion of the average score. Better less and better.
If people are offered 2 service sets, where one consists only of items without defects, and the other of the same number of items without defects, to which items with small defects are added, then the majority will appreciate a large set more expensive than a small one. But if you make an assessment separately, people will appreciate a large service containing defects cheaper than a small one. This is due to the fact that people estimate the cost, not based on the principle of integrating the cost of individual objects, but on the basis of the average cost of parts. So, a set of expensive pen + Chinese pen will be less valuable than just an expensive pen.
Reference point and loss effect
The reluctance to lose is stronger than the desire to win. So, for games related to money, the ratio of the gain from loss is 2. For health issues, the coefficient is 50, which shows sensitivity to loss. People are less inclined to risk to win and tend to risk inevitable losses. This is the basis of the insurance business model. Danger is more important than possibility. Due to the difference in the price of losses, the poor will buy insurance from the rich more willingly, negotiate “fill the price” of concessions, etc. Playing with many attempts minimizes the effect of loss aversion (it’s easier to do business if you know there will be a second chance).
The expected value does not depend linearly with the gain. This is described by a logarithmic scale. It is important not a quantitative state, but the degree of change. The growth of the state from $ 1 to $ 10 million is emotionally more significant than the growth from $ 10 to $ 20 million, but is comparable to the growth from $ 10 to $ 100 million.
The effect of ownership is that things intended for personal use and that cause an emotional response cause a greater sense of loss. How much are you willing to sell your favorite mug or tickets to your favorite band's concert? But if the item was originally intended for sale or exchange, the feeling of loss does not occur. So, if a person is offered an equivalent choice an additional salary or vacation, after the first choice, changing the position is harder, as there is a point of reference and a change is perceived as a loss plus an acquisition, where the loss has more weight.
The error of irrecoverable losses - it is easier to continue to invest in an unpromising business than to fix a loss.
Regret is stronger if caused as a result of action, not inaction (Sergey sold the dollars and bought rubles in June 1998 or Sergey did not buy the dollars). The unusual situation increases the regret (Sergei decided to give a ride to his companion, although he never did this and was subjected to robbery).
Optimist error
Own experience is understandable. Because of this, a planning error occurs, people plan on the basis of available data, rather than statistical facts. The mistake of opinion is that people consider themselves smarter than others. Neglect of competition is due to the effect of exclusivity. Because their own experience is understandable, people tend to exaggerate their own contribution to the common cause. A useful technique for overcoming an optimist's mistake is “lifetime epicrisis” in the course of which failure appears and the reasons that led to it are analyzed.
Halo effect
People project an assessment of the known qualities of an object into unknown qualities. A good speaker is perceived as a professional, a pleasant person to communicate seems frank, etc. So, competence is associated with strength and reliability and people with a pronounced chin and a slight smile are perceived as more competent. The properties are projected onto the surrounding objects, so in order to increase the rating, the policy is beneficial to meet with champions and laureates of awards and avoid debates with unpopular colleagues. The professionalism of the manager is estimated by the financial performance of the company, although according to the research, the correlation between the leadership skills and the success of the company is 0.3. Competent leadership guarantees success with a probability of 60%.
The effect of presenting information
Accuracy of 90% is perceived more positively than a statement about an error of 10%.
The wording changes the perception. Imagine 2 essentially identical questions "will you agree to a game with a 10% chance of winning $ 95 and a 90% chance of losing 5" or "Will you pay $ 5 for a lottery where 10% of tickets win $ 100?".
People are more willing to give up the "discount for ..." than agree to "surcharge for ...".
A kilometer per liter of gasoline distorts consumption (counting practice in the US). It is more correct to count in liters per kilometer.
The reminder that people are being watched makes them behave more decently.
People feel free from responsibility if they believe that others are aware of the situation.
Confidence in the statement falls with the number of arguments.
It is better to "save 50%" than to "lose 50%" of the state.
Better "95% patient survival" than "5% patient mortality."
Neglecting and ranking of significance
When deciding on importance, people ignore quantitative indicators. When conducting a charity campaign, raising money for saving 100 tigers or 10,000 tigers will not affect the average amount of donations.
People tend to determine significance based on the place of the image within the category. Tigers occupy a high place of significance within the category “animals”, and people suffering from migraine among other sick people have a low position of importance (although migraine spoils life for people more often than other “significant”, but rare diseases). If you conduct a fundraising campaign for endangered tigers and for people suffering from migraines independently, then the average donation for tigers will be higher. But if both of these proposals are concluded in one context, donations for people will become higher, since the position of the category “people” is higher than the position of the category “animals”.
The effect of neglecting the denominator is that it is psychologically better to have 8 chances out of 100 than 1 in 10. The risk of a child dying is 0.001%, which is felt less worth attention than the death of ten children out of a million. A disease that kills 186 people out of 1 thousand seems more dangerous than a disease that kills 24% of people, and than kills 24 out of 100. The expression “every year mentally ill kill 1 thousand people” has a greater effect than “the risk of death at the hands of the mentally ill is 0.00036%, which is comparable to the risk of death at the hands of a normal person. "
Substitution of questions
Difficult questions are replaced by simple ones. When people ask "are you happy?", The person answers the question "What is my mood?" “Will the company succeed?” Is replaced by “Do you like the technology, the team, etc.”. The answer is affected by the effect of priming, if you ask “how many dates were you?”, And then “are you happy?” Then the second question will be replaced by the first one.
People tend to substitute the total - the private.
The illusion of focus creates a distortion in favor of goods and occupations attractive at first (auto, telephone), than occupations that take more time and experience (dancing). The focus effect enhances the defamatory effort directed at the weak point of the object.
Ignoring Duration
Experiments have shown that people ignore the duration of exposure. In assessing the pleasure or suffering received, only the value of the peak of the impact and sensation at the conclusion plays a role. The rating of people is the average between the sensations at the peak and the end.
The rule also applies to impressions of stories heard, including stories of biographies. A short bright life is perceived better than a short bright life at the beginning and a less bright additional segment.
Conclusion
The article describes a number of examples of cognitive distortions caused by the way we think. People in a state of fatigue, engaged in another business, in high spirits, exhausted by self-control or endowed with power are at greater risk of cognitive distortion. Therefore, if you are a boss who is tired at work, trying to impress your partners and think about vacation, try to postpone fateful decisions for tomorrow!
Details on this area, research and approaches can be found by reading the book “Think slowly ... decide quickly” by Daniel Kahneman, which served as the basis for writing the article.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/410961/
All Articles