Advertisement
Guest User

Untitled

a guest
May 29th, 2015
272
0
Never
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 18.15 KB | None | 0 0
  1. Anchoring or focalism is a cognitive bias that describes the common human tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information offered (the "anchor") when making decisions. During decision making, anchoring occurs when individuals use an initial piece of information to make subsequent judgments. Once an anchor is set, other judgments are made by adjusting away from that anchor, and there is a bias toward interpreting other information around the anchor.
  2. The focusing effect (or focusing illusion) is a cognitive bias that occurs when people place too much importance on one aspect of an event, causing an error in accurately predicting the utility of a future outcome.
  3.  
  4. You placed too much importance on the negative aspects of my personality, the things that you feel are "wrong" about me, causing you to inaccurately judge me, leading you to believe that there is no way that you could ever like me or form a connection with me.
  5. --
  6. People focus on notable differences, excluding those that are less conspicuous, when making predictions about happiness or convenience.
  7. For example, when people were asked how much happier they believe Californians are compared to Midwesterners, Californians and Midwesterners both said Californians must be considerably happier, when, in fact, there was no difference between the actual happiness rating of Californians and Midwesterners. The bias lies in that most people asked focused on and overweighed the sunny weather and ostensibly easy-going lifestyle of California and devalued and underrated other aspects of life and determinants of happiness, such as low crime rates and safety from natural disasters like earthquakes (both of which large parts of California lack).
  8.  
  9. Your bias lies in that you overweighed what you found to be negative in me, and devauled the postivie and likable traits in my personality.
  10.  
  11. According to this theory, once an anchor is set, people adjust away from it to get to their final answer; however, they adjust insufficiently, resulting in their final guess being closer to the anchor than it would be otherwise
  12.  
  13. you had the idea that i was a generice moronic sjw with no personalilty or likeable qualities, which lead you to try to find otherwise wich subconciously lead you to just find more reasons to further back up your original asumption.
  14.  
  15. According to this theory, providing an anchor changes someone's attitudes to be more favorable to the particular attributes of that anchor, biasing future answers to have similar characteristics as the anchor.
  16.  
  17. The original thoughts you had of me, were further favorable in looking for negative qualities in me as it atributes to your original thoughts of me, biasing your future opinion of me of having simliar characteristics to your original thought.
  18. --
  19. the tendency of our perception to be affected by our recurring thoughts
  20. One example occurs when a person does not examine all possible outcomes when making a judgment about a correlation or association. They may focus on one or two possibilities, while ignoring the rest.
  21.  
  22. you did not consider that you may actually lik me, when making a judgement about me, which lead you to focus on 1 or 2 outcomes, being that you further proved your original opinoin about me, or that you were wrong but you still do not like me,
  23. while ignoring the possibility that you were both wrong and you enjoy my presence.
  24.  
  25. in everyday life, people are often subject to this type of attentional bias when asking themselves, "Does God answer prayers?"[2] Many would say "Yes" and justify it with "many times I've asked God for something, and He's given it to me." These people would be accepting and overemphasizing the data from the present/present (top-left) cell, because an unbiased person would counter this logic and consider data from the present/absent cell. "Has God ever given me something that I didn't ask for?" Or "Have I asked God for something and didn't receive it?" This experiment too supports Smedslund's general conclusion that subjects tend to ignore part of the table.
  26.  
  27. You overemphasized the thoughts of me being your original opinion because if you were being unbiased towards me you would counter your opinion and consider the alternative.
  28.  
  29. Attentional biases can also influence what information people are likely to focus upon.
  30.  
  31. you did not go into this without a bias, you did not come in actually wanting to get a real feel, you came in with a biased and was looking to see if you could comfirm or deny it, favoring towards the earlier.
  32. --
  33. the tendency to search for, interpret, or recall information in a way that confirms one's beliefs or hypotheses
  34. you searched for imformatino to comfirm your reasons of disliking me
  35.  
  36. Experiments have found repeatedly that people tend to test hypotheses in a one-sided way, by searching for evidence consistent with their current hypothesis.[7][8] Rather than searching through all the relevant evidence, they phrase questions to receive an affirmative answer that supports their hypothesis.[9] They look for the consequences that they would expect if their hypothesis were true, rather than what would happen if it were false
  37.  
  38. rather then looking to see if you could actually like me and be my friend you looked for evidence to further support why you shouldnt be
  39.  
  40. In real-world situations, evidence is often complex and mixed. For example, various contradictory ideas about someone could each be supported by concentrating on one aspect of his or her behavior.[8] Thus any search for evidence in favor of a hypothesis is likely to succeed
  41.  
  42. you felt like your feelings were being contridicted with your mind set, by concentrating on one aspecte ie. you negative mindset on me over the fact that you emotionally found be appealing, you thus searched for evicence in favor of that hypothesis/thought and there for made if more probable.
  43.  
  44. In an initial experiment, participants rated another person on the introversion–extroversion personality dimension on the basis of an interview. They chose the interview questions from a given list. When the interviewee was introduced as an introvert, the participants chose questions that presumed introversion, such as, "What do you find unpleasant about noisy parties?" When the interviewee was described as extroverted, almost all the questions presumed extroversion, such as, "What would you do to liven up a dull party?" These loaded questions gave the interviewees little or no opportunity to falsify the hypothesis about them.[17] A later version of the experiment gave the participants less presumptive questions to choose from, such as, "Do you shy away from social interactions?"[18] Participants preferred to ask these more diagnostic questions, showing only a weak bias towards positive tests.
  45.  
  46. Personality traits influence and interact with biased search processes.[19] Individuals vary in their abilities to defend their attitudes from external attacks in relation to selective exposure. Selective exposure occurs when individuals search for information that is consistent, rather than inconsistent, with their personal beliefs
  47.  
  48. Again, you looked for imformation on me to further defend your beliefs about me rather than challange your original thoughts and look for reasons to enjoy my personality,
  49.  
  50. An experiment examined the extent to which individuals could refute arguments that contradicted their personal beliefs.[19] People with high confidence levels more readily seek out contradictory information to their personal position to form an argument. Individuals with low confidence levels do not seek out contradictory information and prefer information that supports their personal position. People generate and evaluate evidence in arguments that are biased towards their own beliefs and opinions.[21] Heightened confidence levels decrease preference for information that supports individuals' personal beliefs.
  51.  
  52. ie, your not confident in your orginal statement about me because of your bias to further prove it right.
  53. --
  54. base rate neglect or base rate bias, is a formal fallacy. If presented with related base rate information (i.e. generic, general information) and specific information (information only pertaining to a certain case), the mind tends to ignore the former and focus on the latter. [1]
  55.  
  56. John is a man who wears gothic inspired clothing, has long black hair, and listens to death metal. How likely is it that he is a Christian and how likely is it that he is a Satanist?
  57. If people were asked this question, they would likely underestimate the probability of him being a Christian, and overestimate the probability of him being a Satanist. This is because they would ignore that the base rate of being a Christian (there are about 2 billion in the world) is vastly higher than that of being a Satanist (estimated to be in the thousands).[2] Therefore, even if such clothing choices indicated an order of magnitude jump in probability of being a Satanist, the probability of being a Christian is still much larger.
  58. --
  59. explains the errors that one makes when forming attributions about the behavior of others (Jones & Nisbett, 1971).[1] When people judge their own behavior, and they are the actor, they are more likely to attribute their actions to the particular situation than to a generalization about their personality. Yet when an observer is explaining the behavior of another person (the actor), they are more likely to attribute this behavior to the actors’ overall disposition rather than to situational factors. This frequent error shows the bias that people hold in their evaluations of behavior (Miller & Norman, 1975). Because people are better acquainted with the situational (external) factors affecting their own decisions, they are more likely to see their own behavior as affected by the social situation they are in. However, because the situational effects of anothers' behavior are less accessible to the observer, observers see the actor's behavior as influenced more by the actor's overall personality. The actor-observer asymmetry is a component of the ultimate attribution error.
  60.  
  61. you formed an unvalid opinion on me based off of my behaviors and the way i think, when you have your own flaws you tend to downplay them, because you know that your reasons for thinking or doing something is atributed to the patiucilar situation rather then your personality as a whole, yet when you look at my personality you are attributing my behavior and overall disposition due to my personality rather then situational factors.
  62. It shows that bias that you hold in your evaluation of me, because you are more fimilar with your behavior and what it is affected by in a giving situation you are in, however because you are less imformed of me and what influences my thoughts and actions you relate it to my overall personality.
  63. --
  64.  
  65. You used my appearence and the things and people i like as a awy to form an assumption about me as being a generice sjw, tumblrina ect, and ignored the base rate at which people have told you im not,
  66. even if my prefrences indicated a slight bias towards my personality the probability of me not being so is still much higher.
  67. --
  68. the tendency to judge the strength of arguments based on the plausibility of their conclusion rather than how strongly they support that conclusion.
  69. --
  70. Subjects apparently judged the experience according to the peak–end rule (in other words, according to its worst and final moments only), paying little attention to duration
  71.  
  72. Some forms of duration neglect may be reduced or eliminated by having participants answer in graphical format, or give a rating for every five minutes
  73. --
  74. subjective judgements do not accurately reflect the true difficulty of that task.
  75.  
  76. your bias towards me does not accurately reflect my true personality.
  77.  
  78. An experimental group was given a questionnaire. It consisted of two alternative general-knowledge questions. Such as "Who was born first, Aristotle or Buddha?" or "Was the zipper invented before or after 1920?". The subjects filled in the answers they believed to be correct and rated how sure they were of them. The result shows that subjects tend to be underconfident when it comes to questions designated by the experimenters to be easy, and overconfident when it comes to questions designated by the experimenters to be hard.
  79.  
  80. simple questions such as, do you like me, why, do you enjoy talking to me, do you find me interesting, ect.
  81. --
  82. that additional information generates additional relevant data for predictions, even when it evidently does not
  83.  
  84. Here is an imaginary example of illusion of validity. Let us picture a large hypothetical corporation. It only recruits people of a certain kind. Only those are wanted who have a prestigious college education which requires high SAT-scores. Also, job candidates are forced to participate in IQ tests. This despite the fact that some studies have shown a high degree of correlation between IQ and SAT scores,[2] so once you know someone's SAT score, knowing their IQ in addition would not add much information and should increase confidence only very little; and, to whatever degree SAT scores correlate with GPA scores, GPA could be predicted from an IQ score nearly as effectively as SAT score.
  85.  
  86. additional imformation on my beliefes and thoughts does not generate any further relevant data to assume whether or not i have a good personaility.
  87. --
  88. Illusory correlation is the phenomenon of perceiving a relationship between variables (typically people, events, or behaviors) even when no such relationship exists.
  89.  
  90. A common example of this phenomenon would be when people form false associations between membership in a statistical minority group and rare (typically negative) behaviors as variables that are novel or salient tend to capture the attention
  91.  
  92. To test their hypothesis, Hamilton and Gifford had research participants read a series of sentences describing either desirable or undesirable behaviors, which were attributed to either Group A or Group B.[5] Abstract groups were used so that no previously established stereotypes would influence results. Most of the sentences were associated with Group A, and the remaining few were associated with Group B
  93.  
  94. you catagorize people into group a or b, being the people only fit into one of two groups in your mind. you thought that it is impossible for you to like me based off of the things i asssociate with there fore deciding that my personaility is like the rest of those who shared the same common intrest but were unappealing in your eyes.
  95. --
  96. phenomenon by which people tend to develop a preference for things merely because they are familiar with them.
  97.  
  98. you only associate with those who have likemindedness of yourself because it is what your fimilar with, there fore you find talking with me to be unpleasent before you even know me because of your assumptions of me shine away from your prefrences of who you communicate with.
  99. --
  100. Negativity effect refers to the greater weight given to negative information relative to equally extreme and equally likely positive information in a variety of information-processing tasks
  101. In psychology, the negativity effect is the tendency of people, when evaluating the causes of the behaviors of a person they dislike, to attribute their positive behaviors to the environment and their negative behaviors to the person's inherent nature.
  102. The term negativity effect also refers to the tendency of some people to assign more weight to negative information in descriptions of others. Research has shown that the negativity effect in this sense is quite common, especially with younger people; older adults
  103.  
  104. You put a higher rating on negative qualities in people then you do the positive.
  105. --
  106. the fundamental attribution error, also known as the correspondence bias or attribution effect, is people's tendency to place an undue emphasis on internal characteristics to explain someone else's behavior in a given situation, rather than considering external factors
  107. Conversely, from the other perspective this error is known as the actor–observer bias, in which people tend to overemphasize the role of a situation in their behaviors and underemphasize the role of their own personalities.
  108.  
  109. Alice, a driver, is about to pass through an intersection. Her light turns green, and she begins to accelerate, but another car drives through the red light, crossing in front of her. Alice slams on the brakes, and is frustrated with the other driver, thinking that he was overtly being reckless; however, she is unaware that the other driver was actually suffering from his first episode of cataplexy - a temporary condition causing muscular weakness, and in this case, paralysis - rendering him incapable of stopping. Of course, this was not anything the other driver could have foreseen or prevented, but as an outsider, Alice was inclined to believe that his behavior reflected his fundamental nature of poor driving skills or a reckless attitude.
  110.  
  111. You are making passing judgements about me and the way that i think and behave without realizing an underlying cause or as to why i feel this way, you look at the situation and assume that i am a certain way because i choose to be, not that there is any underlying cause.
  112. --
  113. There is a tendency for people to assume that their own opinions, beliefs, preferences, values, and habits are normal and that others also think the same way that they do.
  114.  
  115. You have a tendency to believe that people should share your opinoins, beliefs, prefrences, values, ect as what should be normal, and anyone who also doesnt think the same way as you is wrong.
  116. you have a desire for people to conform to your ideas and beliefs and when they dont you automatically push them out.
  117. --
  118. The halo effect is a cognitive bias in which an observer's overall impression of a person, company, brand, or product influences the observer's feelings and thoughts about that entity's character or properties
  119. f the observer likes one aspect of something, they will have a positive predisposition toward everything about it. If the observer dislikes one aspect of something, they will have a negative predisposition toward everything about it.
  120.  
  121. Your overall impression of me is influenced by your feelings and thoughts about me rather then actual facts.
  122. Youve had a negative predisposition for me ever since we first started talking which has again made it bias and not accurate.
  123. --
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement