932 words
5 minutes
Types of Cognitive Biases Common in Humans — Including in Decision Making
TIPIf you want to use another language, please use the translation feature in your browser.
1. Introduction: What Is a Cognitive Bias?
A cognitive bias is a systematic pattern of deviation from rational judgment. Our brains rely on “shortcuts” (heuristics) to process information quickly. While heuristics improve efficiency, they often lead to errors in judgment—especially when making important decisions.
2. Why Do Biases Occur?
- Brains seek to conserve mental energy by using shortcuts.
- In urgent situations, a rapid response often trumps perfect accuracy.
- Emotional needs—like feeling safe or confident—can push us to ignore threatening data.
3. Categories of Cognitive Bias
3.1 Heuristic Biases
- Anchoring: Overreliance on an initial piece of information (number, example).
- Availability: Judging likelihood by how easily instances come to mind.
- Representativeness: Classifying based on stereotypes rather than statistical data.
3.2 Social and Perception Biases
- Halo Effect: Letting one positive trait overshadow other assessments.
- In-group Bias: Favoring members of our group and undervaluing outsiders.
- Fundamental Attribution Error: Attributing someone’s actions to character, not circumstances.
3.3 Memory and Hindsight Biases
- Hindsight Bias: Believing “I knew it all along” after an event occurs.
- Recency Bias: Weighing recent information more heavily.
- Primacy Effect: Clinging to first impressions.
3.4 Biases in Decision Making
- Confirmation Bias: Seeking or interpreting information that supports existing beliefs.
- Overconfidence: Excessive faith in our predictions or abilities.
- Loss Aversion: Preferring to avoid losses rather than acquire equivalent gains.
- Sunk Cost Fallacy: Continuing an endeavor because of past investments, despite poor outlook.
- Status Quo Bias: Preferring current conditions over potentially better alternatives.
- Planning Fallacy: Underestimating time and resources needed for a task.
- Gambler’s Fallacy: Expecting random events to “even out” in the short run.
4. Comprehensive Table of Cognitive Biases
| Bias | Brief Definition | Impact on Decisions | Mitigation Strategies |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anchoring | Relying too heavily on an initial value | Skewed estimates of cost or capacity | Compare multiple references; reset the starting point |
| Availability | Overweighting easily recalled events | Inflated perception of dramatic risks | Use historical data; document all occurrences |
| Representativeness | Judging by resemblance to a stereotype | Misclassification of probabilities or candidates | Check base rates; validate with actual data |
| Confirmation | Focusing on evidence that confirms preconceptions | Clinging to beliefs despite contradictory facts | Actively seek disconfirming evidence |
| Overconfidence | Excess trust in one’s own predictions or abilities | Underestimating risks; ignoring potential errors | Solicit peer review; include error margins |
| Loss Aversion | Stronger desire to avoid losses than to acquire gains | Hesitation on high-reward investments | Reframe gains; quantify both risks and rewards |
| Sunk Cost Fallacy | Continuing investment due to prior costs | Prolonged commitment to failing projects | Base decisions on future prospects only |
| Status Quo | Reluctance to change current state | Missing out on efficiency or innovation | Objectively evaluate new options |
| Planning Fallacy | Underestimating required time and resources | Project delays and budget overruns | Break into phases; use data from similar projects |
| Hindsight Bias | Believing outcomes were predictable in retrospect | Underestimating past uncertainty | Record pre-outcome predictions for later review |
| Recency Bias | Recent information dominates decision making | Overemphasis on short-term trends | Extend analysis window; calculate long-term averages |
| Primacy Effect | First impressions disproportionately influence us | Biased interviews or candidate assessments | Use structured evaluations; vary question order |
| Halo Effect | One positive trait influences overall judgment | Promoting based on a single strength | Employ multi-factor assessments; anonymize data |
| In-group Bias | Preferential treatment of one’s own group | Biased hiring; exclusion of outsiders | Rotate teams; encourage cross-functional input |
| Fundamental Attribution Error | Attributing behavior to character instead of situation | Misunderstandings and conflict | Ask contextual questions; verify circumstances |
| Gambler’s Fallacy | Belief that random events will balance out in the short term | Unfounded bets or speculative investments | Teach probability theory; use stochastic models |
| Self-Serving Bias | Crediting successes to self, blaming failures on external factors | Reduced accountability; inflated ego | Seek external feedback; practice self-reflection |
| Dunning-Kruger | Incompetent individuals overestimate their own skill level | Taking on tasks beyond one’s capability | Use objective tests; secure expert mentoring |
| Choice-Supportive Bias | Justifying past decisions even when flawed | Rejecting new, contradicting information | Keep pros and cons logs; review decisions periodically |
| Endowment Effect | Overvaluing owned items | Holding onto outdated assets | Benchmark market values; test in real transactions |
| Negativity Bias | Focusing more on negative feedback than positive | Undue emphasis on risks; ignoring opportunities | Balance positive and negative inputs; use appreciation journals |
5. General Strategies to Reduce Bias
- Build awareness through regular education and team discussions.
- Implement checklists and decision protocols to flag biases before finalizing.
- Appoint a devil’s advocate to challenge prevailing assumptions.
- Rely on data-driven analyses and quantitative insights.
- Foster team diversity to bring varied perspectives.
- Delay snap judgments; allow time for reflection and additional research.
6. Examples of Cognitive Biases
| Bias | Real-World Example |
|---|---|
| Anchoring | A seller lists a car at $20,000; buyers negotiate around that figure regardless of true value. |
| Availability | After seeing news about shark attacks, someone overestimates the danger of swimming in the ocean. |
| Representativeness | Assuming a quiet, bookish person must be a librarian, ignoring statistical likelihoods. |
| Confirmation | Reading only news outlets that align with one’s political views. |
| Overconfidence | An entrepreneur predicts 200% growth in six months without market research. |
| Loss Aversion | Holding onto losing stocks too long to avoid realizing a financial loss. |
| Sunk Cost Fallacy | Finishing a poor movie because you already paid for the ticket. |
| Status Quo | Reluctance to switch from a familiar software tool to a more efficient alternative. |
| Planning Fallacy | Estimating a home renovation will take two weeks when it actually takes two months. |
| Hindsight Bias | Claiming “I knew the candidate would win” only after the election results are in. |
| Recency Bias | Basing business forecasts solely on last month’s sales spike. |
| Primacy Effect | Making a hiring decision based on a candidate’s first answer in an interview. |
| Halo Effect | Favoring a colleague for promotion simply because they excel at presentations. |
| In-group Bias | Preferring job applicants who attended the same university as you. |
| Fundamental Attribution Error | Blaming a coworker’s lateness on laziness, not considering they faced traffic delays. |
| Gambler’s Fallacy | Believing a roulette wheel is “due” for a black number after a long red streak. |
| Self-Serving Bias | Attributing a project’s success to personal skill but blaming team issues for its failure. |
| Dunning-Kruger | A novice photographer believing their early photos are gallery-worthy. |
| Choice-Supportive Bias | Remembering a less-than-ideal purchase decision as entirely positive. |
| Endowment Effect | Demanding $50 for a mug you own, even though identical mugs sell for $10 online. |
| Negativity Bias | Fixating on one critical comment in a performance review despite nine positive remarks. |
7. Conclusion
Cognitive biases are inseparable from human thought. By identifying biases—from simple heuristics to complex social patterns—we can build mitigation strategies and make more objective decisions. Quality decisions stem from awareness, structure, and a commitment to continuous learning.
“A bias-free decision isn’t a final destination—it’s a continuous journey toward clarity and wisdom.”
Types of Cognitive Biases Common in Humans — Including in Decision Making
https://luminarysirx.my.id/posts/cognitive-bias/