Support Me On Patreon
Join My Newsletter on the right
Without realizing it, we make hundreds of decisions each day. Many are relatively insignificant such as what to eat for lunch, which route to take to a friends house, what music we want to listen to, and so on. However, there are bigger decisions that can affect the course of our lives like what profession you want to go into, who can you trust, how to spend money, or what beliefs you follow.
We often believe that these decisions are mostly the result of careful reasoning. We first gather information, then we weigh the evidence, take alternatives into consideration, and eventually come to a rational conclusion.
However, when it comes to reality, human decision making is considerably more complicated.
Our brains work in such a way that it uses mental shortcuts to process gigantic amounts of information rapidly. These shortcuts are usually quite useful. If we didn’t have these short cuts, even easy decisions could become tiresome. However, they can produce systematic mistakes in judgment referred to as cognitive biases.
These biases play a part on how we perceive evidence, remember the past, judge others, take a look at the risks, and attempt to predict the future. It is important to consider that knowing these biases exist doesn’t necessarily make us immune.
Trying to understand cognitive biases isn’t just a simple academic exercise. It may help us become critical in our things and therefore make better decisions.
What Is a Cognitive Bias?
A cognitive bias is a systematic way in thinking that may cause a person to interpret information or make judgments in a way that departs from purely rational or statistically optimal reasoning.
Two psychologists, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, helped to transform the study of decision-making by showing that people often rely on mental shortcuts, known as heuristics, when attempting to make decisions under uncertainty.
A heuristic may not necessarily be a mistake, but it’s essentially a shortcut.
Visualize something crashing loudly at 3am. You likely don’t perform a detailed analysis before deciding whether or not you should take a look. People’s brains rapidly interpret the sound, consider possible risks, and then come up with a response. It is a useful ability.
However, problems can come up when shortcuts cause us to make conclusions that are not fully supported by the evidence.
Why Do Cognitive Biases Exist?
The brain has attention that is limited along with time and processing capacity. It is impossible to analyze every single bit of information we come across. Therefore, the brain simplifies things.
It notices things such as patterns, puts information into categories, recalls previous experiences, and rapidly makes predictions.
These processes are often quite effective. Imagine if every minor decision required complex deliberation; regular life would be virtually impossible. However, this efficiency has some trade-offs.
We often have a tendency to pay more attention to things that confirm what we already believe. This happens a lot in politics and religion. You can basically Google any viewpoint and come up with various answers. Sometimes dramatic events seem more common than they truly are.
Perhaps we might judge someone’s personality without taking an adequate look at the circumstances that may be influencing their behavior.
Therefore, cognitive biases can be seen partly as a side effect of the brain, which is designed to make workable decisions without complete information.
Confirmation Bias: Seeing What We Expect to See
There is something that is often brought up in research courses called confirmation bias. This refers to our tendency to seek, interpret, or recall things in a way that supports the beliefs we already have.
Perhaps a person thinks that a certain diet will greatly improve their health. In this case, they may remember stories from those who benefited from it while not considering those who didn’t experience any improvement. One great example is how people view vaccinations. Anti-vaxxers will soak up information that vaccines have bad side effects and neglect information that shows that vaccines are the safer route. There are many subjects where this process can occur, such as relationships, science, investing, and so on.
The problem is that finding evidence that supports your belief is not the same as testing a belief. A better and stronger approach would be to deliberately ask, “What is the evidence that shows that I could be wrong? This makes it so that we move beyond simply defending a position to actually evaluating it.
The Availability Heuristic: When Memorable Events Feel Common
Humans often estimate how likely something is based simply on how easily examples come to mind. This is something called “available heuristic.”
Picture seeing a lot of news reports about airplane accidents. This may cause one to feel that flying is more dangerous, even though a simple handful of stories doesn’t mean that the statistical risk of flying in a plane has dramatically increased.
It is true that people can be particularly vulnerable to these emotionally powerful events. Such things as terrorist attacks, bear attacks, winning the lottery, and so on can attract attention because they are typically unusual or they give off strong emotions. Repeated exposure can make it so that such events seem much more common than what they truly are.
This shows us an important distinction: just because something is easy to remember does not mean it happens a lot.
If you’re making an important decision when it comes to risk, statistics tend to be more reliable than vivid anecdotes by themselves.
Anchoring: The Power of the First Number
Our judgments are often influenced by the first piece of evidence that we see. One of the worst places to get information is from Facebook memes. Sometimes I have fallen for them, but I have been more careful now that I have been wrong a few times. I have to research things that come across my wall.
This idea is known as anchoring.
Picture a shirt that typically is advertised for $40, but it is actually being sold for $20. The $40 price is what becomes an anchor. Sometimes when pricing things, you will see a higher price that is crossed out, and the lower price it is being sold for. This often gives the impression that you’re getting a deal. However, is that shirt really worth $20?
This technique is often used in salaries, real estate, negotiations, and in many other ways.
Once the first number enters our minds, we may unconsciously make judgments, even when this number is arbitrary or irrelevant.
The Sunk Cost Fallacy: “I’ve Already Put Too Much Into This”
Let’s say that you spend $100 on a concert, but halfway through you find out that you hate it. You have the choice to leave and do something more enjoyable. However, you might stay due to the fact that you paid $100 for it. The money is gone no matter what you choose.
This is an example of the “sunk cost fallacy.” You continue something because you have already invested resources into it instead of taking a look at whether or not continuing is worthwhile.
Sometimes people will remain committed to unsuccessful projects, careers, relationships, or business plans because they have already invested so much effort. I remember when I wanted to become a therapist. I got my BA in psychology and then went on to a Master’s degree, thinking that it was something I’d want to do. Then I traveled over an hour one way and spent a lot of money on it. I tried to continue and ignore certain roadblocks. Eventually I had to give up, but I stuck to it for longer than I should have.
Instead of the rational question being “How much have I invested?” it is “Seeing where I currently am, will continuing be the best use of future resources?
Even though we invested in something in the past doesn’t mean that you should continue on that path when it isn’t providing the desired effects.
Loss Aversion: Why Losing Hurts So Much
Another important feature that is associated with Kahneman and Tversky’s prospect theory is the idea that people react differently to losses and gains that are equal.
For example, losing $1,000 may feel stronger than gaining $1,000. This is known as “loss aversion.” This phenomenon can influence financial decisions, relationships, and everyday behavior.
You might hold onto a poor investment simply because selling would make the loss feel greater. You might avoid a potential good opportunity rather than losing something that you already have because it feels stronger than the possible gain.
Avoiding loss may not be irrational. However, sometimes avoiding a loss may be the correct decision. This bias happens when we have an emotional reaction to possible losses, and it distorts how we assess the possible risks and benefits.
The Framing Effect: How Wording Changes Decisions
Imagine two statistics. One says that four out of five times it produces success whereas the other says that one out of five times it produces failure. While they both describe the same outcome, psychologically it may not feel the same. This is called the “framing effect.”
Your choices may change depending on whether identical information is shown in terms of losses, gains, failure, survival, and many other things.
This kind of framing is very important when it comes to politics, advertising, journalism, and public communication. Think of the politician who is asked a direct question, but they avoid giving a direct answer.
Whenever an emotionally loaded framing is being used, it often helps to reframe what is being said into neutral or alternative terms.
It might be important to ask if the same decision would remain if it were worded differently.
Hindsight Bias: “I Knew It All Along”
“Hindsight bias” is what happens when an event occurs, and it can seem a lot more predictable than it was beforehand.
It is true that after something major such as an election, scientific discovery, or going to the movies, people generally feel that the outcome should have been more obvious. For example, it is weird to think that gravity had to be discovered. Once the outcome is known, it changes how we remember the uncertainty we dealt with beforehand.
Hindsight bias can help us prevent learning from mistakes because we have a different view of the past rather than accurately examining what we knew beforehand.
It might be a good idea to document predictions before the outcome occurs. Writing down what and why you expect something helps to create a record that hindsight may not easily rewrite. I remember when I bought some expensive tickets for a concert that two of my friends were going to. Instead of collecting the money from them first, I ordered the tickets. One person didn’t end up going, and I lost quite a bit of money. In hindsight, it seems obvious that I should have collected the money before ordering.
The Fundamental Attribution Error
Not only do cognitive biases affect our judgments about certain facts and probabilities, but they influence how we judge people.
The fundamental attribution error shows that we tend to overemphasize personality when describing another person’s behavior while, at the same time, underestimating situational factors.
Perhaps someone forgets to use a turning signal when driving and you automatically think they are an asshole for not putting it on. However, there are other possibilities. Perhaps they don’t realize their signal light isn’t working, or they are in a rush because of an emergency. They may be really nice, but made a simple mistake.
What makes it interesting is that when we make a similar mistake, we are generally more in tune of the circumstances that explain our behavior.
Having an understanding of this bias doesn’t necessarily mean that we excuse harmful behavior. It is viewing behavior as being the result of both personality and circumstances.
The Halo Effect: When One Trait Colors Everything Else
Let’s say you meet someone who is attractive and confident. You then make the assumption that the person is also intelligent and trustworthy. This is called the “halo effect.”
They say that first impressions always count. That’s why people try to dress nicely for job interviews. A strong positive impression in one area can cause you to make judgments in areas that aren’t related.
The opposite can also happen when a single negative trait influences our overall view of the person.
The halo effect can influence many things such as romantic attraction, leadership, job interviews, and several other scenarios.
However, we are often told not to judge a book by its cover, but we often do this. I know this because I write books myself and I’m not sure how appealing my covers are. Perhaps they aren’t that good of covers so someone doesn’t purchase my book because they don’t like the cover. One impressive quality in another person doesn’t automatically prove the existence of other qualities.
Overconfidence Bias
Sometimes we misjudge the limits of our knowledge. This is known as “overconfidence” bias, and it happens when our confidence in the judgments we make goes further than their actual reliability. You might be 89% sure about something even if the evidence isn’t fully present.
Sometimes expertise can help lower mistakes, but even the experts are not immune to overconfidence bias either. Expertise is best in environments where people are perpetually receiving feedback and can truly learn from experience.
It is good to sometimes just say that you don’t know. There is nothing wrong with not knowing something, and it doesn’t mean that you lost an argument. In fact, it is a good way to reason.
Cognitive Biases and Social Media
Anyone exploring their wall on Facebook or X can see that social media has created an environment where cognitive biases are strong. These platforms often produce tons of emotionally charged information. I notice this especially when it comes to politics. Someone sees a meme that confirms what they already believe, and they share it. I’ve done this a few times even though I should have known better. This content can cause emotions like anger, surprise, or fear because people are motivated to have a reaction.
Confirmation bias gets us to be involved with information that supports the beliefs we already have. With heuristics being available, often repeated claims seem more believable or common.
Another thing that can influence which sources we trust is group identity. Our emotions can cause immediate reactions before something is carefully evaluated. We may feel that something is true when it is said repeatedly; for example, Republicans accuse Democrats of being communists even though they don’t fit the definition. However, as our politicians repeat something over and over, people may latch on.
Are Cognitive Biases Signs of Low Intelligence?
The simple answer is “no” because smart people can experience cognitive biases. There are times when greater reasoning ability can make people better at creating complicated arguments to support the position they already hold.
Both education and intelligence are valuable, but neither necessarily means that one is producing an unbiased position. One defense is to develop habits that make us test our ideas rather than just making our arguments stronger.
How Cognitive Biases Affect Everyday Decisions
It is true that biases can play a part in just about every major area of our lives. For example, in relationships, confirmation bias may cause one to see ambiguous behavior according to an existing belief regarding their partner.
When making financial decisions, loss aversion and sunk costs may motivate people to be involved in bad investments.
When it comes to healthy decisions, there are times that dramatic anecdotes overshadow statistical evidence that is stronger.
In the workplace, halo effects and attribution errors may influence decisions when it comes to how well someone performs in an interview. Being a shy person myself, I find interviews very difficult and am often turned down for the job after the interview.
When it comes to politics, people often see information differently depending upon whether it supports or threatens their political positions.
In politics, people may evaluate information differently depending on whether it supports or threatens their existing worldview.
There is not a single worldview that is immune to biased reasoning.
How Can We Reduce Cognitive Bias?
It is unrealistic to completely get rid of cognitive bias. Instead, one should make the goal to make decision-making habits that reduce the likelihood of serious mistakes.
1. Slow Down Important Decisions
We make so many decisions throughout the day that we can’t extensively evaluate them all. However, when it comes to bigger decision that are related to health, careers, relationships, substantial money and long-term consequences deserve to be looked at more closely.
2. Actively Search for Contrary Evidence
Perhaps instead of asking what supports you belief, you can ask what is the strongest evidence opposing it?
3. Separate Evidence From Emotion
Sometimes emotions provide us with much needed information, however, feeling strong about something doesn’t mean it is necessarily true. Perhaps you could ask yourself what evidence would convince another person who didn’t agree with you.
4. Use Numbers When Numbers Matter
When taking a look at risks, it is good to compare actual probabilities instead of relying just on exclusively dramatic examples.
5. Consider Alternative Explanations
It is good to examine alternative explanations before settling on just one. This idea is very valuable when it comes to judging another person’s motives.
Before settling on one explanation, deliberately generate several alternatives.
6. Seek Genuine Disagreement
Be careful of surrounding yourself only with people who tend to agree with you as that will strength confirmation bias. It is good to have constructive disagreement because it shows that we assume things that would remain invisible otherwise.
7. Keep a Decision Journal
For the bigger decisions, write down, “What are you expecting to happen? Why do you believe it may happen? Do you have any evidence that supports your position. What uncertainities are there? What could make you change your position?” Later, take a look at your prediction and compare it to what happened. This can help reveal patterns in your own thinking.
The Bias Blind Spot
There is a final bias boss that you should consider since it may complicate everything else. It is called the “bias blind spot.” It’s true that people can often recognize cognitive biases when it comes to other people. We may notice a person’s confirmation bias while believing our own position is based on evidence. We often assume that our own judgment is objective while seeing someone else’s bias as false.
It is interesting what effects learning cognitive biases can cause. They can give us an ironic result. Instead of criticizing ourselves, we learn a new vocabulary to explain why others are wrong. That defeats the purpose. A useful question isn’t “Which bias shows why a certain person disagrees with me?” but it is “Which of these biases might have an influence on me?” It’s a really difficult question to answer, especially when we feel the need to be right.
Conclusion: Better Thinking Begins With Intellectual Humility
People are neither hopelessly irrational or perfectly rational. Throughout time, our minds have evolved to make decisions in a complex world with limited resources. While the shortcuts are often extraordinarily useful, they may sometimes lead us in the wrong direction.
When looking at cognitive biases, it shouldn’t cause us to distrust every little thought we have. Instead, it should make us be more careful about how confidently we hold to our beliefs.
When making an important decision, ask questions such as “What evidence am I not seeing? Am I truly seeking the truth or only defending a belief that
I already have? If evidence supported the opposite conclusion, would I interpret the evidence differently. Am I reacting to actual probability or am I simply reacting to something memorable? Is there any information that could change my mind?” While these are good questions they don’t necessarily guarantee perfect decisions.
However, they can accomplish something important and they can cause us to be a little less certain when certainty isn’t justified. It can make us more willing to correct ourselves when the evidence shows itself.
Further Reading (Affiliate Links)
Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
The Art of Thinking Clearly by Rolf Dobelli
Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely
Nudge by Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein
Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) by Carol Tavris & Elliot Aronson
The Scout Mindset by Julia Galef
Noise by Daniel Kahneman, Olivier Sibony & Cass R. Sunstein
You Are Not So Smart by David McRaney
The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt
The Undoing Project by Michael Lewis
Return to Psychology
Support Me On Patreon
Join My Newsletter on the right