10 concepts to make you a tiny bit smarter than you were yesterday:
Irrational escalation
The phenomenon where people increase their investment in a decision despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong
May include money ("throwing good money after bad"), time, or — in the case of military strategy — human lives
The phenomenon where people increase their investment in a decision despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong
May include money ("throwing good money after bad"), time, or — in the case of military strategy — human lives
Less-is-better effect
People sometimes prefer the worse of two options, but only when the options are presented separately
When people consider both their choices together, their preferences reverse, so that the less-is-better effect disappears
People sometimes prefer the worse of two options, but only when the options are presented separately
When people consider both their choices together, their preferences reverse, so that the less-is-better effect disappears
Money illusion
The tendency to view wealth and income in nominal dollar terms, rather than recognize their real value, adjusted for inflation
Inflation matters
The tendency to view wealth and income in nominal dollar terms, rather than recognize their real value, adjusted for inflation
Inflation matters
Moral Credential effect
The subconscious tendency whereby increased confidence and security in one's self-image tends to make you worry less about the consequences of subsequent immoral behavior and, therefore, more likely to make immoral choices and act immorally
The subconscious tendency whereby increased confidence and security in one's self-image tends to make you worry less about the consequences of subsequent immoral behavior and, therefore, more likely to make immoral choices and act immorally
Outcome bias
An error made in evaluating the quality of a decision when the outcome of that decision is already known
Involves judging a past decision by its ultimate outcome rather than the quality of the decision at the time it was made, given what was known at that time
An error made in evaluating the quality of a decision when the outcome of that decision is already known
Involves judging a past decision by its ultimate outcome rather than the quality of the decision at the time it was made, given what was known at that time
Overconfidence effect
Where subjective confidence in your own judgments is reliably greater than the objective accuracy of those judgments, especially when confidence is relatively high
Known as the most "pervasive and potentially catastrophic" of all the cognitive biases
Where subjective confidence in your own judgments is reliably greater than the objective accuracy of those judgments, especially when confidence is relatively high
Known as the most "pervasive and potentially catastrophic" of all the cognitive biases
Pro-innovation bias
Believing an innovation should be adopted by all of society without the need for close examination of its limitations or weaknesses
Example: The atomic bomb. Many legislators promoted widespread adoption without close examination of pitfalls and dangers
Believing an innovation should be adopted by all of society without the need for close examination of its limitations or weaknesses
Example: The atomic bomb. Many legislators promoted widespread adoption without close examination of pitfalls and dangers
Pseudocertainty effect
The tendency to perceive an outcome as certain when it's actually uncertain in multi-stage decision making
The evaluation of the certainty of the outcome in a previous stage of decisions is disregarded when selecting an option in subsequent stages
The tendency to perceive an outcome as certain when it's actually uncertain in multi-stage decision making
The evaluation of the certainty of the outcome in a previous stage of decisions is disregarded when selecting an option in subsequent stages
Reactive devaluation
The tendency to disparage proposals made by another party, especially if this party is viewed as negative or antagonistic
We should always assess proposals on their merits, not on their proposer's merits. Further, we should optimise for long-term outcomes
The tendency to disparage proposals made by another party, especially if this party is viewed as negative or antagonistic
We should always assess proposals on their merits, not on their proposer's merits. Further, we should optimise for long-term outcomes
Restraint bias
Our tendency to overestimate the level of control we have over our impulsive behaviours
These urges typically come from “primal impulses” such as hunger, drug cravings, fatigue, or sexual arousal
Hack: Out of sight, out of mind—take temptation out of view
Our tendency to overestimate the level of control we have over our impulsive behaviours
These urges typically come from “primal impulses” such as hunger, drug cravings, fatigue, or sexual arousal
Hack: Out of sight, out of mind—take temptation out of view
That's a wrap!
If you enjoyed this thread:
1. Follow me @_alexbrogan for more of these
2. RT the tweet below to share this thread with your audience
If you enjoyed this thread:
1. Follow me @_alexbrogan for more of these
2. RT the tweet below to share this thread with your audience
https://twitter.com/1488287898067607553/status/1495038013247737857
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
