Scribd
Upload
34 views2 pages

Study Guide-Cognitive Bias ERQ

The document discusses cognitive bias, particularly focusing on the dual processing model which includes System 1 (intuitive) and System 2 (rational) thinking. It highlights studies by Tversky and Kahneman and Strack and Mussweiler that demonstrate the anchoring bias, where initial information significantly influences decision-making. The conclusion raises questions about the reliability of human decisions given the potential for bias.

Uploaded by

zoma
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
34 views2 pages

Study Guide-Cognitive Bias ERQ

The document discusses cognitive bias, particularly focusing on the dual processing model which includes System 1 (intuitive) and System 2 (rational) thinking. It highlights studies by Tversky and Kahneman and Strack and Mussweiler that demonstrate the anchoring bias, where initial information significantly influences decision-making. The conclusion raises questions about the reliability of human decisions given the potential for bias.

Uploaded by

zoma
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Discuss one or more studies on cognitive bias.

Introduction:
- Dual processing model
- System 1: intuitive, automatic, quick and requiring no or little effort, but it can be influence or
biased, real-life situation/scenarios
- System 2: rational and goal-directed, allocates the attention to effortful activities that demand
it (e.g. Choice, concentration); abstract thinking and situations
- Anchoring bias - when the first piece of information influences the decision-making process
heavily.

Main body:
1. Tversky and Kahneman (1974)
o Aim: to test the anchoring bias theory
o Procedure:
 Highschool students
 Group 1: 1x2x3x4x5x6x7x8
 Group 2: 8x7x6x5x4x3x2x1
 Asses the value
o Results: The median for the descending group was higher than in ascending group.
o Conclusion: the first number was the anchor, and it affected the result given.
o Evaluation:
 demand characteristics
 experiment: controlled variables
 reductionist (oversimplifies the theory)

2. Strack and Mussweiler


o Aim: to test anchoring bias
o Procedure:
 Participants asked if Gandhi died before or after certain age
 Group 1: plausible high anchor
 Group 2: plausible low anchor
 Group 3: implausible high anchor
 Group 4: implausible low anchor
o Results: Those with the high anchor consistently guessed higher values for Gandhi’s
age of death, but the implausibly high anchor value did not seem to have as great an
effect. This could be because it was not possible - it was 140 years old.
o Conclusion: This seems to indicate that anchoring bias plays a strong role in decision
making, unless it is completely unreasonable
o Evaluation:
 Demand characteristic (someone can actually know when Gandhi died)
 Experiment: every variable controlled,
 easy to replicate – high internal validity

Discussion:
- Important decision - other factors (e.g. risk) can influence the anchor or even change it
- Gender or age could influence it
- Can schemas be an anchor or influence it ?
- Reductionist
- Can human decision be reliable if they can be biased in such simple way?

Conclusion:
Dual processing can explain some part of decision making,

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy