It seems logical that we should have evolved to perceive the world
accurately, think clearly and make sound decisions. However research in Cognitive
and Social Psychology has demonstrated that we’re really a very biased bunch.
Take a look at the Wikipedia article “List of cognitive biases”; there
are literally hundreds of biases which we all engage in on a nearly daily
basis. It’s an interesting topic, so I would like to give an outline of my favourite
five most fascinating cognitive biases which we’re are all guilty of.
Have you ever found yourself in an argument where you’re the calm,
rational speaker, making clear, logical arguments? Yet your sound logic falls
on deaf ears, only to be returned with absolute nonsense from the other side. That
might be because of the illusion of argument justification. Perhaps both sides’
arguments were just as rational or irrational as the other.
People are terribly bad at rating the credibility of their own
arguments. “When arguing for their own position, participants inaccurately
assessed their ability to present quality arguments” (Fisher & Keil, 2013). So we might feel like we're making a very clever and logical argument, when in fact we are not. In fact, the effect is even stronger when we try to justify a
position we feel particularly strongly about. So next time you’re in an
argument that doesn’t seem to be going anywhere, this is a good reminder to
take a step back, and take an objective look at both points of view.
Fisher, M., & Keil, F. C. (2013, March 18). The Illusion of
Argument Justification. Journal
of Experimental
Psychology: General.
Advance online publication.
2. The Dunning Kruger effect.
If you are an expert at something,
such as playing the piano, or knowing a lot about Psychology, you are more likely to
rate yourself as lacking competence in that skill. It makes sense to a degree;
those who are very good at something are also very good at noticing their own
flaws.
However, those who are completely incompetent at a skill believe they are in fact quite good at it. This is probably because they can’t detect their own mistakes. In 2000, Dunning and Kruger were awarded with the Ig-Nobel prize for their paper which discovered this effect.
However, those who are completely incompetent at a skill believe they are in fact quite good at it. This is probably because they can’t detect their own mistakes. In 2000, Dunning and Kruger were awarded with the Ig-Nobel prize for their paper which discovered this effect.
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why
people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current directions in Psychological science, 12, 3, 83-87.
3. Self-serving bias.
The
self-serving bias is a well-studied phenomenon which we’ve all engaged in at
one time or another, knowingly or not. It’s the tendency to take more
responsibility for good things that happen to us, but to shirk responsibility for
the bad things. It’s caused by our attributional style – the way we
explain the causes of everyday ambiguous events.
Different
people might attribute a different locus of control depending on their outlook.
Imagine two students who both did really well on an exam, but they have different attributional styles. One might say that it was because they studied really hard and
deserved their grade, whereas the other might believe that, despite them
studying, they were just given easy questions, or had a lot of lucky guesses.
Miller,
D. T., & Michael, R. (1975). Self-serving biases in the attribution of
causality: Fact or fiction? Psychological
Bulletin, 82, 2, 213-225.
4. The Google effect.
This one is likely the result of our ever increasing access to any and
all information on demand. It’s the tendency to not bother remembering
information if you can just look it up, and it’s one that I’m certainly guilty
of. Maybe it’s not such a bad thing though. There’s a quote by Albert Einstein
(which I just had to find on Google): “Never memorize something you can look
up”.
Sparrow,
B., et al. (2011). Google effects on memory: Cognitive consequences of having
information at our fingertips. Science,
333, 776-778.
5.
The Just world belief.
The ‘just world’ theory proposes that people are disposed towards believing that the world is a just and
fair place in which to live (Lerner, 1980). In other words, when we see bad things happen
to good people, we rationalise it to maintain a sense of justice. For example “…people may, at times, derogate
an innocent victim’s character to maintain a sense of justice (Lerner &
Simmons, 1966)”.
We jump through a series of mental hoops to maintain this belief, such
as biasing our recollection of past events (Callan et al 2009), and perceiving
the latter lives of victims as better (Anderson, Kay & Fitzsimons, 2010).
A tragic example of where the just world bias went wrong was in the well-known
Fort Lauderdale rape trial, in 1989. During the trial for the rape of a 22
year old girl, the defendant was acquitted. The jury argued that "We
all feel she asked for it [by] the way she was dressed" because she
was wearing “a white lace miniskirt, a green tank top, and no underwear” at the
time of the assault.
Anderson, J. E., Kay, A. C., &
Fitzsimons, G. M. (2010). In search of the silver lining: The justice motive
fosters perceptions of benefits in the later lives of tragedy victims. Psychological Science, 21, 1599-1604.
Callan, M. J., Kay, A. C., Davidenko, N.,
& Ellard, J. H. (2009). The effects of justice motivation on memory for
self- and other-relevant events. Journal
of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 614-623.
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York, NY:
Plenum Press.
