Wws312/psy321: Judgment & Decision Making Final

Front 1

Construal processes

Back 1

Context plays a huge role in how we understand the world

Front 2

Heuristic

Back 2

Experienced based method of learning: relies on natural assessment to make a judgment (often automatic & effortless, insensitive to important factors) ; intuitive strategy (sometimes deliberate, sometimes not), that's founded on a natural assessment to reduce a complex task of predication to a simpler judgment operation

Front 3

Mental Representations

Back 3

How we make decisions (not based on objective states)

Front 4

Pareto optimality

Back 4

Best outcome for all

Front 5

Bias

Back 5

Produced by Heuristics that don't follow normative rules

Front 6

Representativeness

Back 6

judging probability by similarity

Front 7

Availability

Back 7

Judging probability by the ease with which instances come to mind

Front 8

Anchoring

Back 8

Irrelevant starting point

Front 9

Affect heuristic

Back 9

judging an item's merit by the emotion it generates

Front 10

Fundamental attribution error

Back 10

judging dispositions based on observed behavior, with insufficient weight given to the situation

Front 11

Bias-belief affect

Back 11

people attempt to be logical, but are influenced by prior beliefs

Front 12

Curse of Knolwedge

Back 12

find it difficult not to be affacted by knowledge we know, eg. if we know something and others don't

Front 13

Confirmation bias

Back 13

people look for evidence that confirms their prior beleifs

Front 14

Naturalistic Decisions

Back 14

Decisions made in time pressure, high stakes situations, often by experts with inadequate information

Front 15

Recognition-primed decision model

Back 15

people satisfice: look for first work-able option

Front 16

Law of Similarity

Back 16

Like causes like/appearance is like reality

Front 17

Law of Contagion

Back 17

once in contact, always in contact

Front 18

Natural assessments

Back 18

properties are perceived wo/much attention (eg. size, distance, similarity, causality, novelty/surprise value, familiarity, affect)

Front 19

Perscriptive analysis

Back 19

describes behaviors, recognizes our limitations

Front 20

Conjunction Fallacy

Back 20

Logical fallacy when it is assumed that specific conditions are more probable than a single general one. (Linda)

Front 21

Actuarial models

Back 21

explicit models based on pre-existing relationships, out-perform experts because: consistent, properly weigh cues, only use valid cues

Front 22

Clinical models

Back 22

may out-perform actuarial when, judgments are based on theory, rare events/outliers that don't fit into the statistical model

Front 23

Regression Fallacy

Back 23

thinking that there is a correlation between events, when its just regression to the mean

Front 24

Frequency Tree

Back 24

way in which to correctly display the correct thinking process when judging hypotheses

Front 25

The Iron Law of Signal Detection

Back 25

Prediction is never perfect, if criterion is more lenient (less evidence needed), probability of correct positives increases. Way to get minimal error. Make criterion more rigorious: improve prediction equation, partion better, but prediction is never perfect & both error types have negative consequences (Linear Correlation coefficient: best fitting straight line through scatter plot)

Front 26

Validity

Back 26

correlation of predictors w/criterion

Front 27

Proper Linear model

Back 27

weights given to predictors to optimize relationship between predictors & criteria

Front 28

Bootstrapping

Back 28

use judge's prior predictions to get to the core of their knowledge

Front 29

Inherent Limitations of prediction

Back 29

the more invested/important an issue, the more we want to ignore these limitations and the worse our predictions

Front 30

Confirming feedback

Back 30

feedback confirms that our prediction is right (also happens by repetition)

Front 31

Overconfidence cause by

Back 31

Attentional & Motivational factors

Front 32

Implicit Memory

Back 32

memories can be implanted w/leading questions

Front 33

Social inferences

Back 33

fast, automatic, effortless (this is where stereotypes come from)

Front 34

Impact/Duration Bias

Back 34

overestimate the duration of their affective responses to negative events

Front 35

Focusing Illusion

Back 35

When anticipating future events, people exaggerate the importance of things that change in the future, but ignore the things that would stay the same

Front 36

Optimistic reinterpretation

Back 36

revise beliefs about behavior, explain away failure, reinterpret outcomes

Front 37

Inside view

Back 37

focus on singular info. Of the event at hand, this particular case

Front 38

Outside view

Back 38

focus on distributional stats/base rates, past behavior, population

Front 39

Subjective Construal

Back 39

Variability in person's construal of events/meaning of fundamental concepts

Front 40

Bias of Prior & implicit associations:

Back 40

eg. Blitzkrieg v. quickstrike

Front 41

Bounded awareness

Back 41

our minds make predictable mistakes in what to pay attention to

Front 42

Inattentional blindness

Back 42

we are looking selectively (eg. the gorilla on the basketball court)

Front 43

Change blindness

Back 43

often don't explicitely notice changes in the environment

Front 44

6 Cues used in natural assessments

Back 44

affect, novelty/surprise value, similarity/representativeness, causality, ease of recall, familiarity

Front 45

Planning Fallacy

Back 45

We should take outside view instead of inside

Front 46

Endowment affect

Back 46

eg. mug experiment

Front 47

Self-Serving bias

Back 47

Eg. in negotiations

Front 48

Aversion to Concessions

Back 48

In Prospect Theory

Front 49

9 Factors which affect decisions

Back 49

Risk attitudes, shifting weights, loss aversion, mental accounting, emotion, aggregation, temporal discounting, reliance on weights, decisional conflict

Front 50

Psychology of Scarcity

Back 50

Scarcity produces its own psychology

Front 51

Preference malleability

Back 51

act of asking a question may change the behavior

Front 52

Myopia

Back 52

Don't think long-term about decision

Front 53

Peak-end Rule

Back 53

peak ends are remembered in painful events, not duration

Front 54

Dynamic inconsistency

Back 54

inconsistent choices w/time/contexts

Front 55

3 categories in mental accounting

Back 55

current income, assets, future income

Front 56

Alternating identities

Back 56

can prime us to make different decisions

Front 57

Prospect Theory leads to 3 inconsistencies

Back 57

intuitions, valuations, preferences

Front 58

Isolation effect

Back 58

People make decisions by isolating the distinguishing factors

Front 59

6 ways to think straighter

Back 59

de-bias yourself, take an outside view, recognize personal v. situational behavior, use incentives, think about psychological taxes/subsidies, change your behavior?