Phil Exam 2

Front 1

Status quo bias

Back 1

people assign a premium of existing courses of actions over alternatives that they would otherwise agree have greater value

ive always done it that way, pattern to continue

explains why you dont change cell phone plan

Front 2

Ameliorative Psychology

Back 2

Research program designed to identify successful reasoning skills

Studies imporved reasoning procedures

Front 3

Punitive environment

Back 3

Spread candy around the room and then punish kids for taking it

give people a lot of freedom + tempatation and punish them when they fall into temptation

Tempt ppl who are in senate with lobbying payoffs, elaborate regulations that prevent them from putting in situations of conflict

sorry you cant be lobbyist

Take away tempting morsel

Front 4

SPR

Back 4

Statistical prediction rules

The weights optimize the relationship between the sum of the cues and the target property

Front 5

VRAG SPR

Back 5

Predicting violent recidivism

Ungrounded SPR

Research done on violent canadian psyciatric patients

Front 6

Grounded vs. Ungrounded

Back 6

Grounded: SPRS for which we have a theotetical explanation for their sucess

Ungrounded: SPRS for which we do not have a theoretical explanation for their success

Front 7

Goldberg Rule vs. clinical prediction

Back 7

Goldberg: predicts whether a psychiatric patient is necrotic/psychotic on basis of mmp1

Front 8

Broken leg problems

Back 8

It is not always easy to know whether to use a particular reasoning strategy in a particular case so we tend to defect from spr

Front 9

Decision Frame/Framing effects

Back 9

Framing: Someone shows a preference of one option over another when they have equal expected value

1) frame an option in a particular way, way you express yourself attitude you show towards something

2) 2 options of equal expected value and you prefer one

sometimes you can

Front 10

Effects on risk-aversion

Back 10

gain dont want to give it up

loss seek risk in order to prevent loss from being even worse

Front 11

Application toward alternative medicine

Back 11

use standards like testibility, derrogates the practice

Front 12

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

Back 12

How to deal with lack of expertise, very difficult to counteract the forces of ignorance, how do you educate them, how to prevent corrupting influences,

Front 13

False consensus effect

Back 13

overestimation that other people agree with you, sandwich carrying experiment

give person evidence of disagreement

represent diversity of opinion

Front 14

Expert judgment

Back 14

human ej.

someone has arcane knowledge that can be relied on but not arrived at by lay people

Front 15

(Re)constructing stories

Back 15

Gilovich, secondhand accounts, how they get filtered, some details get levels so complicated becomes simple, important details

Front 16

Secondhand accounts

Back 16

?

Front 17

Adjustment and anchoring bias

Back 17

Process in which irrelevant background info fixes points of reference

people fixate on particular value that is irrelevant

realtors deferring to reference point made by novist

judges who anchored on lay person judgement

adjustment whatever movement you can get from that

Front 18

Self-Handicapping

Back 18

self-serving attempt to find off threat to self-esteem by re guiding expectation

I may not due well because . . .

moderated expections if you do well you're heroic

Front 19

Conjunction fallacy

Back 19

Linda problem,

people forget that probabilities are not added together, they are multiplied

They say shes a bank teller AND feminist

Front 20

Golden Rule of Predictive Modeling

Back 20

When based on the same evidence, the predictions of SPR are at least as reliable and typically more reliable than predictions of human experts.

Front 21

Pluralistic Ignorance

Back 21

When you assume that the same behavior is produced by different mental states

we notice that someone else also isnt asking questions, assume they not because they already know

assume other people share or mental states diff.

Front 22

Satisficing Solutions

Back 22

Not optimal, just good enough to get the job done

just good enough to pass on our kind

Front 23

Corrective Feedback

Back 23

Undermine the false conssoues effect,

give feedback that they are mistaken

to interrupt fluency of

Front 24

Planning Fallacy

Back 24

Neglect distributional level data and adopt an internal approach to prediction which underestimates the time complete projects

Front 25

Special Pleading

Back 25

We often tell ourselves that there are special reasons to think that we could meet the deadline in this particular case

this time, despite my record, its going to be different

Front 26

Endowment Effect

Back 26

Students given a mug those who have them are asked to give a sale price

people overvalue a thing just because they own it

Front 27

Recognition Heuristic

Back 27

Use particular cue as indication that proper target is present

city pair example

Front 28

Doxastic Voluntarism

Back 28

Doctrine that we can accept/reject a particular belief we hold despite vast cultivation of and identification of those beliefs

Front 29

Base-Rate Information

Back 29

relative frequency with which events occur in a population

Front 30

Calibration

Back 30

make suggestive estimate that you're correct with the objective probability

Front 31

Leveling

Back 31

knock down certain details to make it smooth, complicating it less so its more fluent

Front 32

Derogating Past Selves

Back 32

our background is worse than it actually is so we get upward trend

Front 33

Sharpening

Back 33

adding detail to sotry to make it more memorable

Front 34

Pluralistic Ignorance

Back 34

mental state about other people not asking questionss

Front 35

Groupthink

Back 35

supressing dissent in a group

produces groupthink

Front 36

Accuracy of Reasoning Strategies

Back 36

what SPRs give tou

Front 37

Kahneman and Tversky’s 5-step corrective procedure

Back 37

Select a reference class

Assessment f distribution of ref class

Intuitive Estimation

assessment of predictability

Correction of intuitive estimate

Front 38

“Little Albert” experiment

Back 38

learning up on and generalizing from his experiences Fear of white rat because associated sound to itour acquired fears can generalize

Front 39

Howard and Dawes’ Study

Back 39

ungrounded spr f-f rules

Front 40

Cost-benefit analysis

Back 40

standrard approach when deciign what spr to use use one with lowest cost and more beneficial