DOCSLIB.ORG

Omission Neglect and the Bias Blind Spot: Effects of the Self-Other Asymmetry in Susceptibility to Bias and Responsiveness to Debiasing

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Omission Neglect and the Bias Blind Spot: Effects of the Self-Other Asymmetry in Susceptibility to Bias and Responsiveness to Debiasing Omission Neglect and the Bias Blind Spot: Effects of the Self-Other Asymmetry in Susceptibility to Bias and Responsiveness to Debiasing A dissertation submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (PH.D.) IN THE DEPARTMENT OF MARKETING of the College of Business 2011 By Xiaoqi Han M.A., Marquette University Committee Chair: Frank R. Kardes, Ph.D. i ABSTRACT Omission Neglect and the Bias Blind Spot: Effects of the Self-Other Asymmetry in Susceptibility to Bias and Responsiveness to Debiasing By Xiaoqi Han Chair: Dr. Frank R. Kardes Research on the bias blind spot shows that people are less capable of identifying biases in their own judgment than in others. People generally believe that they are less susceptible to biases than their peers and average people. This dissertation investigates the self-other bias asymmetry with respect to omission neglect. Omission neglect refers to insensitivity to missing or unknown information. Results from bias blind spot research imply a potential relationship between the self-other asymmetry in bias belief and omission neglect. Research on bias correction suggests that people holding a higher degree of asymmetry in bias beliefs may be less likely to correct biases even when omissions are made noticeable. Ironically, consumers who believe that they are less vulnerable to omission neglect may be more susceptible to omission neglect. Consumers may be also less likely to correct their judgment even when omitted information is made noticeable. The goal of the dissertation is to develop debiasing techniques to debias omission neglect in order to improve consumer judgment and decision making. Corrective procedures are designed to debias omission neglect by means of reducing the bias blind spot. Prior to debiasing, two studies are designed to substantiate the assumption about the relationship between the bias blind spot and omission neglect. Study 1 demonstrates that ii people believe others are susceptible to omission neglect, but they themselves are not. Study 2 shows that higher self-other asymmetry predicts predict greater omission neglect and a decreased likelihood of judgment correction to a moderate position. Last, in study 3, we show that debiasing is most effective when the bias blind spot is most specifically related to omission neglect. However, only people in low need for cognitive closure are responsive to debiasing. Taken together, the studies show that the bias blind spot contributes to omission neglect and reduces responsiveness to debiasing. iii ©Copyright 2011 Xiaoqi Han ALL RIGHTS RESERVED iv DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, my sister, my friend Dawn, and my late grandma. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost, I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Frank R. Kardes. Without him, I would not have been able to complete this dissertation. He is kind, inspiring and tremendously knowledgeable. The inspirations on research I have received from him are beyond description. I am honored to have worked under his guidance. I am also thankful to all the faculty members in the marketing department. I appreciate their kindness. Particularly, I thank Dr. James Kellaris for his humor; I thank Dr. David Curry for his warm and sincere advice; I also thank Dr. Karen Machleit for her generous support; and I thank Dr. Norman Bruvold for his fun and informative culture anecdotes. I would like to thank my family who has supported my education all the way through. Coming from a working class family, I would not have pursued higher education persistently without my family’s belief in me. Particularly, I would like to thank my parents, who worked really hard to support my education. I would like to thank my sister, who has been my emotional support and best friend. I would also like to thank my late grandma, who had faith in me regardless. Finally, I would like to thank my friend, Dawn, who stayed as my company in times of difficulty. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................ 4 Omission Neglect................................................................................................. 4 Debiasing Omission Neglect ............................................................................... 5 The Bias Blind Spot ............................................................................................. 7 The Use of Introspective vs. Behavioral Information between Actors and Observers of Bias ............................................................................................... 12 Bias Blind Spot and Omission Neglect ............................................................. 14 Self-other Asymmetry and Bias correction ....................................................... 16 Dual-processing Theories, Self-other Asymmetry and Omission Neglect ........ 16 The Shallowness Thoughts of the Self and System 1 Processing ...................... 17 CHAPTER THREE HYPOTHESES ..................................................................................................... 21 Relationship between the Self-other Asymmetry and Omission Neglect .......... 21 Debiasing omission neglect ............................................................................... 22 The Need for Cognitive Closure and Debiasing effect ...................................... 23 CHAPTER FOUR STUDY 1 .............................................................................................................. 26 Overview ........................................................................................................... 26 Method ............................................................................................................... 26 Results ............................................................................................................... 27 Discussion .......................................................................................................... 29 CHAPTER FIVE STUDY 2 .............................................................................................................. 30 Overview ........................................................................................................... 30 Pretest ................................................................................................................ 31 Method ............................................................................................................... 32 Results ............................................................................................................... 35 Discussion .......................................................................................................... 39 CHAPTER SIX STUDY 3 .............................................................................................................. 41 Overview ........................................................................................................... 41 Method ............................................................................................................... 44 Results ............................................................................................................... 47 Discussion .......................................................................................................... 49 CHAPTER SEVEN GENERAL DISCUSSION .................................................................................... 51 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 55 APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................................ 64 APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................................ 67 APPENDIX C ............................................................................................................................................ 73 vii TABLES AND FIGURES FIGURE 1 THE PREDICTION .................................................................................... 14 FIGURE 2 STUDY 1 .................................................................................................... 88 FIGURE 3 STUDY 1 .................................................................................................... 89 FIGURE 4 STUDY 2 .................................................................................................... 90 TABLE 1 STUDY 2 .................................................................................................... 91 FIGURE 5 STUDY 2 .................................................................................................... 92 FIGURE 6 STUDY 2 .................................................................................................... 93 TABLE 2 STUDY 3 .................................................................................................... 94 FIGURE 7 STUDY 3 .................................................................................................... 95 viii CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Consumers’ judgment and decisions are subject to a variety of biases. Biases refer to the systematic
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Status Quo Bias and Decisions to Withdraw Life-Sustaining Treatment
    HUMANITIES | MEDICINE AND SOCIETY The status quo bias and decisions to withdraw life-sustaining treatment n Cite as: CMAJ 2018 March 5;190:E265-7. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.171005 t’s not uncommon for physicians and impasse. One factor that hasn’t been host of psychological phenomena that surrogate decision-makers to disagree studied yet is the role that cognitive cause people to make irrational deci- about life-sustaining treatment for biases might play in surrogate decision- sions, referred to as “cognitive biases.” Iincapacitated patients. Several studies making regarding withdrawal of life- One cognitive bias that is particularly show physicians perceive that nonbenefi- sustaining treatment. Understanding the worth exploring in the context of surrogate cial treatment is provided quite frequently role that these biases might play may decisions regarding life-sustaining treat- in their intensive care units. Palda and col- help improve communication between ment is the status quo bias. This bias, a leagues,1 for example, found that 87% of clinicians and surrogates when these con- decision-maker’s preference for the cur- physicians believed that futile treatment flicts arise. rent state of affairs,3 has been shown to had been provided in their ICU within the influence decision-making in a wide array previous year. (The authors in this study Status quo bias of contexts. For example, it has been cited equated “futile” with “nonbeneficial,” The classic model of human decision- as a mechanism to explain patient inertia defined as a treatment “that offers no rea- making is the rational choice or “rational (why patients have difficulty changing sonable hope of recovery or improvement, actor” model, the view that human beings their behaviour to improve their health), or because the patient is permanently will choose the option that has the best low organ-donation rates, low retirement- unable to experience any benefit.”) chance of satisfying their preferences.
    [Show full text]
  • A Task-Based Taxonomy of Cognitive Biases for Information Visualization
    A Task-based Taxonomy of Cognitive Biases for Information Visualization Evanthia Dimara, Steven Franconeri, Catherine Plaisant, Anastasia Bezerianos, and Pierre Dragicevic Three kinds of limitations The Computer The Display 2 Three kinds of limitations The Computer The Display The Human 3 Three kinds of limitations: humans • Human vision ️ has limitations • Human reasoning 易 has limitations The Human 4 ️Perceptual bias Magnitude estimation 5 ️Perceptual bias Magnitude estimation Color perception 6 易 Cognitive bias Behaviors when humans consistently behave irrationally Pohl’s criteria distilled: • Are predictable and consistent • People are unaware they’re doing them • Are not misunderstandings 7 Ambiguity effect, Anchoring or focalism, Anthropocentric thinking, Anthropomorphism or personification, Attentional bias, Attribute substitution, Automation bias, Availability heuristic, Availability cascade, Backfire effect, Bandwagon effect, Base rate fallacy or Base rate neglect, Belief bias, Ben Franklin effect, Berkson's paradox, Bias blind spot, Choice-supportive bias, Clustering illusion, Compassion fade, Confirmation bias, Congruence bias, Conjunction fallacy, Conservatism (belief revision), Continued influence effect, Contrast effect, Courtesy bias, Curse of knowledge, Declinism, Decoy effect, Default effect, Denomination effect, Disposition effect, Distinction bias, Dread aversion, Dunning–Kruger effect, Duration neglect, Empathy gap, End-of-history illusion, Endowment effect, Exaggerated expectation, Experimenter's or expectation bias,
    [Show full text]
  • A Dissertation Entitled Exploring Common Antecedents of Three Related Decision Biases by Jonathan E. Westfall Submitted As Parti
    A Dissertation Entitled Exploring Common Antecedents of Three Related Decision Biases by Jonathan E. Westfall Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology __________________________ Advisor: Dr. J. D. Jasper __________________________ Dr. S. D. Christman __________________________ Dr. R. E. Heffner __________________________ Dr. K. L. London __________________________ Dr. M. E. Doherty __________________________ Graduate School The University of Toledo August 2009 Exploring Common Antecedents ii Copyright © 2009 – Jonathan E. Westfall This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document may be reproduced in any manner without the expressed written permission of the author. Exploring Common Antecedents iii An Abstract of Exploring Common Antecedents of Three Related Decision Biases Jonathan E. Westfall Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for The Doctor of Philosophy in Psychology The University of Toledo August 2009 “Decision making inertia” is a term loosely used to describe the similar nature of a variety of decision making biases that predominantly favor a decision to maintain one course of action over switching to a new course. Three of these biases, the sunk cost effect, status-quo bias, and inaction inertia are discussed here. Combining earlier work on strength of handedness and the sunk cost effect along with new findings regarding counterfactual thought, this work principally seeks to determine if counterfactual thought may drive the three decision biases of note while also analyzing common relationships between the biases, strength of handedness, and the variables of regret and loss aversion. Over a series of experiments, it was found that handedness differences did exist in the three biases discussed, that amount and type of counterfactuals generated did not predict choice within the status-quo bias, and that the remaining variables potentially thought to drive the biases presented did not link causally to them.
    [Show full text]
  • Perceptions of Teacher Expectations Among First and Second
    Digital Commons @ George Fox University Doctor of Education (EdD) Theses and Dissertations 12-1-2016 Student Voice: Perceptions of Teacher Expectations Among First and Second Generation Vietnamese and Mexican Students Sara Gandarilla George Fox University, [email protected] This research is a product of the Doctor of Education (EdD) program at George Fox University. Find out more about the program. Recommended Citation Gandarilla, Sara, "Student Voice: Perceptions of Teacher Expectations Among First and Second Generation Vietnamese and Mexican Students" (2016). Doctor of Education (EdD). 90. http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/edd/90 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctor of Education (EdD) by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STUDENT VOICE: PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHER EXPECTATIONS AMONG FIRST AND SECOND GENERATION VIETNAMESE AND MEXICAN STUDENTS By SARA GANDARILLA FACULTY RESEARCH COMMITTEE: Chair: Terry Huffman, Ph.D. Members: Ginny Birky, Ph.D. and Tatiana Cevallos, Ed.D. Presented to the College of Education, George Fox University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education December 7, 2016 ii ABSTRACT This qualitative research study explored the perceptions first and second generation Vietnamese and Mexican high school students hold on teacher expectations based on their racial identity. Specifically, this study explores the critical concepts of stereotype threat, halo effect, and self-fulfilling prophecy. The primary purpose of this investigation was to enhance the understanding of how the perception students have impacts success or lack of success for two different student groups.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Service Evaluations and Qualitative Research
    EAHP Academy Seminars 20 - 21 September 2019 Brussels #ACASEM2019 EAHP Academy Seminars 20-21 September 2019 Introduction to service evaluation and qualitative research Jonathan Underhill, NICE and Keele University, UK Ulrika Gillespie Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden Conflicts of interest • No conflicts of interest to declare Introduction • Understanding how humans make decisions and its impact on: – Communicating findings – Conducting research • Answering questions using qualitative and quantitative studies Introduction • Understanding how humans make decisions and its impact on: – Communicating findings – Conducting research • Answering questions using qualitative and quantitative studies What do we know about how people make decisions? • Behavioural economics and cognitive psychology: – Bounded rationality (Herbert Simon 1978) – Dual process theory (Daniel Kahneman 2002) – Most decisions are informed by brief reading and talking to other people - please find a piece of paper and a pen - a list of words follows look at them once, do not re-read them - when you have read the list close your eyes Flange Routemaster Laggard Sausages Automaton Approach Antichrist Research Slipper Haggle Fridge Locomotive Bracket Confused Telesales Professor Stool pigeon Hale Banquet Irrelevance Write down as many words as you can remember Flange How many words Routemaster A that you remembered Laggard are in each group? Sausages Automaton Approach B Antichrist Research Slipper Haggle C Fridge Locomotive Bracket Confused D Telesales Professor Stool pigeon Hale E Banquet Irrelevance Herbert Simon 1978 Economics Bounded rationality Satisfycing Please list all the medicines which have a potential interaction with warfarin – both increasing and decreasing its effect Drug interactions with warfarin – decreased effect • Amobarbital • Primidone Butabarbital Ribavirin Carbamazepine Rifabutin Cholestyramine Rifampin Dicloxacillin Secobarbital Griseofulvin Sucralfate Mercaptopurine Vitamin K Mesalamine Coenzyme Q10 Nafcillin Ginseng Phenobarbital St.
    [Show full text]
  • The Art of Thinking Clearly
    For Sabine The Art of Thinking Clearly Rolf Dobelli www.sceptrebooks.co.uk First published in Great Britain in 2013 by Sceptre An imprint of Hodder & Stoughton An Hachette UK company 1 Copyright © Rolf Dobelli 2013 The right of Rolf Dobelli to be identified as the Author of the Work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of the publisher, nor be otherwise circulated in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. A CIP catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library. eBook ISBN 978 1 444 75955 6 Hardback ISBN 978 1 444 75954 9 Hodder & Stoughton Ltd 338 Euston Road London NW1 3BH www.sceptrebooks.co.uk CONTENTS Introduction 1 WHY YOU SHOULD VISIT CEMETERIES: Survivorship Bias 2 DOES HARVARD MAKE YOU SMARTER?: Swimmer’s Body Illusion 3 WHY YOU SEE SHAPES IN THE CLOUDS: Clustering Illusion 4 IF 50 MILLION PEOPLE SAY SOMETHING FOOLISH, IT IS STILL FOOLISH: Social Proof 5 WHY YOU SHOULD FORGET THE PAST: Sunk Cost Fallacy 6 DON’T ACCEPT FREE DRINKS: Reciprocity 7 BEWARE THE ‘SPECIAL CASE’: Confirmation Bias (Part 1) 8 MURDER YOUR DARLINGS: Confirmation Bias (Part 2) 9 DON’T BOW TO AUTHORITY: Authority Bias 10 LEAVE YOUR SUPERMODEL FRIENDS AT HOME: Contrast Effect 11 WHY WE PREFER A WRONG MAP TO NO
    [Show full text]
  • Valuing Thoughts, Ignoring Behavior: the Introspection Illusion As a Source of the Bias Blind Spot ଝ
    Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43 (2007) 565–578 www.elsevier.com/locate/jesp Valuing thoughts, ignoring behavior: The introspection illusion as a source of the bias blind spot ଝ Emily Pronin ¤, Matthew B. Kugler Department of Psychology, Green Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA Received 3 September 2005; revised 16 May 2006 Available online 20 July 2006 Communicated by Fiedler Abstract People see themselves as less susceptible to bias than others. We show that a source of this bias blind spot involves the value that people place, and believe they should place, on introspective information (relative to behavioral information) when assessing bias in themselves versus others. Participants considered introspective information more than behavioral information for assessing bias in themselves, but not others. This divergence did not arise simply from diVerences in introspective access. The blind spot persisted when observers had access to the introspections of the actor whose bias they judged. And, participants claimed that they, but not their peers, should rely on introspections when making self-assessments of bias. Only after being educated about the importance of nonconscious processes in guiding judgment and action—and thereby about the fallibility of introspection—did participants cease denying their relative susceptibility to bias. © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Bias blind spot; Introspection illusion; Self—other; Nonconscious inXuences; Self-perception In a recent news story, a federal judge defended his ability The tendency to see bias in others, while being blind to it to be objective in handling a case involving a long-time friend. in ourselves, has been shown across a range of cognitive In another story, government scientists defended their impar- and motivational biases (for a review, see Pronin, Gilovich, tiality in evaluating drug companies from whom they received & Ross, 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • Positive Stereotypes, Negative Outcomes: Reminders of the Positive Components of Complementary Gender Stereotypes Impair Perform
    1 British Journal of Social Psychology (2018) © 2018 The British Psychological Society www.wileyonlinelibrary.com Positive stereotypes, negative outcomes: Reminders of the positive components of complementary gender stereotypes impair performance in counter-stereotypical tasks Rotem Kahalon1* , Nurit Shnabel1 and Julia C. Becker2 1Tel-Aviv University, Israel 2Osnabruck University, Germany Gender stereotypes are complementary: Women are perceived to be communal but not agentic, whereas men are perceived to be agentic but not communal. The present research tested whether exposure to reminders of the positive components of these gender stereotypes can lead to stereotype threat and subsequent performance deficits on the complementary dimension. Study 1 (N = 116 female participants) revealed that compared to a control/no-stereotype condition, exposure to reminders of the stereotype about women’s communality (but not to reminders of the stereotype about women’s beauty) impaired women’s math performance. In Study 2 (N = 86 male participants), reminders of the stereotype about men’s agency (vs. a control/no- stereotype condition) impaired men’s performance in a test of socio-emotional abilities. Consistent with previous research on stereotype threat, in both studies the effect was evident among participants with high domain identification. These findings extend our understanding of the potentially adverse implications of seemingly positive gender stereotypes. While the message that negative stereotypes are anti-egalitarian and socially unacceptable is reinforced in contemporary Western society, positive stereotypes are prevalent and considered socially acceptable (Czopp, Kay, & Cheryan, 2015). The present research tested whether, despite their subjectively positive tone, positive gender stereotypes might lead to negative outcomes. In particular, we examined whether highlighting the positive stereotypes about women’s communality and men’s agency can lead to stereotype threat effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Does Physical Attractiveness and Sex Impact Decisions in a Threat Detection Task
    DOES PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS AND SEX IMPACT DECISIONS IN A THREAT DETECTION TASK A research project submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY At the UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY By JESSIE KENDALL UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY 2014 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would firstly like to thank Deak Helton for being an excellent and supportive supervisor. I am very grateful of your guidance and your efficient and thorough feedback that you have provided throughout the year. Also, to Kumar Yogeeswaran, my secondary supervisor, for your exceptional guidance and assistance. It has been a privilege to work with you both. A very big thank you also to Jon Wiltshire, who helped design and create the computer simulation game necessary for this research. I would also like to thank Christopher Burt for encouraging me to return to University to complete the second year of the APSY course after a break. 1 CONTENTS CONTENTS .............................................................................................................................................. 1 LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................................... 3 ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................. 4 SECTION I – INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 5 1.1. STEREOTYPES
    [Show full text]
  • Infographic I.10
    The Digital Health Revolution: Leaving No One Behind The global AI in healthcare market is growing fast, with an expected increase from $4.9 billion in 2020 to $45.2 billion by 2026. There are new solutions introduced every day that address all areas: from clinical care and diagnosis, to remote patient monitoring to EHR support, and beyond. But, AI is still relatively new to the industry, and it can be difficult to determine which solutions can actually make a difference in care delivery and business operations. 59 Jan 2021 % of Americans believe returning Jan-June 2019 to pre-coronavirus life poses a risk to health and well being. 11 41 % % ...expect it will take at least 6 The pandemic has greatly increased the 65 months before things get number of US adults reporting depression % back to normal (updated April and/or anxiety.5 2021).4 Up to of consumers now interested in telehealth going forward. $250B 76 57% of providers view telehealth more of current US healthcare spend % favorably than they did before COVID-19.7 could potentially be virtualized.6 The dramatic increase in of Medicare primary care visits the conducted through 90% $3.5T telehealth has shown longevity, with rates in annual U.S. health expenditures are for people with chronic and mental health conditions. since April 2020 0.1 43.5 leveling off % % Most of these can be prevented by simple around 30%.8 lifestyle changes and regular health screenings9 Feb. 2020 Apr. 2020 OCCAM’S RAZOR • CONJUNCTION FALLACY • DELMORE EFFECT • LAW OF TRIVIALITY • COGNITIVE FLUENCY • BELIEF BIAS • INFORMATION BIAS Digital health ecosystems are transforming• AMBIGUITY BIAS • STATUS medicineQUO BIAS • SOCIAL COMPARISONfrom BIASa rea• DECOYctive EFFECT • REACTANCEdiscipline, • REVERSE PSYCHOLOGY • SYSTEM JUSTIFICATION • BACKFIRE EFFECT • ENDOWMENT EFFECT • PROCESSING DIFFICULTY EFFECT • PSEUDOCERTAINTY EFFECT • DISPOSITION becoming precise, preventive,EFFECT • ZERO-RISK personalized, BIAS • UNIT BIAS • IKEA EFFECT and • LOSS AVERSION participatory.
    [Show full text]
  • Influencing Choice Without Awareness
    Consciousness and Cognition 37 (2015) 225–236 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Consciousness and Cognition journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/concog Influencing choice without awareness ⇑ Jay A. Olson a,c, , Alym A. Amlani b, Amir Raz a,c, Ronald A. Rensink d a Department of Psychiatry, 1033 Pine Avenue West, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 1A1, Canada b School of Business, Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Main Building, Room 206, 12666 72 Avenue, Surrey, BC V3W 2M8, Canada c The Lady Davis Institute at the SMDB Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada d Departments of Psychology and Computer Science, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada article info abstract Article history: Forcing occurs when a magician influences the audience’s decisions without their aware- Received 18 July 2014 ness. To investigate the mechanisms behind this effect, we examined several stimulus Available online 7 February 2015 and personality predictors. In Study 1, a magician flipped through a deck of playing cards while participants were asked to choose one. Although the magician could influence the Keywords: choice almost every time (98%), relatively few (9%) noticed this influence. In Study 2, par- Forcing ticipants observed rapid series of cards on a computer, with one target card shown longer Magic than the rest. We expected people would tend to choose this card without noticing that it Volition was shown longest. Both stimulus and personality factors predicted the choice of card, Free will Decision making depending on whether the influence was noticed. These results show that combining Sense of agency real-world and laboratory research can be a powerful way to study magic and can provide Persuasion new methods to study the feeling of free will.
    [Show full text]
  • The Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking
    EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 51(1), 23–34, 2016 Copyright Ó Division 15, American Psychological Association ISSN: 0046-1520 print / 1532-6985 online DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2015.1125787 2013 THORNDIKE AWARD ADDRESS The Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking Keith E. Stanovich Department of Applied Psychology and Human Development University of Toronto, Canada The Nobel Prize in Economics was awarded in 2002 for work on judgment and decision- making tasks that are the operational measures of rational thought in cognitive science. Because assessments of intelligence (and similar tests of cognitive ability) are taken to be the quintessence of good thinking, it might be thought that such measures would serve as proxies for the assessment of rational thought. It is important to understand why such an assumption would be misplaced. It is often not recognized that rationality and intelligence (as traditionally defined) are two different things conceptually and empirically. Distinguishing between rationality and intelligence helps explain how people can be, at the same time, intelligent and irrational. Thus, individual differences in the cognitive skills that underlie rational thinking must be studied in their own right because intelligence tests do not explicitly assess rational thinking. In this article, I describe how my research group has worked to develop the first prototype of a comprehensive test of rational thought (the Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking). It was truly a remarkable honor to receive the E. L. Thorn- Cunningham, of the University of California, Berkeley. To dike Career Achievement Award for 2012. The list of previ- commemorate this award, Anne bought me a 1923 ous winners is truly awe inspiring and humbling.
    [Show full text]