DOCSLIB.ORG

A List of Biases (With Implementation Tips)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A List of Biases (With Implementation Tips) A List of Biases (With Implementation Tips) Confirmation Bias – We look for and trust information that agrees with our existing beliefs - Tip: Use information your audience is likely to agree with Barnum/Forer Effect – The tendency to accept general information as being true (think horoscopes) - Tip: Using information that is generally applicable to your audience, address your customers in a believably “personalized” way Priming – An unconscious type of human memory that activates mental associations just before carrying out a task - Tip: Use language and visual cues that prime your customer for your offer - Tip: Show credibility, liking, and your strongest points before attempting to influence potential customers BYAF (“but you are free”) – When you give customers a choice by reminding them that they’re free to make their own decision, they are more likely to choose you - Tip: Use BYAF (“But you are free”) when appropriate and possible Ambiguity Aversion Bias – The preference for known risks (certainty) over unknown risks (uncertainty) - Tip: Reduce ambiguity wherever possible: Include links to more information, FAQs, a glossary - Tip: If you have a multi-page checkout, include copy that ensures customers they can review their information before finalizing their order Chart and Science Bias – Content that implies science increases the credibility of its surroundings, even when irrelevant - Tip: Incorporate “sciencey” content like charts, graphics, statistics etc into your marketing strategies Image Bias – The presence of imagery increases the believability of claims, even if irrelevant - Tip: Use imagery (or even metaphors) whenever possible Picture Superiority Effect – Images improve content recall - Tip: Use images in addition to or instead of copy Von Restorff Effect – People are more likely to remember an item that visually stands out from the rest - Tip: Design an ad that’s “out of the box”, make it visually distinct from other ads people are seeing Distinction Bias – Viewing two objects simultaneously emphasizes their differences - Tip: Use side by side comparisons (a chart, product photos, etc) to emphasize differences between your product and your competitor’s Bandwagon Effect – People have an innate tendency to follow the crowd - Tip: Show that other people are doing what you want your users to do (for example, displaying “X amount of people have given our product 5 stars/trust our product” Cheerleader Effect: Individuals are perceived as more attractive when they’re in a group - Tip: Show group (four or more) photos of your executive team, staff, or testimonials Precision Bias – The idea that precise numbers are better than round numbers (501.52 beats 500) - Tip: Use a precise price over a round one Syllable Effect – A price that is many syllables and has lots of punctuation feels more expensive to prospective customers - Tip: Cut the dollar signs and commas, aim for a number without too many zeroes Anchoring Bias – The first piece of information (i.e. a price) sets the tone for any information to follow - Tip: Avoid placing low value numbers on your webpage, even if the number is irrelevant to pricing - Tip: Place high numbers on your page, anchor with a higher price Price Illusion – Big numbers seem more valuable - Tip: Create your own currency or points system (ex: $1 = 1,000 points) Mere Exposure Effect – The more often you’re exposed to something, the more you like it - Tip: Use repetition with your brand or logo, put it wherever possible Decoy Effect – Consumers will have a change in preference when presented with an asymmetrically dominated option - Tip: Add an additional option as the decoy effect Extrinsic Incentives Bias – People tend to overestimate the effect that a product’s price has on people’s buying decision - Tip: Hold off on lowering your price when trying to increase sales; try some other tactics first. Ben Franklin Effect – A person who does you a favor is actually more likely to do you another favor in the future than if you did them a favor in the first place - Tip: Ask potential customers to do a small favor for you, perhaps to like you on Facebook Endowment Effect – We place a higher value on things that are ours - Tip: Offer free trials, use sensory descriptions and vivid product images IKEA Effect – A product seems more valuable when you participate in assembling it - Tip: Let your customer customize or somehow finish your product Illusory Superiority – People tend to overestimate their good qualities and underestimate their bad qualities - Tip: Use copy that flatters your customers Availability Heuristic – Logic and probability take the backseat to emotional arguments - Tip: Use vivid stories and graphic images that create an emotionally-charged memory when your brand/product comes to mind Paradox of Choice – A large number of choices can cause choice overload and ultimately decrease satisfaction of a purchase - Tip: If you offer many choices, showcase a “recommended” product, “house special”, “most popular”, or some other specially featured product to create a clearer, less overwhelming purchase decision Other tips: - Use adjectives that are: vivid, sensory, emotional, nostalgic, specific, and branded (“rough day” trumps “bad day”) .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Cognitive Psychology
    COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY PSYCH 126 Acknowledgements College of the Canyons would like to extend appreciation to the following people and organizations for allowing this textbook to be created: California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office Chancellor Diane Van Hook Santa Clarita Community College District College of the Canyons Distance Learning Office In providing content for this textbook, the following professionals were invaluable: Mehgan Andrade, who was the major contributor and compiler of this work and Neil Walker, without whose help the book could not have been completed. Special Thank You to Trudi Radtke for editing, formatting, readability, and aesthetics. The contents of this textbook were developed under the Title V grant from the Department of Education (Award #P031S140092). However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. Unless otherwise noted, the content in this textbook is licensed under CC BY 4.0 Table of Contents Psychology .................................................................................................................................................... 1 126 ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Chapter 1 - History of Cognitive Psychology ............................................................................................. 7 Definition of Cognitive Psychology
    [Show full text]
  • Detection of Confirmation and Distinction Biases in Visual
    EuroVis Workshop on Trustworthy Visualization (TrustVis) (2019) R. Kosara, K. Lawonn, L. Linsen, and N. Smit (Editors) Detection of Confirmation and Distinction Biases in Visual Analytics Systems . A. Nalcaci , D. Girgin , S. Balki , F. Talay, H. A. Boz and S. Balcisoy 1Sabanci University, Faculty of Engineering & Natural Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey Abstract Cognitive bias is a systematic error that introduces drifts and distortions in the human judgment in terms of visual decompo- sition in the direction of the dominant instance. It has a significant role in decision-making process by means of evaluation of data visualizations. This paper elaborates on the experimental depiction of two cognitive bias types, namely Distinction Bias and Confirmation Bias, through the examination of cognate visual experimentations. The main goal of this implementation is to indicate the existence of cognitive bias in visual analytics systems through the adjustment of data visualization and crowdsourc- ing in terms of confirmation and distinction biases. Two distinct surveys that include biased and unbiased data visualizations which are related to a given data set were established in order to detect and measure the level of existence of introduced bias types. Practice of crowdsourcing which is provided by Amazon Mechanical Turk have been used for experimentation purposes through prepared surveys. Results statistically indicate that both distinction and confirmation biases has substantial effect and prominent significance on decision-making process. CCS Concepts • Human-centered computing ! Empirical studies in visualization; Visualization design and evaluation methods; 1. Introduction cording to existing studies, usual heuristic errors involve confirma- tion bias, which characterizes people’s approaches to receive the Visual perception is the combination of physical and thoughtful de- confirmatory corroboration of a pre-existing hypothesis and dis- sign that provides the ability to interpret the environment and the miss contrary information.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Physical Distinctiveness and Word Commonness on Brain Waves and Subsequent Memory: an ERP Study
    University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 4-14-2010 The Effects of Physical Distinctiveness and Word Commonness on Brain Waves and Subsequent Memory: An ERP Study Siri-Maria Kamp University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons Scholar Commons Citation Kamp, Siri-Maria, "The Effects of Physical Distinctiveness and Word Commonness on Brain Waves and Subsequent Memory: An ERP Study" (2010). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/1675 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Effects of Physical Distinctiveness and Word Commonness on Brain Waves and Subsequent Memory: An ERP Study by Siri-Maria Kamp A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of Psychology College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Emanuel Donchin, Ph.D. Geoffrey F. Potts, Ph.D. Kenneth J. Malmberg, Ph.D. Date of Approval: April 14, 2010 Keywords: Word Frequency, Event-Related Potential, P300, Frontal Slow Wave, Recall Memory c Copyright 2010, Siri-Maria Kamp Acknowledgments I would like to thank my advisor Emanuel Donchin for all of his support throughout this study. Michelle-Chin Quee deserves acknowledgement for helping with data collection and entry. Fur- thermore, I would like to thank the other members of the Cognitive Psychophysiology laboratory, especially Ty Brumback, Geoffrey Potts and Yael Arbel, as well as Kenneth Malmberg and his lab, for their helpful comments and suggestions in lab meeting discussions.
    [Show full text]
  • Ilidigital Master Anton 2.Indd
    services are developed to be used by humans. Thus, understanding humans understanding Thus, humans. by used be to developed are services obvious than others but certainly not less complex. Most products bioengineering, and as shown in this magazine. Psychology mightbusiness world. beBe it more the comparison to relationships, game elements, or There are many non-business flieds which can betransfered to the COGNTIVE COGNTIVE is key to a succesfully develop a product orservice. is keytoasuccesfullydevelopproduct BIASES by ANTON KOGER The Power of Power The //PsychologistatILI.DIGITAL WE EDIT AND REINFORCE SOME WE DISCARD SPECIFICS TO WE REDUCE EVENTS AND LISTS WE STORE MEMORY DIFFERENTLY BASED WE NOTICE THINGS ALREADY PRIMED BIZARRE, FUNNY, OR VISUALLY WE NOTICE WHEN WE ARE DRAWN TO DETAILS THAT WE NOTICE FLAWS IN OTHERS WE FAVOR SIMPLE-LOOKING OPTIONS MEMORIES AFTER THE FACT FORM GENERALITIES TO THEIR KEY ELEMENTS ON HOW THEY WERE EXPERIENCED IN MEMORY OR REPEATED OFTEN STRIKING THINGS STICK OUT MORE SOMETHING HAS CHANGED CONFIRM OUR OWN EXISTING BELIEFS MORE EASILY THAN IN OURSELVES AND COMPLETE INFORMATION way we see situations but also the way we situationsbutalsotheway wesee way the biasesnotonlychange Furthermore, overload. cognitive avoid attention, ore situations, guide help todesign massively can This in. take people information of kind explainhowandwhat ofperception egory First,biasesinthecat andappraisal. ory, self,mem perception, into fourcategories: roughly bedivided Cognitive biasescan within thesesituations. forusers interaction andeasy in anatural situationswhichresults sible toimprove itpos and adaptingtothesebiasesmakes ingiven situations.Reacting ways certain act sively helpstounderstandwhypeople mas into consideration biases ing cognitive Tak humanbehavior. topredict likely less or andmore relevant illusionsare cognitive In each situation different every havior day.
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitive Biases in Software Engineering: a Systematic Mapping Study
    Cognitive Biases in Software Engineering: A Systematic Mapping Study Rahul Mohanani, Iflaah Salman, Burak Turhan, Member, IEEE, Pilar Rodriguez and Paul Ralph Abstract—One source of software project challenges and failures is the systematic errors introduced by human cognitive biases. Although extensively explored in cognitive psychology, investigations concerning cognitive biases have only recently gained popularity in software engineering research. This paper therefore systematically maps, aggregates and synthesizes the literature on cognitive biases in software engineering to generate a comprehensive body of knowledge, understand state of the art research and provide guidelines for future research and practise. Focusing on bias antecedents, effects and mitigation techniques, we identified 65 articles (published between 1990 and 2016), which investigate 37 cognitive biases. Despite strong and increasing interest, the results reveal a scarcity of research on mitigation techniques and poor theoretical foundations in understanding and interpreting cognitive biases. Although bias-related research has generated many new insights in the software engineering community, specific bias mitigation techniques are still needed for software professionals to overcome the deleterious effects of cognitive biases on their work. Index Terms—Antecedents of cognitive bias. cognitive bias. debiasing, effects of cognitive bias. software engineering, systematic mapping. 1 INTRODUCTION OGNITIVE biases are systematic deviations from op- knowledge. No analogous review of SE research exists. The timal reasoning [1], [2]. In other words, they are re- purpose of this study is therefore as follows: curring errors in thinking, or patterns of bad judgment Purpose: to review, summarize and synthesize the current observable in different people and contexts. A well-known state of software engineering research involving cognitive example is confirmation bias—the tendency to pay more at- biases.
    [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]
  • Advisory Study and Literature Review Report to the UK Higher Education Funding Bodies by CFE Research
    UK Review of the provision of information about higher education: Advisory Study and Literature Review Report to the UK higher education funding bodies by CFE Research April 2014 Dr Abigail Diamond Professor Jennifer Roberts Dr Tim Vorley Dr Guy Birkin Dr James Evans Jonathan Sheen Tej Nathwani © HEFCE 2014 For more information about this report please contact: Abigail Diamond CFE Research Phoenix Yard Upper Brown Street Leicester LE1 5TE T: 0116 229 3300 W: www.cfe.org.uk E: [email protected] Established in 1997, CFE is an independent not- for-profit company specialising in the provision of research and evaluation services across the fields of education, employment and skills. CONTENTS Executive Summary ........................................................................................... 4 Research Background, Aims and Approach ......................................................................4 Key Findings ......................................................................................................................4 Principles for Information Provision in Higher Education ............................................... 7 Potential Areas for Future Research .................................................................................9 Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................. 11 1.0 Project Background ................................................................................................ 11 1.1 Aims and Objectives ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • John Collins, President, Forensic Foundations Group
    On Bias in Forensic Science National Commission on Forensic Science – May 12, 2014 56-year-old Vatsala Thakkar was a doctor in India but took a job as a convenience store cashier to help pay family expenses. She was stabbed to death outside her store trying to thwart a theft in November 2008. Bloody Footwear Impression Bloody Tire Impression What was the threat? 1. We failed to ask ourselves if this was a footwear impression. 2. The appearance of the impression combined with the investigator’s interpretation created prejudice. The accuracy of our analysis became threatened by our prejudice. Types of Cognitive Bias Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases | Accessed on April 14, 2014 Anchoring or focalism Hindsight bias Pseudocertainty effect Illusory superiority Levels-of-processing effect Attentional bias Hostile media effect Reactance Ingroup bias List-length effect Availability heuristic Hot-hand fallacy Reactive devaluation Just-world phenomenon Misinformation effect Availability cascade Hyperbolic discounting Recency illusion Moral luck Modality effect Backfire effect Identifiable victim effect Restraint bias Naive cynicism Mood-congruent memory bias Bandwagon effect Illusion of control Rhyme as reason effect Naïve realism Next-in-line effect Base rate fallacy or base rate neglect Illusion of validity Risk compensation / Peltzman effect Outgroup homogeneity bias Part-list cueing effect Belief bias Illusory correlation Selective perception Projection bias Peak-end rule Bias blind spot Impact bias Semmelweis
    [Show full text]
  • The Behavioral Decision-Making Architecture
    The behavioral decision-making architecture Markus Domeier* & Pierre Sachse* * Institute of Psychology, Leopold-Franzens-University Innsbruck ABSTRACT Decision-makers in real life often have to deal with different situational influences while making a decision. They don’t know the odds of the outcome of different options and thus make their decisions under uncertainty. Moreover, most real- life situations are fast changing and dynamic, and the decision-maker doesn’t always know the exact cause of a given cir- cumstance. This intransparency and interdependency of the decision’s different elements can lead to a high complexity of the situation (Schroda, 2000) and thus to a difficult decision. Potential consequences are, besides errors, cognitive biases in the decision-making process, which can lead to erroneous decisions. But why do these systematic unconscious effects occur so frequently and what makes them so robust? This paper investigates the mechanisms and processes which lead to biased decisions. Therefore, a Behavioral Decision-Making Architecture model is presented. It takes a closer look onto the interaction between the characteristics of complex situations (Schroda, 2000), the computational architecture of psycho- logical processes (PSI theory, Dörner & Güss, 2013), and the occurrence of cognitive biases (Carter, Kaufmann & Michel, 2007) as well as their behavioral consequences in the decision-making process. The model depicts these processes and provides an approach to explain the unconscious upside (positive influence on motivational needs) of cognitive biases. Keywords Behavioral Decision-Making Architecture – PSI theory – Cognitive Biases – Erroneous Decisions – Real-life Decisions 1 Introduction and quickly became an entrepreneurial success story. With the introduction of the „Kodak Brownie“ in 1900, In everyday life, we come across a lot of decisions, every photographer could afford a camera for the price many small ones and some bigger ones.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Embrace Your Cognitive Bias
    1 Embrace Your Cognitive Bias http://blog.beaufortes.com/2007/06/embrace-your-co.html Cognitive Biases are distortions in the way humans see things in comparison to the purely logical way that mathematics, economics, and yes even project management would have us look at things. The problem is not that we have them… most of them are wired deep into our brains following millions of years of evolution. The problem is that we don’t know about them, and consequently don’t take them into account when we have to make important decisions. (This area is so important that Daniel Kahneman won a Nobel Prize in 2002 for work tying non-rational decision making, and cognitive bias, to mainstream economics) People don’t behave rationally, they have emotions, they can be inspired, they have cognitive bias! Tying that into how we run projects (project leadership as a compliment to project management) can produce results you wouldn’t believe. You have to know about them to guard against them, or use them (but that’s another article)... So let’s get more specific. After the jump, let me show you a great list of cognitive biases. I’ll bet that there are at least a few that you haven’t heard of before! Decision making and behavioral biases Bandwagon effect — the tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. Related to groupthink, herd behaviour, and manias. Bias blind spot — the tendency not to compensate for one’s own cognitive biases. Choice-supportive bias — the tendency to remember one’s choices as better than they actually were.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Goldstone Research Unit Philosophy, Politics and Economics 4-2011 Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory Hugo Mercier University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Dan Sperber Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/goldstone Part of the Epistemology Commons, and the Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34 (2), 57-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10000968 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/goldstone/15 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Why Do Humans Reason? Arguments for an Argumentative Theory Abstract Reasoning is generally seen as a means to improve knowledge and make better decisions. However, much evidence shows that reasoning often leads to epistemic distortions and poor decisions. This suggests that the function of reasoning should be rethought. Our hypothesis is that the function of reasoning is argumentative. It is to devise and evaluate arguments intended to persuade. Reasoning so conceived is adaptive given the exceptional dependence of humans on communication and their vulnerability to misinformation. A wide range of evidence in the psychology of reasoning and decision making can be reinterpreted and better explained in the light of this hypothesis. Poor performance in standard reasoning tasks is explained by the lack of argumentative context. When the same problems are placed in a proper argumentative setting, people turn out to be skilled arguers. Skilled arguers, however, are not after the truth but after arguments supporting their views.
    [Show full text]