HEURISTICS

NOTABLE FIGURES:

1. Herbert A. Simon (1950): Bounded Rationality 2. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman (1972): Heuristics & Biases 3. Gerd Gigerenzer ( ): Fast & Frugal 4. Daniel Kahneman & Shane Frederick (2002): Attribute

Substitution

AVAILABILITY HEURISTICS Some judgment errors depend on the use of availability heuristics, which involves estimating the frequencies of events on the basis of how easily we can call to mind what we perceive as relevant information of a phenomenon (Eysenck & Keane, , 2010). E.g. Stereotypes|Voting |Lottery| Accidents

REPRESENTATIVENESS HEURISTICS 1. How obvious, equal, or representative it is in relation to the population - for example, many believe that it is more likely to get GGGGG (girl) than BBBBB (boy) because it is born more girls than boys. 2. The degree of reflecting the underlying characteristics of the process, such as coincidence - for example, most people considering the likelihood of getting BGBBBB less likely than getting GBGBBG. Although the probability is the same for both. The reason for this is because the second compound of sex (GBGBBG) are more randomly distributed, and therefore perceived as more likely. E.g. Economics| Child Development| Clinical

ANCHORING HEURISTICS A heuristic closely linked to availability is the anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic. In this type of heuristic, people adjust their evaluations of things by means of certain reference point called end-anchors (Sternberg & Sternberg, 2009). This type of heuristic is related to humans tendency to anchor the ratings in a specific starting point and adaption of further information in relation to this. E.g. Performance| Price negotiation

ANCHORING A heuristic closely linked to availability is the anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic. In this type of heuristic, people adjust their evaluations of things by means of certain reference point called end-

anchors (Sternberg & Sternberg, 2009). This type of heuristic is related to humans tendency to anchor the ratings in a specific starting point and adaption of further information in relation to this.

DEFINITION Methods by which one makes a judgment process simpler. Mental shortcut : intuitive judgment, stereotyping,

educated guess. The fastest way of avoiding hard thinking.

TYPES of HEURISTICS

2 STAGE SYSTEMS Mental processes are divided into 2 systems:

SYSTEM 1 Works

unconsciously, quickly proposes

answers (intuition) Effortless

SYSTEM 2 Works slowly, demanding on

cognitive, monitors quality of thoughts

(reason) Effortful

THEORIES on HEURISTICS

STROOP TEST Instructed to report the colour in which words are

printed tend to stumble

Satisficing(accept an available option) This heuristic is based on the belief that after we have considered options one by

one, we will select an option as soon as we find one that is satisfactory or good enough to meet our minimum level of acceptability(Sternberg & Sternberg, 2009)

Elimination by aspects If we are faced with more alternatives than we have time to consider, we may use a process of elimination by aspects, in which we eliminate alternatives by

focusing on aspects of each alternative, one at a time

FRAMING This heuristic is based on the belief that in which way the options of a problem is presented, will influence the

selection of an option. For example, when we are faced with an option involving potential gains, we tend to choose

options that demonstrate risk aversion. This means that we would choose an option that offers a small but certain gain rather than a large but uncertain gain (Sternberg & Sternberg, 2009).

nurliyanamarissaismailSticky NoteA repetition of the point above

nurliyanamarissaismailSticky NoteDELETE gerd gigerenzer

ATTRIBUTE SUBSTITUTION Difficult judgments are made by substituting conceptually /semantically related assessments that are simpler and more readily accessible.

ISSUES on HEURISTICS REPRESENTATIVENESS CONTROVERSY

FALLACIES On the basis of heuristics central role in the decision process, the possibility

of incorrect inferences will be facilitated that can affect the decision process.

1.CONJUNCTION ERRORS 2.NEGLECT OF BASE RATES

Introduced by Tversky and Kahneman(1983) Adequate information was available for the participant to avoid error

BIASES If our heuristics fail to produce a correct judgment, it may result in a cognitive bias, which is the tendency to draw incorrect conclusions based on cognitive

factors. I will in the following discuss some biases that occur in decision making:

illusory correlation, overconfidence, and hindsight bias.

ACCESSIBILITY AND SUBSTITUTION Attribute substitution occurs when a relatively inaccessible target attribute is

assessed by mapping a relatively accessible and related heuristic attribute onto the target scale. Some attributes are permanent candidates for the heuristic role

because they are routinely evaluated as part of perception and comprehension and thus always accessible (Tversky & Kahneman, 1983)

OVERCONFIDENCE Overconfidence is a common error, which is an individuals overvaluation of ones own skills, judgment, knowledge e.g. One reason for such overconfidence, may be that people not realize how little they know, and that their information may come

from unreliable sources. As a result, people sometimes make poor decisions.

HINDSIGHT BIAS If When we look back at a situation, we believe we easily can see all the signs and events that lead to a particular outcome; a bias called hindsight bias. This bias can

be common when intimate personal relationships are in trouble, where people often fail to observe signs of the difficulties until the problems gets too big

ILLUSORY CORRELATION Our predisposition(kecenderungan) to see particular events, attributes or

categories as going together is a phenomenon called illusory correlation. For instance, in the case of attributes, we may use personal prejudices to form and use stereotypes, and in the case of events, we may see false cause-effect relationships

(Sternberg & Sternberg, 2009). GAMBLER'S FALLACY AND THE HOT HAND This misconception can be related to representative heuristics, which is based

on the belief that the pattern of past events is likely to change. A contrast to this fallacy is the hot hand effect, which refers to the belief that a set of events will

continue

CONJUNCTION FALLACY which assumes that an individual gives a higher estimation for a subset of

events, than for the larger set of events containing the given subclass

SUNK-COST FALLACY Which claims that the decision making process not only takes potential consequences into consideration. It also takes account of past commitments. According to the sunk costs fallacy, we will continue to invest in something, just because we have invested in it before and hope to recover our contribution.

DO HEURISTICS HELP US OR LEAD US ASTRAY One of the most common heuristics the representativeness heuristic, which is the belief that

small samples of a population resemble the whole population. Our misunderstanding of aspects of probability and base rates can also lead us to other mental shortcuts, such as in the conjunction fallacy. Another common heuristic most of us use, is the availability heuristic, in

which we make judgments based on information that is available in our memory, without bothering to seek less available information (Stenberg & Stenberg, 2009).

RESEARCH

ALGORITHMIC VERSUS HEURISTIC THINKING (Mathew Lipman P58)

Algorithmic thinking is more of a method or procedure thinking to produce valid results (systematic correctness).

Heuristic thinking focuses on results even though the after effect of the result is consequences we do not want.

Garver says Prudential thinking falls in between algorithmic and heuristic thinking, which is often difficult to distinguish.

Lipman however finds that there is little basis in distinguishing between ordinary and higher thinking order with these two types of thinking, therefore he purposes to

concentrate more on the improvement of reasoning judgement by persistent practice in distinguishing logical from illogical discourse.

He also said the improvement of judgement is getting the students involved in a never ending continuum of judgement, where good judgement is part of higher-order thinking, which is a combination of creative and critical thinking for excellent

cognitive processing.

LITERATURE 1 How to cope with bias while adapting for inclusion in Physical Education and Sports: A Judgement and Decision Making Perspective By Yeshayahu Hutzler, Michael Bar-Eli Key words: Special Needs, Inclusion, Attitudes, Decision Making, Adaption 1. How to cope with bias 2. Decision Environment, bounded rationality & heuristic 3. Availability (Av) heuristic 4. Representative (Rep) heuristic 5. JDM in the context of adapting PE & S for inclusion 6. Inclusion in PE Teachers Bias 7. Inclusion in interscholastic Sports Administrators and Coaches Bias 8. Practitioners Bias while choosing an adaptation 9. Interventions Facilitating Inclusive JDM 10. JDM and Ecological Model

LITERATURE 2 Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristic & Bias By Amos Tversky and Danial Kahneman 1. Decision making 2. Representativeness 3. Insensitivity to prior probability 4. Insensitivity to sample size 5. Misconceptions of chance 6. Insensitivity to predictability 7. The illusion of validity 8 8. Misconception of regression 9. Availability 10. Biases due to retirevability of instances 11. Biases of Imaginability 12.Illusory correlation 13. Adjustment and anchoring 14. Insufficient adjustment 15. Anchoring in the assessment of subject probability distributions 16. Discussions

LITERATURE 3 Heuristic, Bias & Strategic By A John Moule, Gerard P. Hodgkinson 1. Strategic decisions concern 2. Heuristic modes of thinking in decision and judgement 3. Cognitive Biases 4. Judgmental heuristics in Strategic decision making 5. Evidence for heuristics from documentary sources 6. Evidence for heuristics from experimental research 7. Evaluation of field and experimental research 8. Conclusions and Implications

LITERATURE 4 Heuristic Bias, Conflict and Rationality in Decision Making By Wim De Neys Lab Experimental Psychology Belgium 2010 1. Introduction 2. Conflict detection studies 2.1. To detect or not to detect 2.2 To the brain and beyond 2.3 The Effortless nature of conflict detection 3. Implications for the rationality debate 4. Caveats and conclusions

LITERATURE 5 Decisions Making heuristic and biases the life span By Jo Neil, Tara Kams and Leo Schlosnagle Key words: sunk costs, framing effect, dual processes, heuristic bias 1. JDM Judgement and Decision Making 2. Overview 3. Dual process method 4. Contextual framework of decision making as 3D process 5. Development change 6. Contextual influences 7. Motivation model of JDM across the life span 8. The sunk cost fallacy: overview 9. Decision context 10. Measurement 11. Explanation 12. Individual differences in decisions about sunk costs 13. Development trajectory 14. Early and later adulthood 15. Summary- the framing effect: overview