Error in Human Reasoning
Although humans are the only animals that reason, we do not follow probability theory, a normative model, very closely in our everyday reasoning. The conjunction fallacy is one of the major errors that humans commit when dealing with problems that involve probability. Exemplified by Linda the feminist bank teller, this problem occurs when we assume that a conjunction of two premises is more likely than one or more of the premises alone. According to probability, the conjunction of two premises can never be more probable than either of the premises alone. In the Linda problem, the subjects are given a brief biographical description of Linda, followed by several statements about Linda's current occupation or activities. The subjects are then asked to rank the statements in order of most likely to least likely. The majority of the subjects choose "Linda is a bank teller and a feminist" (T and F) as more likely than "Linda is a bank teller." (F) (Barron, pg. 138)
According to the laws of probability, T must be more probable than the combination of T and F. Thus, the question arises as to why we reason this way. As Professor Kellman explained in his lectures, we commit this fallacy because of our association of the word "feminist" with the biographical description of Linda. Apparently, we ignore the most basic laws of probability, and rely on our ability to associate certain characteristics with likely careers and hobbies of an individual.
Ever since the original study by Tversky and Kahnerman in 1983, it has been assumed that human reasoning prefers association of terms in lieu of mathematical probabilities in these situations. There is debate, however, as to whether this is a fallacy i...
... middle of paper ...
... her in a way that eventually violates the conjunction rule. We do not see Linda as a bank teller who has forgotten her days of social activism. We want to believe that she is still an activist. Therefore, we ignore the probabilities of randomness, and make the selection that is most compatible with the biographical sketch. As Hertwig and Gigerenzer have pointed out in their study, we do not infer mathematical probabilities when asked to make judgments about characters of individuals, most notably, Linda, the feminist banker.
Works Cited
Baron, Jonathan. Thinking and Deciding. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Hertwig, Ralph, and Gigerenzer, Gerd. The 'Conjunction Fallacy' Revisited: How Intelligent Inferences Look Like Reasoning Errors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 275-305.
William Shakespeare wrote the play Romeo and Juliet about two “star-crossed lovers” who take their own lives in order to be together. What could have possibly cause this other than the fact that they were in love? Human errors, that’s what. Firstly, Romeo and Juliet were from two separate households, and all they did was cause trouble between them. The families’ discrepancies were a major human error which led to the deaths. The second reason is that the two characters were not in love, and that they tricked each other into thinking they were. Eventually, the poor timing of many characters proves that the deaths were induced by human error. If the Friar and Nurse hadn’t been so incapable of keeping things in good timing, the lovers may still be alive.
Epstein, Richard A. The Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic. New York: Academic, 1977. Print.
People tend to views an image based on how society say it should be they tend to interpret the image on those assumption, but never their own assumptions. Susan Bordo and John Berger writes’ an argumentative essay in relation to how viewing images have an effect on the way we interpret images. Moreover, these arguments come into union to show what society plants into our minds acts itself out when viewing pictures. Both Susan Bordo and John Berger shows that based on assumptions this is what causes us to perceive an image in a certain way. Learning assumption plays into our everyday lives and both authors bring them into reality.
Terry Griffith is well known at her high school for many reasons; one reason being that she is in journalism class and writes for the school newspaper. When her paper is not picked for a summer job contest at The Sun Tribune she confronts her journalism teacher about it. When he tells her “You should have something to fall back on. […] You’re a pretty girl you can be a model,” Terry is outraged and believes that her teacher did not pick her article because she is a woman. This is a male gender stereotype because Terry concludes that her teacher is being sexist. Many wom...
In a real life situation one may subconsciously use perceptual choice when seeing and meeting other people, such as, “through the process of selective attention, the brain picks out the information that is important to us and discards the rest” (Folk & Remington, 1998; Kramer et al., 2000). For a better understanding of how the mind works, an experiment was done to confirm the perceptions that people create. Three subjects were chosen to prove that people are mindlessly creating judgment and generalizat...
Not realizing that the second mover’s action reflects beliefs that combine the first and second movers’ signals, the third mover’s inference from both predecessors leads her, in fact, to count the first mover’s signal twice. The (naive) fourth mover, in turn, unintentionally counts the first mover’s signal four times: once from the first action, once from the second action, and twice from the third action[7].:223
While people deal with everyday life, a plethora of events is occurring throughout the day. Most people usually do a multitude of actions to resolve these events without thinking as well. This can be anything from trying to get to class as soon as possible, talking to someone that recently was introduced, or doing a kind of tradition at a football game. Cognitive Biases is defined as a systematic pattern of deviation from norm or rationality in judgment, whereby inferences about other people and situations may be drawn in an illogical fashion. This article will talk about a small sample of these situations and clarify what the meaning behind them. It shall discuss Negativity Bias, Confirmation Bias, Gamblers Fallacy, and Illusion of Control
“Huxley portrays the female citizens of the World State as far more compliant than their male counterparts” (Fares). Although the book is mainly focused on the male characters, there were only three female characters. Lenina Crowne was the more developed character, and played an important role in this story. Also, Linda and Fanny were secondaries characters. Critics stated that the fact that Huxley “recycles famous names for comedic and ironic purposes . . . indicates that he thinks individual women have made few, if any substantive contributions to human development” (Horan). Throughout the book male characters only focused in the physical aspect of women. The “physical appearance determines how female characters are valued by others” (Horan). One of the most criticized characters based on their physical appearance was Linda. The people in the utopian society were referring to her as fat a woman. The book stated Linda as a: “Fat; having lost her youth; with bad teeth, and a blotched complexion, and that figure (Ford!)–you simply couldn’t look at her without feeling sick, yes, positively sick. So the best people were quite determined not to see Linda” (167,168). Huxley described Linda as a person with a bad physical aspect that is the main reason people were disgusted. However, Huxley 's way to illustrate a male character was totally different. Helmholtz Watson was described as “a
logical that a person is less likely to commit a given act if by doing so he
McCloskey, M. & Glucksberg, S. (1979). Decision processes in verifying category membership statements: Implications for models of semantic memory. Cognitive Psychology, 11(1), 1-37.
Thought processes can greatly influence people's social interactions, and the way that they live their lives. Cognitions develop how people perceive themselves and others on a daily basis. It is important to investigate how people attribute actions and behaviors exhibited, not only by themselves, but also those around them. These attributions shape the way an observer feels and reacts to others, and how people feel about themselves due to their own actions. The correspondence bias (fundamental attribution error) and the self-serving bias are two errors made in attribution by virtually every human being (Baron & Byrne, 2000). Both of these biases can be shown not only in adults, but also children (Guern, 1999). Even sport spectators display these biases when watching their favorite teams (Wann & Schrader, 2000). When the self-serving bias is absent in people's cognitions, they will show the self-defeating attributions. It is important to study people that demonstrate self-defeating attributions, because these individuals also show symptoms of depression (Wall & Hayes, 2000). Clearly, attributions are an imperative aspect of social cognition. Attributional bias is discussed by Marie Beesley. It is also important to investigate the factors that affect people's judgment biases in decision making and reasoning skills, which is explored by Amanda Wheeler. Because these two processes are so vital to the way in which people perceive themselves and others, and to the way a person chooses to behave, it is important to understand the factors that can cause inaccurate judgments. Judgment biases affect the way people form conclusions and make attributions about others, as well as abou...
The theoretical and practical implications of inconsistent and consistent information in the Psychology of Stereotypical Behavior differentiates in two ways. With consistent information, a group is known for certain behaviors (negative or positive), and the subject who is analyzing the behavior may lose interest since the known behavior is consistent with the stereotype. However, when a group shows inconsistencies of the perceived stereotypical behaviors, then the analyzer will question the inconsistencies, and give specific attention to the group.
Bad math in court is something that happens over and over again and because of it, many innocent victims have been jailed and punished unjustly over the years. The problem is not some sort of miscalculation, but the refusal of the court to recalculate. More than often enough, the judge refuses to reexamine the collected DNA in an investigation case. What the people of the court fail to realize at times is that probability is not a one off thing, it is something that should be repeated at least more than once and can even be repeated over and over again. The flipping of a coin is frequently used to explain this logic and will be explained in following paragraphs. Sometimes statistician will state that there is only a one in a million chance (or some other ludicrously large number) that the defendant is innocent; but then they fail to examine: what is that 1, what are the chances that the accused that that one in a million? In this paper, I will be discussing the issue of ‘bad math in court,’ why it happens and how something as simple as probability can get innocent people out of jail.
The way choices are framed impacts the way they are perceived and decided upon. Tversky and Kahneman (1981) suggested that choice between a "certain" and a risky option of equal expected value is affected by option phrasing, a phenomenon known as the framing effect. The framing effect is an example of a psychological terms called cognitive bias, in which people respond to differently to a choice depending on how it is presented; i.e. as a gain or as a loss. When a positive frame is presented, people tend to avoid the risky option, selecting the “certain” option as opposed to when a negative frame is presented, people tend to select the risker option. Gain and loss are defined in scenarios as descriptions of outcomes (i.e. lives lost or saved
Catherine Mackinnon’s radical feminism theory argues that societally is patriarchally dominated by males (MacKinnon 16). The legal system therefore has an inherent male bias. As seen in Susan Glaspell’s short story, “A Jury of Her Peers,” the male-dominated jury would not have acknowledged the psychological trauma of Mrs. Wright’s situation. The facts of the case would have proven her guilt, but the male-dominated legal system would not have accounted for the experiences of Mrs. Wright. As domestic women, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters were able to identity with Mrs. Wright and understand her