← Back to catalogue
Research draft

cognitive bias

vr.tr.cognitive-bias · XCT.STA

Let an agent explain cognitive biases with sources, help people recognise them in decisions and research, and avoid overstating weakly replicated findings.

Thing Registry Cross-cutting context

Research draft, second pass

A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.

written by Claude from model knowledge without web access - no source was read, every claim is a lead to verify

Researched by: Claude

Purpose and description

Let an agent explain cognitive biases with sources, help people recognise them in decisions and research, and avoid overstating weakly replicated findings.

A systematic pattern of deviation from rational judgement, in which people draw inferences in predictable but inaccurate ways, such as confirmation bias, anchoring, availability, base rate neglect and attentional bias.

What it is for: Improving decisions, research and communication.

It can be identify common cognitive biases; apply debiasing techniques; recognise bias in research and statistics; check replication status of findings.

Distinguishing features

Systematic, not random

Affects everyone

Studied experimentally

Some findings replicate better than others

What it looks like

Not physical; seen in judgements, decisions and data analysis.

How it is recognised

Named biases such as anchoring

Base rate and p-value misuse

Social prejudice is a related but different concept

Related models

is a kind of - category

bias and psychological phenomenon

affects - process

decision making

is studied by - fields

behavioural economics and psychology

is related to - mechanism

heuristic

In practice

Families and kinds

confirmation bias

anchoring

availability heuristic

base rate neglect

attentional bias

Standards and regulation

Research reporting guidelines to reduce bias

Failure modes and hazards

Citing poorly replicated effects as fact

Using bias labels to dismiss people

Overconfidence in debiasing

Also called

look-elsewhere effectmisuse of p-valuesMind projection fallacyemotional reasoningbase rate fallacyattentional biasFrancis Bacon's Idolahypersemiotizationguru effectpreparedness paradoxratio biasoperational momentummedical misogynyrationality deficitperceived deceptionMedical gynopiarosy retrospectionself-selection biasracial biascognitive bias in animalsmisunderstandingselective abstractionbelief perseverancesurvivorship biasactor–observer asymmetrybias blind spothorn effectmean world syndromeresponse biasconservatismextension neglectanchoringinformation biasapopheniarecency illusionvictim mentalityhalo effectadultification biasIdeological biasobserver effect

+7

Where this came from

wikidata · CC0 1.0

Source repository Registry entry point

Drafted structure

Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 4 bundles · 8 layers · 8 findings · 16 questions.

Bias Which bias.

Biases differ.

Identify

Name.

Identify

Bias identification.

  1. Which cognitive bias might be at work here? definition
  2. How is it defined in research? provenance

Evidence

Replication.

Evidence

Evidence strength.

  1. How well has this bias been replicated? provenance
  2. Are effect sizes reported? measurement
Decisions Practical impact.

Biases affect choices.

Impact

Effects.

Impact

Decision impact.

  1. How could this bias affect the current decision? boundary
  2. What would a neutral check look like? action

Debias

Techniques.

Debias

Debiasing.

  1. Which debiasing techniques have evidence behind them? provenance
  2. How can they be applied here? action
Research Science.

Research has its own biases.

Statistics

P-values and base rates.

Statistics

Statistical bias.

  1. Is the analysis vulnerable to p-hacking or base rate neglect? boundary
  2. Was it preregistered? provenance

Publication

Publication bias.

Publication

Publication bias.

  1. Could publication bias distort the evidence? boundary
  2. Is there a systematic review? provenance
Communication Respect.

Labels can be misused.

Respect

Fair use.

Respect

Fair use of labels.

  1. Is a bias label being used to dismiss someone unfairly? boundary
  2. How can the point be made constructively? action

Teaching

Learning.

Teaching

Teaching.

  1. Which examples teach this bias clearly? action
  2. Which sources are reliable? provenance

What the second pass must settle

  • Should each bias be a separate entry?
  • How should replication status be recorded?
  • How should debiasing evidence be linked?
Draft as JSON