Heuristics--Representativeness and Availability
Summary
TLDRThe transcript discusses decision-making strategies, particularly when people lack full information or time. It introduces heuristics, mental shortcuts like the representativeness and availability heuristics, which help in making judgments about categories or frequency of events. The Linda problem is used to show how people rely on stereotypes rather than probabilities. Another example highlights how people judge the frequency of events based on how easily they recall them, leading to errors in estimating risks like murder versus diabetes deaths. These heuristics can often lead to predictable yet flawed decisions.
Takeaways
- 🧠 People make judgments and solve problems all day long, but often without complete information or sufficient time and energy.
- 💡 Rational decisions can be made when all the information and time are available, but judgments are still made even without all the facts.
- 📉 Heuristics are mental shortcuts used when a decision is needed, but complete information is lacking.
- 👥 The representativeness heuristic involves categorizing people or things based on perceived traits, often leading to errors in judgment, as seen in the 'Linda problem'.
- 🎲 The gambler's fallacy is rooted in misjudging the likelihood of events in random processes, such as thinking a red result in roulette is due after many black results.
- 🔢 Probability problems like the dice sequence example show that people tend to choose more 'representative' sequences, even if they are less likely.
- ⚖️ Jurors may use heuristics like representativeness to make assumptions about defendants based on appearance, which can lead to biased judgments.
- 👀 The availability heuristic influences decisions by making people judge the frequency of events based on how easily examples come to mind.
- 💭 People often wrongly estimate how common certain events (e.g., murders vs. strokes) are because memorable or dramatic events are more easily recalled.
- 📚 Heuristics are widely studied in psychology and have been proven to influence many aspects of decision-making, especially when data or experience is limited.
Q & A
What are heuristics and why are they used?
-Heuristics are mental shortcuts or strategies that help people make decisions quickly when they don’t have all the information, time, or energy to think things through fully. They are used to simplify complex decision-making processes.
What is the 'Linda problem' and how does it demonstrate the representativeness heuristic?
-The 'Linda problem' involves deciding whether Linda, based on a given description, is more likely to be a bank teller or a feminist bank teller. People often choose the latter due to the representativeness heuristic, which leads them to match Linda’s description with stereotypical characteristics of a feminist, even though statistically, it’s more likely she is just a bank teller.
What is the representativeness heuristic?
-The representativeness heuristic is a mental shortcut where people categorize a person or situation based on how closely it matches a prototype or stereotype they have in mind, often overlooking actual probabilities.
How does the representativeness heuristic contribute to the gambler’s fallacy?
-The representativeness heuristic leads to the gambler’s fallacy by making people believe that a sequence of random events (like a series of red spins in roulette) must 'balance out' with the opposite outcome, even though the events are statistically independent.
What is the availability heuristic?
-The availability heuristic is a mental shortcut where people estimate the likelihood of an event based on how easily they can recall examples of it from memory. This can lead to overestimating the frequency of dramatic events, like murders or floods, over more common but less memorable events.
Why do people tend to guess the wrong answer when asked if murder is more common than diabetes?
-People often guess murder because instances of murder are more memorable due to media coverage and vividness. This demonstrates the availability heuristic, where more memorable events seem more frequent, even if they are not.
How does the representativeness heuristic affect judgments about category membership?
-The representativeness heuristic affects judgments by causing people to assign others to categories based on superficial traits or similarities to stereotypes, rather than assessing actual likelihood or statistical probabilities.
What is the difference between problems that use the representativeness heuristic and the availability heuristic?
-The representativeness heuristic is used for categorizing something based on its similarity to a stereotype, while the availability heuristic is used to estimate how often something happens based on how easily examples come to mind.
How do people typically respond when guessing the probability of two events happening together versus one event alone?
-People often incorrectly think that two events happening together (like Linda being both a feminist and a bank teller) is more likely than one event alone (just being a bank teller), due to the representativeness heuristic.
Why do people guess that the second die sequence is more likely, even though it’s statistically less probable?
-People guess the second die sequence because it seems more representative of what they expect random sequences to look like, even though each individual sequence is equally probable. This is an example of the representativeness heuristic at work.
Outlines
🤔 Decision-Making and Heuristics: When You Lack Complete Information
The first paragraph delves into the cognitive process of making judgments and decisions without having all necessary information. It explains that while rational decisions require thorough analysis and complete data, we often rely on mental shortcuts called heuristics when pressed for time or lacking information. These shortcuts allow people to form judgments quickly, such as in situations where complete understanding of risks and probabilities is unavailable, like trusting a plane mechanic or judging a person’s honesty.
🧠 The Linda Problem and the Representativeness Heuristic
This paragraph introduces the representativeness heuristic using the famous 'Linda problem.' It illustrates how people tend to categorize individuals based on how well they fit preconceived stereotypes, often leading to errors in judgment. The heuristic causes people to choose the less likely option (Linda being both a feminist and a bank teller) because it seems more representative of her description, even though the statistically correct choice would be that she is just a bank teller.
🎲 Probability Errors and the Gambler’s Fallacy
Here, the focus shifts to probability, particularly the gambler’s fallacy, which stems from misjudging the likelihood of random events. The paragraph describes how people incorrectly assume that past independent outcomes (like rolling a die or spinning a roulette wheel) affect future ones. The example given is that people often believe a different outcome (like the ball landing on red instead of black) is more likely after a streak of similar results, despite each spin being independent.
📊 The Availability Heuristic: Frequency Judgments Based on Memory
This paragraph discusses the availability heuristic, which influences how people estimate the frequency of events. It explains how people often judge events that are easier to recall (such as murders or floods) as being more frequent than less memorable occurrences (like strokes or appendicitis), even if the statistics suggest otherwise. The easier it is to remember a vivid or dramatic event, the more frequent people believe it to be, skewing their judgments.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Heuristics
💡Representativeness Heuristic
💡Availability Heuristic
💡Linda Problem
💡Probability
💡Membership Problem
💡Gambler’s Fallacy
💡Social Categories
💡Decision-Making
💡Risk Assessment
Highlights
Judgments are made even without complete information or time to think through all factors.
Heuristics are decision-making shortcuts used when all the facts or probabilities aren't available.
The representativeness heuristic helps in making judgments about category membership.
The 'Linda problem' illustrates how people use representativeness to determine category membership based on familiar characteristics.
People often ignore probabilities and statistics when using heuristics, leading to incorrect judgments.
In the Linda problem, most people choose the second option because it aligns with their mental associations, despite it being statistically less likely.
Judgments about membership are influenced by people's perception of what a category represents.
The representativeness heuristic can blind people to the fact that membership in two categories is less likely than being in just one.
The gambler's fallacy arises when people misunderstand independent events, thinking patterns must change after repeated outcomes.
In games like poker, probabilities shift as cards are dealt, while in roulette, the probability of a color remains constant regardless of prior outcomes.
The availability heuristic influences how people estimate the frequency of events based on how easily they can recall an example.
People often overestimate the likelihood of dramatic events like murder or floods because these are easier to recall than more common events like strokes or diabetes.
Using heuristics often leads to predictable errors in judgment, especially in frequency estimations.
The representativeness heuristic is common in social judgment, such as when jurors decide if defendants match stereotypes of criminals.
Heuristics like representativeness and availability are mental shortcuts that can simplify decision-making but also introduce biases.
Transcripts
you make judgments solve mental problems
all day long
and as you can tell from that quote
there's some question about whether
you're putting as much thought into all
of them as maybe you
could as with attributions rational
decisions can be made when you have all
the information you need and the time
and energy to think it all through but
as with attributions not having all the
information you need or not having the
time and energy to sift through it and
make an informed judgment doesn't stop
you from making a judgment
sometimes you need to make decisions
regardless of whether you have all the
facts or can figure out all the
probabilities or know about all the
risks you don't know whether the
mechanic who repaired the engine on the
plane you're about to fly showed up to
work drunk or whether an economic
downturn will eliminate the tax Bas
that's making our school so good or
whether Pat has been honest about his or
her
past or maybe you could get all that
information but you need to make make a
decision before you could pull it all
together so you rely on a problemsolving
strategy a decision- making
shortcut to get yourself to a decision
that you otherwise couldn't
make those kinds of strategies are
called
heuristics it's close the college where
I'll be teaching and Coastal Supermarket
where I'll be
shopping just like our house I work and
my husband Putters around the
house my husband doesn't putter he's a
rider this novel was just published
procrastination by TS GARP TS GARP not
the bastard son of Jenny Fields oh I
loved your mother's book loved
it I keep buying them and my husband
keeps burning
[Laughter]
them oh you're right too isn't that
nice you must be so proud of your mother
oh I'm very very proud of mom
[Applause]
[Music]
[Music]
you folks all right down there yeah I'm
okay we're all right but are you all
right oh I'm
fine you mind if I use your phone sure
if you can find it thanks a
lot we'll take the house gar honey honey
the chances of another plane hitting
this house are astronomical see it's
been pre disaster I'm going to be safe
here the sort of shortcut you use would
depend on the kind of problem you're
trying to
solve there being lots of kinds of
problems there are lots of different her
istics you could use but a couple of
them have been studied pretty
extensively this is one kind of problem
trying to figure out what someone is
like what sorts of social categories he
or she might fall
into if you can figure out which
categories they belong
to which is a membership
problem then you might be able to make
some assumptions about what they're
like in fact maybe you could use
information about what they're like to
figure out which social categories
they're in
the Linda problem makes for a nice
demonstration of
this you see a description of what Linda
has been up to and then you're asked to
decide what kind of person Linda might
be if you're familiar with probability
or statistics solving the problem is
pretty easy you might say there is no
uncertainty but what if you don't know
how to solve the problem that
way maybe you'd have to guess
then and if a 100 people looked at this
problem and just guessed at the
answer about how many should end up
picking the first
option and how many should end up
picking the second
option it would be like flipping a coin
and guessing heads or
tails so if it turned out that almost
all of those 100 people picked the
second
option would you think that they were
just
guessing
nope something LED them all to the same
solution to this problem they must share
the same sort of strategy for figuring
out membership and categories
in this case that strategy is called the
representativeness
puristic this problem the Linda problem
was first used in studies back in the
70s so we might not all know exactly
what an active feminist is but it's
still clear that the description of
Linda involves lots of characteristics
that we'd readily associate with an
active feminist and none that are espe L
likely among bank
tellers
so Linda Walks Like A Duck and people
almost always choose that second
option actually of course she's more
likely to be a bank teller than a bank
teller and a
feminist but using the
representativeness juristic blinds
people to the fact that they might
otherwise appreciate that being a member
of two
categories has to be less likely than
being a member of either one
alone of course you don't often run
across situations exactly like the Linda
problem but you are often called upon to
make judgments about membership in
category
if the defendants on the left look more
like people who commit crimes than the
defendants on the
right then what might the jurors
do here's another illustration of the
representativeness
juristic let's say I have a die with
four green sides and two red sides and
then I rolled it five times and came up
with the sequence of colors on top that
you see
here then I rolled it six times and came
up with this other sequence of
colors which of those
sequences would have the higher
probability of
happening again if you know about
probability or statistics you can just
solve the
problem otherwise maybe you have to
guess and if a 100 people were guessing
half would pick the top sequence and
half would pick the bottom
sequence and in fact almost everybody
picks the sequence on the
bottom and yes the one on the top is
actually more likely
how does the representativeness euristic
figure into
this any sequence should be the product
of
chance there being twice as many green
sides as red sides green sides ought to
end up on top a lot more than red sides
do just by
chance that second sequence might not
have a whole lot of green sides but it
does have more than the first sequence
so it it's more representative of the
sorts of outcomes you'd expect from a
random process like rolling
dice this is by the way what's
responsible for the gambler's
fallacy when you play poker or blackjack
or lots of gambling games the
probability of getting any particular
card changes as other cards are dealt at
the beginning of a hand the odds of
getting an ace say would be four out of
52 because there are 52 cards and four
of them are
Aces but if 18 cards get dealt and none
of them are
Aces then the odds of getting an ace
goes up to four out of
34 but in some games of chance it's not
that way
if you play the roulette wheel for
example the ball can land on a red space
a black space or a green
space there are mostly black and red
spaces and the same number of
each because each Ru of the wheel is
supposedly independent of the others the
probability of the ball landing on a
particular color never
changes so if you've gotten five red
spaces in a row
should you bet on the ball landing on
black or on
red what would someone who's relying on
the representativeness juristic
do the representativeness euristic
points you toward a solution to problems
that involve
categorizing here's a different kind of
problem to solve
sometimes you have to or want to figure
out how often something might happen how
frequently some event
occurs and you can bet you don't always
have piles of data laying around that
will give you that information so you
might end up using a
heuristic and again this heuristic could
steer you predictably toward answers
that are
wrong just to illustrate let's say say
you're trying to figure out whether
people are more likely to die from
murder than diabetes from floods than
hepatitis from accidents rather than
strokes and so
on gez who
knows but again
people presumably including you and
me don't
guess as you can probably tell they
virtually all always
pick the wrong
one why at least with the options laid
out here does that
happen how do the options on the left
side differ from the options on the
right for most people it's much easier
to dredge up in their mind a memory of a
murder or a flood or somebody drowning
and it's much more difficult to remember
an instance of somebody dying of a
stroke or
appendicitis the easier it is to
remember an example of some event the
more frequently it's judged to
happen that's the availability
heuristic here's an
example and where's here's the example
here in this article from The rala Daily
News and here in this article from Time
Magazine
Browse More Related Video
Heuristics and biases in decision making, explained
AP Psychology - Cognition - Part 1 - Thinking & Problems
Bias cognitivi: scopri tutti gli errori che compie il tuo cervello (parte 1)
Future Thinking | Jim Davies | TEDxCarletonUniversity
C est quoi un stereotype
12 Cognitive Biases Explained - How to Think Better and More Logically Removing Bias
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)