Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
When you only know half of the information, it's easy to think you're right. There may be a psychological reason why some people aren’t just wrong in an argument — they’re confidently wrong.
For example, for certain types of questions, answers that people rate as "99% certain" turn out to be wrong 40% of the time. [ 5 ] [ 44 ] [ 45 ] [ 46 ] Planning fallacy , the tendency for people to underestimate the time it will take them to complete a given task.
The first condition is logical as people compare new information with what they already know to be true and consider the credibility of both sources. However, researchers discovered that familiarity can overpower rationality—so much so that repetitively hearing that a certain fact is wrong can paradoxically cause it to feel right. [4]
One recent study has shown that consensus bias may improve decisions about other people's preferences. [4] Ross, Green and House first defined the false consensus effect in 1977 with emphasis on the relative commonness that people perceive about their own responses; however, similar projection phenomena had already caught attention in psychology.
illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations). A series of psychological experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ...
In every fight, one person is right and one person is wrong. Julie : That's the way people sabotage connection during a fight—by fighting to win, as opposed to fighting to understand.
This describes the tendency of people with a below-average IQ to overestimate their IQ, and of people with an above-average IQ to underestimate their IQ (similar trend to the Dunning-Kruger effect). This tendency was first observed by C. L. Downing, who conducted the first cross-cultural studies on perceived intelligence.
After making a series of item-confidence judgments, if people try to estimate the number of items they got right, they do not tend to systematically overestimate their scores. The average of their item-confidence judgments exceeds the count of items they claim to have gotten right. [ 15 ]