WEBVTT - How Cognitive Biases Work 0:00:01.480 --> 0:00:04.960 Welcome to Stuff you Should Know, a production of iHeartRadio. 0:00:11.400 --> 0:00:13.920 Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh, and there's 0:00:14.040 --> 0:00:16.560 Chuck and Jerry's here too, and we are getting down 0:00:16.600 --> 0:00:19.319 to business, getting right to it here on stuff you 0:00:19.320 --> 0:00:22.440 should know, because we've got a lot to cover here. 0:00:22.960 --> 0:00:26.320 That's right. So, Chuck, I got a little bit of 0:00:26.360 --> 0:00:26.800 an intro. 0:00:27.680 --> 0:00:30.360 Let's hear it was that it? That wasn't it? 0:00:32.960 --> 0:00:37.720 Do you remember how homeostasis used to come up a lot? Yes, So, 0:00:38.000 --> 0:00:39.960 for those of you who haven't been listening that long, 0:00:40.040 --> 0:00:42.720 homeostasis is what your body, in your mind and your 0:00:42.720 --> 0:00:45.320 brain wants to return to. Right. You just want everything 0:00:45.400 --> 0:00:48.919 nice and even, keel and normal and without exerting too 0:00:49.000 --> 0:00:51.360 much effort and energy. Right, that's homeostasis. 0:00:52.200 --> 0:00:54.440 That's are you asking me? Sure? 0:00:54.800 --> 0:00:59.640 Okay? So one of the ways that your brain returns 0:00:59.680 --> 0:01:02.520 to homeostasis as fast as it can is to use 0:01:02.560 --> 0:01:07.160 shortcuts in making decisions, right, Because if you're having to 0:01:07.160 --> 0:01:10.480 decide something, you're actively being challenged, you have to You're 0:01:10.480 --> 0:01:15.000 not in your homeostatic space. So if you use a shortcut, 0:01:15.240 --> 0:01:19.319 you can say something like I've had the red apple 0:01:19.480 --> 0:01:22.720 in the past and it was delicious, I've eaten the 0:01:22.760 --> 0:01:25.640 brown mushy one before and it was awful. I'm going 0:01:25.720 --> 0:01:28.240 to eat this red apple, right. Rather than going to 0:01:28.280 --> 0:01:31.360 the trouble of pulling both apples out and like analyzing 0:01:31.400 --> 0:01:33.320 them with a microscope and all that, you can just 0:01:33.400 --> 0:01:36.200 kind of use a little shortcut. That's a heuristic, and 0:01:36.280 --> 0:01:38.560 it makes a lot of sense because your brain is like, great, 0:01:38.600 --> 0:01:41.319 I didn't use that much energy. I made the right decision, 0:01:41.680 --> 0:01:45.959 and we're good to go. The problem that comes about, though, 0:01:46.080 --> 0:01:49.360 is that with heuristics, you're not always right. You don't 0:01:49.400 --> 0:01:51.840 always make the right decision, you're not always taking all 0:01:51.840 --> 0:01:55.040 of the information into account, and when that happens, you 0:01:55.120 --> 0:01:59.720 start stumbling into cognitive biases. 0:02:00.680 --> 0:02:04.040 Yeah. Like, this is a frustrating episode because I feel 0:02:04.080 --> 0:02:08.000 like the title could be cognitive bias is everything you 0:02:08.080 --> 0:02:09.120 think you know is wrong. 0:02:09.600 --> 0:02:11.520 Yeah, well that's a great title. Let's go with that. 0:02:12.760 --> 0:02:14.760 It just it made me feel like a dummy the 0:02:14.760 --> 0:02:15.200 whole time. 0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:19.400 Oh don't it's You're not a dummy. All humans are 0:02:19.440 --> 0:02:22.360 dummies as far as cognitive biases go. It's not just you, 0:02:22.840 --> 0:02:25.280 and this stuff is hardwired into us because like I 0:02:25.400 --> 0:02:28.760 just said, we take mental shortcuts and the problem, Chuck, 0:02:28.840 --> 0:02:33.160 is what we're talking about mostly today are unconscious biases. Right, 0:02:33.480 --> 0:02:37.079 there's conscious biases. We just usually call those biases, right, 0:02:37.120 --> 0:02:40.919 those are the active challenges that you need to overcome 0:02:40.960 --> 0:02:45.359 to be a better version of yourself. These are like unconscious. 0:02:45.400 --> 0:02:48.680 So there's not a lot you can do about it. 0:02:48.960 --> 0:02:50.600 Although at the end we're going to kind of give 0:02:50.600 --> 0:02:53.800 you some tips and pointers, but it's a challenge for 0:02:53.840 --> 0:02:56.280 absolutely everybody. Doesn't it doesn't make you dumb. 0:02:56.440 --> 0:02:59.080 Yeah, I mean I think the tips and things can help, 0:02:59.200 --> 0:03:02.400 for sure, But it's just part of being human, you know, 0:03:02.600 --> 0:03:05.280 the unconscious bias, and there's not a lot we can 0:03:05.320 --> 0:03:09.360 do to completely eradicate them. And if it's a you know, 0:03:10.120 --> 0:03:13.320 if it's a real problem, then I'm sorry. 0:03:14.919 --> 0:03:17.040 Well. One of the big problems that we all kind 0:03:17.040 --> 0:03:24.440 of face is that we are were predictably irrational, as 0:03:24.600 --> 0:03:30.480 was said by Dan Arielli, who was a behavioral economist, 0:03:30.840 --> 0:03:35.720 And because of that, corporations, marketers, basically everybody who wants 0:03:35.720 --> 0:03:38.320 to sell you something knows about these things, and they 0:03:38.320 --> 0:03:40.840 can manipulate those things. They can trick you into making 0:03:40.880 --> 0:03:42.440 decisions you wouldn't otherwise make. 0:03:42.800 --> 0:03:45.880 Yeah, for sure, And we wouldn't even be here probably 0:03:45.920 --> 0:03:48.920 talking about this, but hadn't been for two kind of 0:03:49.040 --> 0:03:52.360 revolutionary thinkers who ended up being some of the more 0:03:52.360 --> 0:03:56.600 off cited researchers in the history of research, as we'll learn, 0:03:56.680 --> 0:04:00.400 especially when it comes to economics. And they were a 0:04:00.440 --> 0:04:04.920 couple of psychologists, Israeli psychologists named Amos. And I looked 0:04:05.000 --> 0:04:06.840 up different ways to pronounce this because we always get 0:04:06.920 --> 0:04:12.160 guff and I've heard everything from hard Tbirski to his 0:04:12.440 --> 0:04:16.600 colleague Daniel Kahneman doing more of one of those Verski. 0:04:17.920 --> 0:04:19.840 Oh, I just heard him refer to him as Big T. 0:04:20.880 --> 0:04:24.039 The Big T because it's TV. But those were the 0:04:24.040 --> 0:04:26.240 two guys working together. They developed this concept in the 0:04:26.279 --> 0:04:32.839 seventies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and really like 0:04:33.279 --> 0:04:36.760 got down to it pretty quickly as a result of 0:04:37.279 --> 0:04:41.839 Connoman I think taking some issue with the Big T's research, 0:04:41.920 --> 0:04:44.320 and I guess they kind of bonded over that or something. 0:04:45.320 --> 0:04:50.159 Yeah, it was pretty cool because Tski, basically he was 0:04:50.279 --> 0:04:54.760 a mathematical psychologist, which anytime you hear mathematical and it's 0:04:55.120 --> 0:04:57.239 to do with something other than math, what that means 0:04:57.320 --> 0:05:00.640 is you've taken something and you've set it out in 0:05:00.640 --> 0:05:03.359 a very standardized way, so you can explore it, you 0:05:03.360 --> 0:05:06.080 can teach it based on certain facets and the upshot 0:05:06.120 --> 0:05:09.760 of mathematical psychology as far as human behavior goes. These 0:05:09.760 --> 0:05:12.279 are the people who came up with the kroc idea 0:05:12.800 --> 0:05:17.680 that humans behave as rational actors. We're self interested, we 0:05:17.760 --> 0:05:20.359 take all the best information available to make the best 0:05:20.920 --> 0:05:25.000 decision for ourselves. And Daniel Kaneman was like, this is 0:05:25.040 --> 0:05:29.320 not at all true, and he started challenging Amos Tawirski's 0:05:30.279 --> 0:05:34.000 theories and Tavsky instead of saying like, no, you shut up, 0:05:34.440 --> 0:05:36.200 he was like, all right, let's go figure out, let's 0:05:36.200 --> 0:05:38.240 get to the bottom of this. And because of that, Yeah, 0:05:38.480 --> 0:05:42.479 they formed this partnership that a huge impact on the world. Yeah. 0:05:42.480 --> 0:05:46.159 I think it's kind of heartening that they, as academics, 0:05:46.600 --> 0:05:49.160 you know, got together. There were no ruffled feathers or 0:05:49.200 --> 0:05:51.360 at least it didn't end up that way, and they 0:05:51.400 --> 0:05:53.480 work together. It's kind of a heartening thing I think 0:05:53.520 --> 0:05:54.000 these days. 0:05:54.120 --> 0:05:55.440 Yeah, there's got to be at least one. 0:05:56.240 --> 0:05:59.080 Yeah, that's right. They came up with a program called 0:05:59.080 --> 0:06:04.320 the Heroistics and Biases Program to basically, you know, study 0:06:04.320 --> 0:06:06.719 how human beings make their decisions, how they go through 0:06:06.760 --> 0:06:11.480 life making choices when they don't have like all the 0:06:11.480 --> 0:06:14.240 information at hand, all the most perfect information to make 0:06:14.279 --> 0:06:17.479 that choice, or if they don't have like all the 0:06:17.520 --> 0:06:19.719 time in the world to look at the information that 0:06:19.760 --> 0:06:22.240 they do have to make that choice. So, like, how 0:06:22.240 --> 0:06:25.880 are people making decisions? How are they making mistakes and 0:06:25.960 --> 0:06:28.839 their decision making? And they ended up coming up with 0:06:28.880 --> 0:06:32.840 a couple of different systems, one which is super quick, 0:06:32.839 --> 0:06:34.320 and one which is much more deliberate. 0:06:35.160 --> 0:06:37.960 Yeah, Daniel Kahman came out with Thinking Fast and Slow, 0:06:38.000 --> 0:06:42.440 which was one of those super popular airport books. 0:06:42.360 --> 0:06:45.480 You know, Yeah, thinking Comma faster. 0:06:45.760 --> 0:06:50.159 Yes, thank you, eat shoots and leaves, that's right. And 0:06:50.200 --> 0:06:53.520 in it he basically lays out this kind of shorthand models. 0:06:53.640 --> 0:06:56.240 He's very explicit to say, like this is not this 0:06:56.320 --> 0:06:58.920 is not how like your brain is actually laid out, 0:06:59.000 --> 0:07:01.120 but it's a good metaphor for it. And System one 0:07:01.640 --> 0:07:05.400 is how you think quickly, You think almost unconsciously, you 0:07:05.440 --> 0:07:09.400 make rapid decisions, and that is kind of how we 0:07:09.520 --> 0:07:13.520 generally navigate life. System two is much more deliberate. It's 0:07:13.520 --> 0:07:16.840 where we take into account like different ideas, It's where 0:07:16.880 --> 0:07:20.120 we really stop and think about something before making a decision, 0:07:20.600 --> 0:07:26.040 and they're essentially competing. There's something called interference, and system 0:07:26.120 --> 0:07:29.720 one has a really great tendency to interfere with system two. 0:07:30.360 --> 0:07:32.640 And there was a psychologist working all the way back 0:07:32.640 --> 0:07:37.440 in nineteen thirty five named John Ridley's Stroop who basically 0:07:37.480 --> 0:07:40.200 discovered the Stroop effect that is a way of demonstrating 0:07:40.280 --> 0:07:44.560 how system one interferes with the slower, more deliberate system too. 0:07:44.960 --> 0:07:47.000 Yeah, I bet a boy. I bet he patted himself 0:07:47.040 --> 0:07:49.520 on the back after this one, because it's one of 0:07:49.520 --> 0:07:52.400 those things that's so simple, But I bet he winked 0:07:52.400 --> 0:07:55.040 at everyone like watch this. Yeah, this is going to 0:07:55.080 --> 0:07:55.720 break your brain. 0:07:55.960 --> 0:07:56.760 It's genius. 0:07:57.000 --> 0:07:59.280 It really kind of is. So what they did was 0:07:59.320 --> 0:08:04.920 they simply wrote down the names of colors, but they 0:08:04.920 --> 0:08:06.760 would write down the name of that color in a 0:08:06.800 --> 0:08:10.440 different color, and then he would just say, as to 0:08:10.480 --> 0:08:12.960 the person to read out loud, the color of the 0:08:13.000 --> 0:08:15.360 word that is written, not the color that it's written in. 0:08:15.960 --> 0:08:19.280 And it is surprisingly difficult to do that. It's just 0:08:19.360 --> 0:08:21.160 a little weird brain breaking thing. 0:08:21.760 --> 0:08:25.480 Yeah. Yeah, so he's showing that your system one just 0:08:25.480 --> 0:08:27.760 wants to hurry up and read it, yeah, and it's 0:08:27.800 --> 0:08:31.760 getting it wrong and that's interference, right. So that kind 0:08:31.760 --> 0:08:34.360 of like started to lay the groundwork for this idea 0:08:34.440 --> 0:08:37.000 that we do have kind of competing ways of seeing 0:08:37.080 --> 0:08:43.000 the world and making decisions. And what Knoman was saying 0:08:43.240 --> 0:08:47.200 is that most of the decisions were walking around making 0:08:47.240 --> 0:08:52.000 are actually the System one super fast shorthand decisions. But 0:08:52.160 --> 0:08:55.280 we think that we're using our more rational mind because 0:08:55.320 --> 0:08:59.080 we make post hoc explanations for why we decided that. 0:09:00.080 --> 0:09:02.400 And that's not to say we're all walking around with 0:09:02.440 --> 0:09:05.559 these creepy little secrets that we know. We're like fooling ourselves. 0:09:05.800 --> 0:09:08.600 We don't realize we're doing this. That's why these biases 0:09:08.600 --> 0:09:11.280 are unconscious. Even if you stop and think about what 0:09:11.360 --> 0:09:13.960 you're doing, you may still not come up with the 0:09:14.040 --> 0:09:17.440 answer like, oh, yeah, I was making up explanations after 0:09:17.559 --> 0:09:20.680 the fact to explain why I actually used System two 0:09:20.720 --> 0:09:23.240 when I didn't. It's really hard to do that. 0:09:23.720 --> 0:09:26.480 Yeah, for sure, Livy gives a pretty good example of that. 0:09:26.520 --> 0:09:29.560 As far as like hiring somebody, Someone may make an 0:09:29.600 --> 0:09:33.960 impression in an interview that kind of locks it up 0:09:33.960 --> 0:09:36.040 from the second they walk in. Maybe they look like 0:09:36.080 --> 0:09:39.200 their mom or dad, or a relative, or maybe they 0:09:39.280 --> 0:09:41.920 remind them of themselves, or maybe like who knows what 0:09:41.960 --> 0:09:44.280 it could be. Then they end up getting that job, 0:09:44.480 --> 0:09:46.640 and later if you ask the person who hired them, 0:09:47.120 --> 0:09:49.400 you might say, oh, what it was because of this, 0:09:49.400 --> 0:09:51.720 this and this and this, when in fact that's really 0:09:51.760 --> 0:09:55.160 just system too kind of confirming, Like now it's because 0:09:55.200 --> 0:09:58.120 the guy walked in wearing a New York Giants T shirt. 0:09:58.679 --> 0:10:01.840 Yeah, and we'll get into some of the problems with 0:10:01.880 --> 0:10:04.559 the stuff throughout, but this is a good example. Right 0:10:04.600 --> 0:10:07.760 if the opposite happened, If like you didn't hire somebody 0:10:07.840 --> 0:10:11.319 because they weren't quite like you, that's an example of 0:10:11.440 --> 0:10:14.480 a bias too, even if you don't think that that's 0:10:14.520 --> 0:10:16.480 why you did it. If you're looking at their CV 0:10:16.600 --> 0:10:18.760 afterward and you're like, oh, they didn't graduate from college, 0:10:18.760 --> 0:10:22.160 it's why. But really it was not because you're racist, 0:10:22.160 --> 0:10:24.920 it's not because you're a woman hater. It was because 0:10:24.960 --> 0:10:28.520 you're preserving your own level of comfort because other groups 0:10:28.520 --> 0:10:31.560 that are different than you make you uncomfortable. And that's 0:10:31.559 --> 0:10:35.200 how groups can become entrenched. Right You just once one 0:10:35.240 --> 0:10:38.200 group kind of dominates an organization, they tend to continue 0:10:38.240 --> 0:10:41.760 doing that because people hire other people who they're comfortable around, 0:10:41.880 --> 0:10:45.040 rather than pushing themselves outside of their comfort zone and 0:10:45.200 --> 0:10:49.520 probably improving their organization. And that's why diversity programs exist 0:10:49.600 --> 0:10:51.959 in the first place, because of that human tendency. 0:10:52.320 --> 0:10:54.040 Yeah, or maybe they were just a Jets fan. 0:10:54.720 --> 0:10:57.520 That's possible. I mean, no Jets is going to hire 0:10:57.559 --> 0:10:58.320 a Giants fan. 0:10:58.679 --> 0:11:00.480 Yeah. Well, here's a tip. I don't know a lot 0:11:00.480 --> 0:11:02.559 about interviewing other than be yourself and try and get 0:11:02.559 --> 0:11:05.199 someone to like you. But don't go into any interview 0:11:05.320 --> 0:11:08.560 wearing any sort of branded sports apparel. 0:11:09.480 --> 0:11:13.440 Yeah, especially a jersey. Yeah, I think that says quite 0:11:13.440 --> 0:11:13.719 a bit. 0:11:14.679 --> 0:11:17.640 Yeah, you wear that Giants jersey in there. Well, I 0:11:17.640 --> 0:11:20.000 guess you're rolling the dice. You've either got that job 0:11:20.280 --> 0:11:21.800 right or there's no way you're going to get it. 0:11:21.840 --> 0:11:24.720 So maybe it's not a bad idea. Then I don't 0:11:24.720 --> 0:11:26.160 even know what I'm I might be wrong. 0:11:27.280 --> 0:11:29.240 Yeah, I mean, I guess if you dressed it up 0:11:29.240 --> 0:11:31.440 with a bow tie, maybe you could get away with it. 0:11:31.480 --> 0:11:33.719 But yes, it is still a gamble regardless. 0:11:33.960 --> 0:11:35.600 Well, not all jobs you have to wear a suit 0:11:35.640 --> 0:11:36.079 and tie, you. 0:11:36.040 --> 0:11:39.240 Realize, I know, But I'm saying, like you dress for 0:11:39.280 --> 0:11:41.520 the part you want. If you're wearing a giant's jersey 0:11:41.559 --> 0:11:44.160 with the bow tie, I think you're making a good 0:11:44.160 --> 0:11:45.200 impression out of the gate. 0:11:46.160 --> 0:11:50.320 All right, So I guess we can talk about We're 0:11:50.320 --> 0:11:52.480 going to go through a list of about ten different 0:11:52.520 --> 0:11:56.040 biases and they're all pretty interesting and I know everyone 0:11:56.080 --> 0:11:58.480 can identify with probably each of these at some point. 0:11:58.760 --> 0:12:01.800 But before we do that, we need to point out that, like, 0:12:02.360 --> 0:12:05.120 these are all mental shortcuts or the result of a 0:12:05.160 --> 0:12:07.840 mental shortcut, but not all of them work in the 0:12:07.840 --> 0:12:10.160 same way. And how our brains work, a lot of 0:12:10.240 --> 0:12:11.760 you know, there could be a lot of things at play. 0:12:12.720 --> 0:12:16.640 Emotions can come into play, maybe, like we were just 0:12:16.679 --> 0:12:20.120 talking about, like it's hard to reassess something after you've 0:12:20.160 --> 0:12:24.720 gotten a first impression. People humans historically through their life 0:12:24.800 --> 0:12:27.600 tend to make bad guesses at things because if you 0:12:27.640 --> 0:12:31.040 make great guesses, then things like you know, gambling would 0:12:31.040 --> 0:12:33.800 be super easy. So all of these things come into play. 0:12:35.720 --> 0:12:37.880 There's not just like a single way that this it's 0:12:37.880 --> 0:12:40.280 a broken system. 0:12:39.880 --> 0:12:44.000 Right yeah, yeah, yeah, But people generally, it seems like 0:12:44.160 --> 0:12:46.800 universally in a lot of these cases, behave in these 0:12:47.240 --> 0:12:49.760 ways under the same circumstances. 0:12:50.440 --> 0:12:53.440 Yeah, like some of their stuff wasn't replicatable, but that's 0:12:53.520 --> 0:12:57.160 sort of standard for studies in psychology. Like a lot 0:12:57.160 --> 0:12:59.920 of this stuff, as we'll see, has checked out across cultures. 0:13:00.240 --> 0:13:03.520 Yeah, which is huge, you know, considering the whole weird 0:13:03.760 --> 0:13:05.640 problem in psychology in. 0:13:05.559 --> 0:13:09.040 Particular that weird people. 0:13:08.760 --> 0:13:14.559 Are Western educated, industrial hich are Yeah, rich democratic, I think. 0:13:15.520 --> 0:13:18.040 All right, so we'll start. We'll leave the biggest guy 0:13:18.120 --> 0:13:20.440 for last, I think, which will be after a break probably, 0:13:20.440 --> 0:13:23.600 but we'll start then with maybe hindsight bias. And this 0:13:23.679 --> 0:13:27.240 is the idea that after something has occurred and we 0:13:27.320 --> 0:13:28.959 talked about this one before here and there, that we 0:13:30.080 --> 0:13:31.800 tend to think like, oh, well, of course that was 0:13:31.840 --> 0:13:34.400 going to happen. In fact, not only was that should 0:13:34.440 --> 0:13:37.160 I have seen that coming, It was probably inevitable that 0:13:37.240 --> 0:13:40.800 that happened. And a lot of a time maybe because 0:13:40.840 --> 0:13:45.640 you're misremembering your expectation before it even happened, right. 0:13:45.960 --> 0:13:49.600 Like we can rearrange our memory of how we felt 0:13:49.600 --> 0:13:52.040 about the event or the outcome of the event afterward 0:13:52.080 --> 0:13:55.120 to basically match the outcome. Yeah, I guess because we 0:13:55.160 --> 0:13:56.840 have this number ending need to be right. 0:13:57.559 --> 0:13:59.000 Yeah, that probably had something to do with it. 0:13:59.640 --> 0:14:05.080 I knew you were going to say that, so I've 0:14:05.080 --> 0:14:08.240 got another one for you, Chuck all right, self serving 0:14:08.280 --> 0:14:13.280 bias combined with a little fundamental attribution error on the side. 0:14:13.240 --> 0:14:15.359 Yeah, that's a good one. It's a good side dish. 0:14:15.640 --> 0:14:19.760 So these things basically go hand in hand. It's basically 0:14:19.760 --> 0:14:22.360 how we see ourselves in a great light and how 0:14:22.400 --> 0:14:24.760 we see other people in a more negative light. Self 0:14:24.800 --> 0:14:28.240 serving bias is basically saying, if something good happens to you, 0:14:28.400 --> 0:14:31.400 it's because you are good, like you earned it. It's 0:14:31.440 --> 0:14:34.640 because of you doing something right. Something bad happens to you, 0:14:35.040 --> 0:14:41.000 it's external forces that made that happen, right. Fundamental attribution 0:14:41.160 --> 0:14:43.720 error is the exact opposite with other people, If they 0:14:43.800 --> 0:14:46.320 do something right, it was just luck. If something bad 0:14:46.360 --> 0:14:49.680 happens to them, it's their own fault. So good example 0:14:49.680 --> 0:14:52.000 of this is like if a coworker comes in late 0:14:52.080 --> 0:14:55.040 one day, you're like, they're just lazy and slack, but 0:14:55.080 --> 0:14:57.040 then you come in late the next day and you're 0:14:57.080 --> 0:14:58.160 like it was traffic. 0:14:58.600 --> 0:14:58.840 Right. 0:14:59.160 --> 0:15:01.720 That's basically the two things going hand in hand, and 0:15:01.760 --> 0:15:03.520 those are those are both biases. 0:15:04.000 --> 0:15:07.320 Yeah, and I hope people understand that, Like all of 0:15:07.360 --> 0:15:11.480 those things can also be true. You know. Sure, so 0:15:11.880 --> 0:15:14.040 if you're if you're thinking like, well, no, but some 0:15:14.440 --> 0:15:17.520 you know, sometimes I did deserve the thing, and sometimes 0:15:17.520 --> 0:15:20.520 it was someone's fault. Yeah, sure, that can't happen. That's 0:15:20.600 --> 0:15:22.840 we're not These aren't absolutes. 0:15:22.960 --> 0:15:27.800 No, it's more just yeah, your your your tendency to 0:15:27.840 --> 0:15:30.480 think in certain ways. Yeah, sometimes you're going to be right. 0:15:30.520 --> 0:15:31.640 Sometimes you're going to be wrong for. 0:15:31.880 --> 0:15:34.480 Like humanities tendency. Yeah, you got to take a big 0:15:34.480 --> 0:15:35.160 broad view here. 0:15:35.800 --> 0:15:41.080 Yeah, but also you specifically right you James Kirkland listening 0:15:41.160 --> 0:15:41.840 in Baltimore. 0:15:42.080 --> 0:15:44.960 There's one. Oh, man, James Kirkland is going to pull 0:15:44.960 --> 0:15:47.600 over to the side of the road right now and really 0:15:47.640 --> 0:15:48.120 freak out. 0:15:48.320 --> 0:15:50.320 I hope, man, I hope I nailed it. 0:15:50.800 --> 0:15:52.520 Yeah, I think you picked a common enough name. 0:15:52.920 --> 0:15:53.880 We'll see, all right. 0:15:54.400 --> 0:15:58.160 So anchoring bias is another one. This one I've fallen 0:15:58.160 --> 0:15:59.960 prey too. I'm gonna say that probably about all these, 0:16:00.080 --> 0:16:02.760 but that is the first piece of info that you 0:16:02.800 --> 0:16:06.520 get about something can really affect and even in a 0:16:06.760 --> 0:16:10.960 very disproportional way, things that happen after that, Like, once 0:16:10.960 --> 0:16:13.960 something is kind of locked in, it's hard to unwind that. 0:16:14.560 --> 0:16:18.560 Yeah, that first piece of information, it's like, oh, okay, 0:16:17.800 --> 0:16:21.640 this is going to basically prime you in your answer 0:16:21.760 --> 0:16:24.400 your decision. Right. So a good example I saw is 0:16:24.680 --> 0:16:27.880 there was a study that says, like, Okay, the Mississippi 0:16:27.960 --> 0:16:30.840 River is less than two miles long, how long is it? 0:16:31.160 --> 0:16:33.560 And those people would say something like fifteen hundred miles. 0:16:34.240 --> 0:16:36.960 And then other people would say, okay, the Mississippi River 0:16:37.120 --> 0:16:40.240 is less than five hundred miles long, and people would 0:16:40.240 --> 0:16:42.760 say like, it's like three hundred miles. And then another 0:16:42.840 --> 0:16:45.760 group was the Mississippi River is less than eighty miles long. 0:16:45.920 --> 0:16:49.280 Those people would answer like sixty. It's the same thing, 0:16:49.360 --> 0:16:52.479 the length of the Mississippi River. But they were presented 0:16:52.520 --> 0:16:55.640 with this basically this priming number, a large one, a 0:16:55.680 --> 0:16:59.000 middle number, or a smaller number, and their answers were 0:16:59.040 --> 0:17:02.640 related to that first piece of information that they got, 0:17:02.840 --> 0:17:04.159 and that's anchoring bias. 0:17:04.640 --> 0:17:07.600 Yeah, And Livia pointed out another little side this year, 0:17:07.600 --> 0:17:09.760 which is called the decoy effect, and that's when you 0:17:10.480 --> 0:17:12.399 will go into a restaurant and they might and this 0:17:12.520 --> 0:17:15.800 is how just kind of one way this can affect economics, 0:17:16.000 --> 0:17:17.840 which will come up a lot. But you'll go into 0:17:17.880 --> 0:17:21.200 a restaurant and they might have one super expensive bottle 0:17:21.240 --> 0:17:24.320 of wine on the menu, and maybe it's even placed 0:17:24.359 --> 0:17:26.600 at the top so you see it first, and then 0:17:26.760 --> 0:17:29.199 the other bottles of wine might seem like a decent 0:17:29.280 --> 0:17:31.680 deal after that, even if they're also overpriced. 0:17:31.840 --> 0:17:34.200 Yeah, exploitation, but. 0:17:34.240 --> 0:17:37.840 All wine and restaurants is overpriced. I hope everyone realizes that. 0:17:37.840 --> 0:17:39.560 I mean buy a lot, right, Yeah, I think that 0:17:39.640 --> 0:17:41.040 most of their margin on that. 0:17:41.280 --> 0:17:45.360 Oh, totally. It's it's frustrating, but it's that's that's the business. 0:17:45.680 --> 0:17:48.080 Well, that's also I think, chuck. This anchoring bias is 0:17:48.080 --> 0:17:50.600 why they say you should never lead in a negotiation 0:17:50.720 --> 0:17:53.200 with your actual price that you want to go high 0:17:53.280 --> 0:17:55.400 or lower depending on your position. 0:17:56.080 --> 0:17:58.119 Oh like if they ask what you want to get paid? 0:17:58.560 --> 0:18:01.399 Yeah, or like you're trying question or something like that. 0:18:01.480 --> 0:18:04.040 You know, yeah, I hate all that stuff. 0:18:04.680 --> 0:18:07.199 Yeah. Yeah. If somebody it's like, well, what do you 0:18:07.280 --> 0:18:08.359 think I should get paid? 0:18:08.440 --> 0:18:10.359 You know, what are you looking to make at this job? 0:18:10.680 --> 0:18:12.840 But that's what I'm saying, what you make is should 0:18:12.840 --> 0:18:13.719 always be the answer. 0:18:14.040 --> 0:18:17.280 Exactly. You just want to add I don't know, fifty 0:18:17.320 --> 0:18:19.280 percent to what you actually want, and then you're away 0:18:19.320 --> 0:18:22.560 for negotiation. There's the one other thing that's related to 0:18:22.600 --> 0:18:25.520 this framing bias, and that's basically the same thing, but 0:18:25.600 --> 0:18:28.520 rather than the first piece of information guiding you, this 0:18:28.680 --> 0:18:33.959 is more directly guiding you. So for example, some drug 0:18:35.440 --> 0:18:38.760 maker says ten percent of patients die, You're like, oh god, 0:18:38.880 --> 0:18:41.680 that's a lot, right. You could say at the opposite weight, 0:18:41.800 --> 0:18:44.480 ninety percent of patients live and you're like, oh that's great, 0:18:44.920 --> 0:18:47.840 the same amount of people dying. It's just framed differently 0:18:47.920 --> 0:18:51.600 to exploit your your response. 0:18:51.680 --> 0:18:53.440 To exploit your aversion to dying. 0:18:55.600 --> 0:18:57.399 And that's a human thing, isn't it? 0:18:57.480 --> 0:19:01.160 For sure? Shall we take a break? Yeah, all right, 0:19:01.280 --> 0:19:03.080 Josh said human things. So it's time for a break 0:19:03.080 --> 0:19:04.840 and we're going to come back with more biases right 0:19:04.880 --> 0:19:05.359 after this. 0:19:34.880 --> 0:19:37.640 All right, chuck up to bat is number twenty three 0:19:38.119 --> 0:19:39.720 availability heuristic? 0:19:40.680 --> 0:19:42.760 Can we put like a stadium echo effect on that? 0:19:44.160 --> 0:19:46.440 Next to bat? Many motos? 0:19:47.359 --> 0:19:47.800 Very nice? 0:19:49.160 --> 0:19:53.639 So what is that availability heuristic? And I'm sure this 0:19:53.720 --> 0:19:54.920 has happened to you before. 0:19:54.760 --> 0:19:58.399 Right, Yeah, none of these have ever happened to you, 0:19:58.440 --> 0:20:00.640 which is a funny thing about us doing this episode. 0:20:00.640 --> 0:20:06.439 But the availability heuristic is what you have available to 0:20:06.600 --> 0:20:08.679 call up in your brain at any given moment, So 0:20:08.720 --> 0:20:12.400 you're you're going to rely more on what you can 0:20:12.480 --> 0:20:16.439 immediately think of in the moment, and chances are what 0:20:16.520 --> 0:20:18.800 you're immediately able to think of in the moment as 0:20:18.800 --> 0:20:22.360 something that probably aligns with your worldview or something like that, 0:20:22.400 --> 0:20:24.560 which is a sort of a well, we won't talk 0:20:24.560 --> 0:20:27.280 about the sea bias because that's coming up. 0:20:27.560 --> 0:20:30.160 Well, yeah, or something that like really kind of goosed 0:20:30.200 --> 0:20:34.440 you emotionally, like that's that's very available because it's wow, 0:20:34.560 --> 0:20:38.080 you know, loud and scary in your mind kind of 0:20:38.119 --> 0:20:42.119 you know, like if you saw something about a plane 0:20:42.200 --> 0:20:44.640 crash in the last like day or so, right when 0:20:44.640 --> 0:20:47.639 somebody asks you how frequent plane crashes are, you're probably 0:20:47.640 --> 0:20:49.600 going to give a much higher estimate than you would 0:20:49.600 --> 0:20:52.400 have before that, you know, maybe based on the number 0:20:52.400 --> 0:20:54.400 of times you've flown and nothing bad happened. 0:20:54.720 --> 0:20:56.200 Yeah, that's a good one. 0:20:57.119 --> 0:21:01.719 There's also an attentional blindness. And before anybody, before we 0:21:01.760 --> 0:21:04.359 talk about this, because we're gonna spoil it. Yeah, yeah, 0:21:04.440 --> 0:21:06.919 I want to send everybody, if you have the means 0:21:06.960 --> 0:21:10.800 to do this, go onto YouTube and search for selective 0:21:10.920 --> 0:21:15.719 attention test. And this is Daniel Simon's YouTube channel, and 0:21:15.760 --> 0:21:17.960 then watch the test where the people are passing the 0:21:18.000 --> 0:21:20.919 basketball back and forth. We'll wait a second. 0:21:21.240 --> 0:21:26.359 Dude, Okay, that's enough. 0:21:26.400 --> 0:21:29.320 All right, great, so hopefully you press pause and you 0:21:29.359 --> 0:21:31.680 didn't just try to watch it while we were while 0:21:31.760 --> 0:21:33.240 Chuck was doing the Jeopardy theme. 0:21:33.560 --> 0:21:35.000 It is short, but it's not that short. 0:21:35.119 --> 0:21:37.320 It's like a minute and a half or something, right, Yeah, 0:21:37.359 --> 0:21:40.520 So tell them about this video, Chuck, because it's pretty great. 0:21:40.880 --> 0:21:44.119 That's right. In the video, they have a group of 0:21:44.880 --> 0:21:48.800 what was it like six people, probably six on the nose, 0:21:49.200 --> 0:21:52.280 six college students I guess, Three are wearing white shirts, 0:21:52.320 --> 0:21:54.960 three are not wearing white shirts, and they're in a 0:21:55.400 --> 0:21:59.520 very tight, small circle. It looks very awkward. They have 0:21:59.680 --> 0:22:03.800 a I think was it two basketballs. There's two groups, yeah, 0:22:03.800 --> 0:22:07.040 two groups, two basketballs, and you're what you're told is 0:22:07.080 --> 0:22:09.520 the tasket hand is to count the number of times 0:22:09.880 --> 0:22:14.080 that people in white the white team are passing the basketball. 0:22:14.200 --> 0:22:18.680 So you're counting, right, one, two, three, four, four, five, six, seven, 0:22:19.359 --> 0:22:21.040 and that's all you're supposed to do. And at the 0:22:21.119 --> 0:22:23.160 end you're supposed to say, you know how many times 0:22:23.240 --> 0:22:24.400 they pass a basketball? 0:22:24.440 --> 0:22:24.680 Right? 0:22:24.920 --> 0:22:27.000 And now, now, hit them with the good stuff. 0:22:27.680 --> 0:22:32.440 So apparently half of the people who do this, which 0:22:32.480 --> 0:22:35.680 is astounding to me, half of the people who watch 0:22:35.760 --> 0:22:38.080 this video and take this test don't notice that in 0:22:38.160 --> 0:22:41.440 the middle of it, a person in a gorilla suit 0:22:41.520 --> 0:22:44.840 walks into frame and turns to the camera and I 0:22:44.880 --> 0:22:48.119 think beats on their chest and then walks out of frame. 0:22:48.440 --> 0:22:50.840 Like in the middle of these people throwing these basketballs 0:22:50.840 --> 0:22:54.040 around the gorilla, half of the people are paying such 0:22:54.080 --> 0:22:58.600 close attention to counting how many times the people wearing 0:22:58.600 --> 0:23:00.760 white T shirts are passing the basket well that they 0:23:00.880 --> 0:23:03.760 do not notice the gorilla until the end of the 0:23:03.840 --> 0:23:05.240 video when it's pointed out. 0:23:05.880 --> 0:23:08.920 Yeah, and we're assuming it's a person in a gorilla costume. 0:23:09.040 --> 0:23:10.520 I'm hoping, first of all. 0:23:10.400 --> 0:23:11.919 That might be a bias at play, that it's not 0:23:11.960 --> 0:23:12.879 a real gorilla. 0:23:13.040 --> 0:23:15.200 Well, I guess it depends on the amount of funding 0:23:15.240 --> 0:23:15.560 they had. 0:23:15.800 --> 0:23:20.439 Yeah, it looks actually like the gorilla from trading places. 0:23:19.320 --> 0:23:23.920 Totally, which is like, were they even trying? No, Okay, kid, 0:23:24.119 --> 0:23:25.360 I just wanted to make sure. 0:23:25.520 --> 0:23:28.159 Uh, did you watch this video Before you knew about this. 0:23:28.520 --> 0:23:32.120 I had heard it from some friends who were who 0:23:32.160 --> 0:23:34.720 do magic, and they were basically talking about this on 0:23:34.800 --> 0:23:36.440 a little podcast that they made. 0:23:36.880 --> 0:23:39.480 Who Bo Bobo, You are friends who do magic? 0:23:41.119 --> 0:23:43.960 So you know our friend Toby. Oh, yeah, he has 0:23:44.119 --> 0:23:45.760 very good friends that do magic. 0:23:46.200 --> 0:23:46.440 Wow. 0:23:46.680 --> 0:23:50.560 I became Yes, I became kind of friends with him. 0:23:50.560 --> 0:23:52.399 So yeah, I guess I do. I have friends that 0:23:52.440 --> 0:23:53.000 do magic. 0:23:53.480 --> 0:23:55.879 Well, buddy, next time we are in Los Angeles at 0:23:55.920 --> 0:23:58.360 the same time, our good friend and friend of the show, 0:23:58.400 --> 0:24:02.120 Adam Pranica, Yeah, is a member of the Magic Castle 0:24:03.000 --> 0:24:05.600 and it's one of his and his wife Elaine's favorite 0:24:05.600 --> 0:24:08.119 thing to do is to take friends to the Magic Castle. 0:24:08.200 --> 0:24:09.440 So have you ever been? 0:24:09.800 --> 0:24:10.000 No? 0:24:10.280 --> 0:24:11.480 And it is great fun. 0:24:11.800 --> 0:24:14.960 Adam Pranika just keeps getting better and better, doesn't he. 0:24:15.440 --> 0:24:17.080 Yeah. I haven't been with him, but I've been a 0:24:17.119 --> 0:24:19.639 couple of times, once many many years ago, then another 0:24:19.720 --> 0:24:21.560 probably ten years ago. But it's a lot of fun. 0:24:21.880 --> 0:24:25.280 I'm a big fan of magic. Yeah, And it's pretty magical. 0:24:25.280 --> 0:24:27.760 When people don't see that gorilla in a very tight frame, 0:24:28.359 --> 0:24:31.240 it's not like it's on a big basketball court and 0:24:31.280 --> 0:24:33.439 the gorilla sneaks in there like there's six people and 0:24:33.480 --> 0:24:35.919 then there's a seventh. Very clearly it is. 0:24:36.080 --> 0:24:38.000 It is very obvious so I mean, what this is 0:24:38.040 --> 0:24:41.720 showing is that our attention is limited, right, and we're 0:24:41.760 --> 0:24:45.560 really focused on a task. You you saw that gorilla. 0:24:46.080 --> 0:24:48.560 Those half of the people who didn't notice the gorilla, 0:24:48.600 --> 0:24:50.960 you still saw it, but you're still focused on the task. 0:24:51.000 --> 0:24:53.199 That your brain was just getting rid of information that 0:24:53.280 --> 0:24:57.840 was unrelated to the task because it's not pertinent. It 0:24:57.840 --> 0:25:00.880 can become pertinent though, when that gorilla decide to attack you. 0:25:01.680 --> 0:25:04.800 And so this is a cognitive bias we have where 0:25:04.800 --> 0:25:10.159 we're ignoring potentially unimportant information to take in the stuff 0:25:10.200 --> 0:25:12.480 that's related to the task at hand. Yeah. 0:25:12.520 --> 0:25:14.199 Well, you know where they could really get away with 0:25:14.280 --> 0:25:17.080 this because where you have great concentration. Is it a 0:25:17.119 --> 0:25:20.240 professional sports game on the jumbo tron when they have 0:25:20.359 --> 0:25:23.480 the baseball under the helmet or whatever, uh huh, and 0:25:23.520 --> 0:25:25.440 then they're moving them around and you got to find 0:25:25.520 --> 0:25:27.840 you know, it's like three card money, yep, Because you're 0:25:27.840 --> 0:25:30.040 concentrating so hard on that, they could they could put 0:25:30.080 --> 0:25:32.320 whatever they wanted on that screen while that's going on, 0:25:32.560 --> 0:25:35.320 And I bet you most people would not or maybe 0:25:35.359 --> 0:25:37.159 I guess it's half if that's what they found. 0:25:37.640 --> 0:25:40.000 Yeah, I'll bet you're right. I'll bet you're right, man. 0:25:40.200 --> 0:25:41.520 I was just trying to think of something where you're 0:25:41.520 --> 0:25:44.560 super trying to follow because I was happy I came 0:25:44.640 --> 0:25:46.520 up with the correct amount of passes at the end. 0:25:46.440 --> 0:25:48.919 You did. You said, what does it mean if I 0:25:49.000 --> 0:25:52.000 noticed the gorilla and got the correct number of passes? 0:25:52.040 --> 0:25:54.119 And I said, it means you're a perfect human. 0:25:53.960 --> 0:25:55.639 That's right, which we all know is not true. 0:25:57.240 --> 0:25:58.880 None of us are, Chuck, None of us are. 0:25:59.119 --> 0:25:59.520 Yeah, I know. 0:26:00.080 --> 0:26:02.359 So there's another one that you may have heard of before, 0:26:02.400 --> 0:26:04.200 even if you've not heard of any of these other ones, 0:26:04.200 --> 0:26:07.000 called the Dunning Kruger effect. It became kind of viral 0:26:07.119 --> 0:26:11.320 because if you take it through the pop culture meat grinder, 0:26:11.800 --> 0:26:14.159 it becomes much more simplified and kind of loses some 0:26:14.240 --> 0:26:18.199 of its actuality. But yeah, people still like it because 0:26:18.520 --> 0:26:20.240 it's a good way to put other people down. 0:26:20.720 --> 0:26:23.320 Yeah, it is. This is the idea that the correct 0:26:23.520 --> 0:26:27.000 idea is that people with a little understanding in an 0:26:27.040 --> 0:26:31.119 area tend to overestimate their ability and their knowledge about something, 0:26:31.359 --> 0:26:34.400 right because they don't They know so little they don't 0:26:34.400 --> 0:26:37.080 even know what they don't know. Kind of right exactly, 0:26:37.560 --> 0:26:39.760 But what you were talking about, it's kind of been 0:26:39.800 --> 0:26:44.679 transformed into like morons have them are the most like braggadocious, 0:26:44.800 --> 0:26:46.320 which can be true. 0:26:47.000 --> 0:26:48.960 It can be you know. I think that's one of 0:26:49.000 --> 0:26:51.159 the things. Like you said, you can be right with 0:26:51.240 --> 0:26:53.680 cognitive biases, you're not wrong with them all the time. 0:26:53.720 --> 0:26:56.119 So yeah, that kind of supports that, But that's not 0:26:56.160 --> 0:26:58.919 what the Dunning Kruger effect actually says. You said it. 0:26:59.240 --> 0:27:02.639 And then there's the opposite way too, where the more 0:27:02.720 --> 0:27:06.040 experience you have, the more expert you are in a field, 0:27:06.640 --> 0:27:10.320 the more you assume that it should be easier for 0:27:10.400 --> 0:27:11.199 you than it is. 0:27:12.240 --> 0:27:15.600 Yeah. That's a very valuable thing to understand, I think, 0:27:15.800 --> 0:27:19.360 and you get much further in life if people are like, well, 0:27:19.400 --> 0:27:22.719 you're the expert, and the experts usually the one going yeah, 0:27:22.760 --> 0:27:25.360 but I don't know, maybe we should hold off because 0:27:25.440 --> 0:27:26.560 you know X, Y and Z. 0:27:27.040 --> 0:27:30.440 Right. Yeah, So that's the actual Dunning Kruger effect, and 0:27:30.520 --> 0:27:33.520 I saw that it's it's being assailed right now. People 0:27:33.560 --> 0:27:36.480 are showing a question even the basic version of it, 0:27:36.560 --> 0:27:39.120 like the actually academic version of it. Yeah, so we'll 0:27:39.119 --> 0:27:40.080 see what happens with that. 0:27:40.400 --> 0:27:44.199 Oh interesting. We've got the gambler's fallacy next, and that 0:27:44.359 --> 0:27:49.760 is oh boy, if you have ever gambled anywhere. But 0:27:49.800 --> 0:27:51.560 if you like go to casinos and stuff like that, 0:27:52.200 --> 0:27:54.360 you're going to see this all over the place. You're 0:27:54.359 --> 0:27:56.600 going to hear it spoken out loud. And this is 0:27:56.640 --> 0:28:00.960 the idea that you find patterns where there are no patterns. 0:28:01.119 --> 0:28:01.639 Yeah. 0:28:01.720 --> 0:28:04.120 So if you're at the blackjack table and you hear 0:28:04.200 --> 0:28:08.040 the person next to you like, well, oh, man, see, 0:28:08.040 --> 0:28:10.280 I've lost four in a row, so I'm gonna bet, like, 0:28:10.840 --> 0:28:13.160 I'm gonna go all in on this because I'm bound 0:28:13.200 --> 0:28:14.760 to win because I've lost four in a row. There's 0:28:14.760 --> 0:28:16.280 no way I'm gonna lose five in a row. 0:28:16.400 --> 0:28:19.440 Right. The problem is is those each of those hands 0:28:19.440 --> 0:28:22.480 of blackjack are unrelated to one another. They don't form 0:28:22.520 --> 0:28:26.080 a pattern. But you are predicting a pattern that just 0:28:26.119 --> 0:28:29.560 doesn't exist. Yeah, that means you're a fallacious gambler. 0:28:29.960 --> 0:28:33.040 I can get you in real trouble. I mean it's 0:28:33.200 --> 0:28:35.040 you can do the same thing on the playground with 0:28:35.119 --> 0:28:37.600 coin tosses. In fact, coin tosses, I think is a 0:28:37.600 --> 0:28:39.920 lot of a lot of times the way they sort 0:28:39.920 --> 0:28:41.600 of try and prove. 0:28:41.440 --> 0:28:45.440 This, Yeah, because each coin toss, considering like you're playing 0:28:45.480 --> 0:28:48.480 with a perfect unflogged coin that has no bias whatsoever. 0:28:49.120 --> 0:28:51.840 Each coin toss is totally unrelated to the last. So 0:28:52.440 --> 0:28:54.560 you could get one hundred heads in a row and 0:28:54.560 --> 0:28:56.880 that doesn't mean anything. It doesn't mean a tail is coming, 0:28:57.320 --> 0:29:00.720 because that each of those hundred heads in each of 0:29:00.760 --> 0:29:03.440 those coin tosses had nothing to do with the last 0:29:03.440 --> 0:29:04.760 one or the next one. 0:29:05.120 --> 0:29:07.240 I know. That's hard to break out of, though, because 0:29:07.240 --> 0:29:10.000 it seems very human to think like they've flipped foreheads 0:29:10.000 --> 0:29:11.360 in a row. There's no way there's going to be 0:29:11.360 --> 0:29:11.640 a fit. 0:29:12.080 --> 0:29:14.320 Well, that's another reason why this is so hard. We're 0:29:14.400 --> 0:29:17.560 hardwired to find patterns and stuff. It's a way to 0:29:17.680 --> 0:29:20.240 navigate the world. The way we navigate the world is 0:29:20.280 --> 0:29:22.920 by finding patterns so that we can recognize things in 0:29:22.920 --> 0:29:26.440 the future and thus spend less energy getting back to homeostasis. 0:29:26.800 --> 0:29:28.920 That's right, This is all so interesting to me. 0:29:29.160 --> 0:29:30.120 I love this stuff. 0:29:30.880 --> 0:29:33.240 I knew that you loved it. This is Josh Clark Central. 0:29:33.680 --> 0:29:36.840 I love observing it because I can't grasp what it 0:29:36.880 --> 0:29:39.000 feels like to suffer any of these, So just to 0:29:39.080 --> 0:29:42.480 discuss it and in this way is really fascinating to me. 0:29:42.960 --> 0:29:45.880 All right, let's talk about the base rate fallacy That 0:29:45.960 --> 0:29:49.480 means you put more weight on just like one very 0:29:49.480 --> 0:29:52.600 specific piece of information instead of looking at all the 0:29:52.640 --> 0:29:54.640 pieces of information that have come your way. 0:29:54.840 --> 0:29:58.920 Yeah, and usually it's individuated information, meaning like say some 0:29:59.120 --> 0:30:02.920 quality or careacteristic of one person, and then you're ignoring 0:30:03.000 --> 0:30:06.440 the base rate, which is like pure statistical information about 0:30:06.520 --> 0:30:09.440 what you're trying to figure out. And a really good 0:30:09.480 --> 0:30:11.880 example of this is like, let's say that you are 0:30:12.000 --> 0:30:14.600 looking at somebody who is super fit, a woman who's 0:30:14.680 --> 0:30:18.000 very fit and athletic, and you're asked, do you think 0:30:18.000 --> 0:30:21.640 that woman is a personal trainer or a teacher, Because 0:30:21.800 --> 0:30:24.280 the basically the only evidence you have there is that 0:30:24.320 --> 0:30:28.280 this woman is very athletic and fit. You might say 0:30:28.360 --> 0:30:31.480 personal trainer. But if you took all the base rate 0:30:31.560 --> 0:30:35.880 information into account, you would know that even the very say, 0:30:36.040 --> 0:30:40.280 very small portion of teachers who are very fit and 0:30:40.320 --> 0:30:44.080 athletic may be small compared to the total number of teachers, 0:30:44.400 --> 0:30:48.040 it's still much larger than the total number of personal 0:30:48.080 --> 0:30:51.960 trainers in the world. So statistically speaking, it's much likelier 0:30:52.280 --> 0:30:55.479 that that very fit athletic woman is a teacher and 0:30:55.520 --> 0:30:57.960 not a personal trainer. You don't do that because you 0:30:58.000 --> 0:31:01.840 think personal trainer athletic fit must be a personal trainer. 0:31:02.080 --> 0:31:05.280 You've just fallen prey to the base rate fallacy. 0:31:05.360 --> 0:31:08.520 My friend, Yeah, but she has on yoga pants and 0:31:08.560 --> 0:31:12.880 hokuhs exactly. That doesn't narrow down anything these days. 0:31:13.560 --> 0:31:18.080 You know, how about the mere exposure effect, Chuck, and like, 0:31:18.240 --> 0:31:20.320 mirror is part of it. I'm not making a judgment 0:31:20.360 --> 0:31:20.960 about it. 0:31:21.120 --> 0:31:25.760 That's right. That means just merely being exposed to something 0:31:26.640 --> 0:31:30.840 has a vast impact. So the more we experience something, 0:31:31.240 --> 0:31:33.200 the more you like it, which is why you see 0:31:33.200 --> 0:31:36.400 that commercial for the thing over and over and over, 0:31:36.520 --> 0:31:40.160 that burger king ad over and over and over. Although 0:31:40.200 --> 0:31:42.920 I wouldn't say that you might like that one the 0:31:42.920 --> 0:31:44.200 more you heard it. 0:31:44.320 --> 0:31:45.800 That's the outlier for me too. 0:31:46.600 --> 0:31:50.840 But that's the idea. Though there's just just mere exposure, 0:31:51.080 --> 0:31:51.800 we'll get you there. 0:31:52.000 --> 0:31:54.880 And then there's a related thing called the illusory truth effect, 0:31:54.880 --> 0:32:00.600 which is basically that repeated exposure to a lie causes 0:32:00.640 --> 0:32:02.560 you to eventually believe in it if you hear it 0:32:02.680 --> 0:32:06.920 enough times, even if you initially knew that it wasn't true. 0:32:07.160 --> 0:32:10.000 So that makes me wonder if like it just wears 0:32:10.000 --> 0:32:12.040 you down over time, like your brain is tired of 0:32:12.080 --> 0:32:15.560 defending itself against being assailed with a lie. And it's 0:32:15.600 --> 0:32:17.520 just like, fine, that's true. I don't I don't care. 0:32:18.440 --> 0:32:22.200 Yeah, I mean sure, politics certainly comes to mind. Repeat 0:32:22.240 --> 0:32:23.840 the lie, repeat the lie, repeat the lie. 0:32:23.920 --> 0:32:26.280 Yeah, And I mean like it's a viable way to 0:32:26.360 --> 0:32:30.000 exploit people's cognitive biases in that In that respect. 0:32:30.680 --> 0:32:33.240 Should we end up should we close out with the 0:32:33.240 --> 0:32:35.200 big daddy of them all, the big c the big 0:32:35.200 --> 0:32:36.200 confirmation bias? 0:32:36.320 --> 0:32:38.000 Yeah, let's do it, baby. 0:32:38.080 --> 0:32:40.640 All right, why don't you start this one? 0:32:41.320 --> 0:32:43.880 Okay, So there's a guy named Peter Wasason back in 0:32:43.920 --> 0:32:48.800 the sixties. He coined the term confirmation bias, and he 0:32:48.880 --> 0:32:51.680 basically had an experiment that's really clever. It's hard to 0:32:51.760 --> 0:32:55.440 understand at first, but it's very clever. He basically said, hey, 0:32:55.600 --> 0:32:58.360 here is a sequence of numbers two, four, and six. 0:32:59.480 --> 0:33:02.680 Figure out what the pattern is. Just to be clear, 0:33:02.760 --> 0:33:06.960 this is really hard to explain. If if you find 0:33:07.000 --> 0:33:10.600 somebody who can explain this, well you'll get it. But 0:33:10.840 --> 0:33:13.360 I don't think I'm a candidate for that. I think 0:33:13.400 --> 0:33:15.400 we all know that I'm not going to explain this 0:33:15.560 --> 0:33:16.000 very well. 0:33:16.360 --> 0:33:17.680 Oh I don't think that's true. 0:33:17.720 --> 0:33:18.720 Do you want to take a crack? 0:33:19.240 --> 0:33:23.120 Okay, The original numbers were two four six, and people 0:33:23.240 --> 0:33:26.240 might tend to go with, like, all right, eight ten twelve, 0:33:26.960 --> 0:33:28.920 and they thinking it might be all right, it's even 0:33:29.000 --> 0:33:32.960 number sequence ascending even number, right, and they would say, no, 0:33:33.080 --> 0:33:35.560 that's not correct. And you said, well, maybe it's four 0:33:35.640 --> 0:33:38.360 eight twelve and it's like doubled or something, and they 0:33:38.400 --> 0:33:43.120 would say, well, that's also incorrect. And then you're at 0:33:43.120 --> 0:33:46.200 WIT's end because what you haven't done is just done 0:33:46.240 --> 0:33:50.320 any ascending order. You didn't go one seventy nine, three hundred. 0:33:50.760 --> 0:33:53.920 All right, let me take a crack at it. You ready? 0:33:54.280 --> 0:33:54.640 Sure? 0:33:55.120 --> 0:33:58.320 So the original numbers two four six, and the participants 0:33:58.360 --> 0:34:00.760 would try to come up with the explanation of why, 0:34:01.080 --> 0:34:04.880 like what are the what pattern are those numbers following? 0:34:05.040 --> 0:34:05.200 Right? 0:34:05.880 --> 0:34:11.200 So you might say the like does eight ten twelve 0:34:11.280 --> 0:34:14.560 work and they would say yes, and you'd say, okay, 0:34:14.600 --> 0:34:16.680 well then you're just looking at even numbers and they 0:34:16.680 --> 0:34:20.040 would say, no, you still got this right, This still 0:34:20.080 --> 0:34:23.280 fits the pattern, but your your hypothesis for it is wrong. 0:34:23.800 --> 0:34:25.200 Right, that's yeah, that's the key. 0:34:25.360 --> 0:34:28.439 Right. Here's where the confirmation bias came in. People would 0:34:28.520 --> 0:34:32.799 then go back and continue trying to find versions that 0:34:32.960 --> 0:34:36.600 fit their hypothesis to explain this even though it was wrong. Yeah, 0:34:36.719 --> 0:34:39.920 rather than take their hypothesis and say, Okay, this is right, 0:34:40.160 --> 0:34:42.880 this fits the pattern, but it's still not correct and 0:34:42.920 --> 0:34:47.120 start trying to break their original hypothesis by coming up 0:34:47.120 --> 0:34:50.520 with like just completely random stuff that doesn't fit their 0:34:50.800 --> 0:34:54.240 original hypothesis, in which case they might have said something 0:34:54.320 --> 0:34:57.160 like does one, six or twenty seven work and they 0:34:57.200 --> 0:35:00.680 would say no, that's that doesn't fit, and then that 0:35:00.760 --> 0:35:03.480 might lead the person to see that actually, the only 0:35:03.640 --> 0:35:06.279 the only thing that has to be correct to be 0:35:06.360 --> 0:35:08.160 part of the model is that the numbers have to 0:35:08.239 --> 0:35:13.479 ascend in order. That was it. But people, people, man, 0:35:14.200 --> 0:35:14.440 just you. 0:35:14.480 --> 0:35:16.799 Might even try, you might even try and break it 0:35:16.840 --> 0:35:20.400 by saying three, five, seven, but you're still using that 0:35:20.480 --> 0:35:25.440 original a version of that original hypothesis. 0:35:25.000 --> 0:35:27.839 Exactly that that there's yes, say like that you think 0:35:27.840 --> 0:35:29.760 it goes up by two or something like that. Yes, 0:35:30.239 --> 0:35:33.719 You're like very few people go back and try to 0:35:33.760 --> 0:35:37.479 break their own hypothesis, And that's the point of confirmation bias. 0:35:37.560 --> 0:35:40.360 Let's move on from that experiment. The point of confirmation 0:35:40.480 --> 0:35:43.120 bias that this shows if you actually can understand it 0:35:43.160 --> 0:35:47.279 from other people than us, is that we tend to 0:35:47.320 --> 0:35:51.200 take our initial ideas, our beliefs in a lot of cases, 0:35:51.600 --> 0:35:54.960 and look for information that supports those and discard information 0:35:55.080 --> 0:35:56.200 that doesn't support it. 0:35:57.000 --> 0:35:59.400 Right, And that's of course you know mentioned politics a 0:35:59.440 --> 0:36:01.680 minute ago. That where you most firmly see that these 0:36:01.760 --> 0:36:06.880 days is you are in a media bubble. Probably, I 0:36:06.880 --> 0:36:09.399 don't know a ton of people that get their news 0:36:09.480 --> 0:36:14.160 sources from completely disparate points of view, and news these 0:36:14.280 --> 0:36:17.680 days that you're getting is so a lot of it 0:36:17.719 --> 0:36:19.839 is so slanted to begin with. It's probably not even 0:36:19.880 --> 0:36:23.840 the best example anymore to use, but you're probably a 0:36:23.840 --> 0:36:26.160 long way of saying, you're probably going to be seeking 0:36:26.200 --> 0:36:28.520 out news that confirms your beliefs because you don't want 0:36:28.560 --> 0:36:29.360 your beliefs challenged. 0:36:29.560 --> 0:36:32.440 Yes, I mean, I, like everybody else, I have trouble 0:36:32.480 --> 0:36:34.440 with that as well. But I have to boast you 0:36:34.520 --> 0:36:38.000 me is actually really good about getting news from different sources. 0:36:38.719 --> 0:36:39.160 Yeah. 0:36:39.200 --> 0:36:41.480 And one reason that I find it difficult to do 0:36:41.560 --> 0:36:45.640 is because I have like physical reactions sometimes. Yeah, And 0:36:45.800 --> 0:36:47.799 that is a thing that's one of the reasons why 0:36:47.800 --> 0:36:50.200 they think we have we use confirmation biases because it 0:36:50.280 --> 0:36:53.319 sucks to be to have your beliefs challenged, right, It's 0:36:53.360 --> 0:36:56.319 really difficult to overcome that. And there's this thing called 0:36:56.360 --> 0:37:01.160 belief perseverance, which is, even when you're beliefs are challenged with, 0:37:01.280 --> 0:37:06.799 say like an indisputable fact, you can still use confirmation 0:37:06.880 --> 0:37:12.440 bias to preserve that belief because we usually attach our identity, 0:37:12.520 --> 0:37:15.040 or build our identity around our beliefs. That's who we are. 0:37:15.200 --> 0:37:18.200 So it's like we're being personally attacked. And then even 0:37:18.239 --> 0:37:20.560 more than that, there's the backfire effect. Right did you 0:37:20.560 --> 0:37:21.000 see that? 0:37:21.760 --> 0:37:22.160 I did not. 0:37:22.520 --> 0:37:26.000 So the backfire effect says that in the in the 0:37:26.040 --> 0:37:30.880 face of being presented with information that is that basically 0:37:30.880 --> 0:37:34.200 counters your own beliefs, it can make you actually solidify 0:37:34.800 --> 0:37:39.000 your original incorrect belief in the first place. Right, You'll 0:37:39.040 --> 0:37:42.680 you'll you'll believe it even more strongly, even though you've 0:37:42.719 --> 0:37:46.560 just been given facts that contradict it. So we really 0:37:46.920 --> 0:37:51.320 really hang on to our beliefs as much as possible. 0:37:51.320 --> 0:37:54.680 And that is a huge, huge thing that humans trip over. 0:37:54.840 --> 0:37:58.759 That confirmation bias is probably the grandaddy of all biases. 0:37:58.840 --> 0:38:03.120 I think, Yeah, that's why I saved it for last Yeah, 0:38:03.160 --> 0:38:04.680 and you know, a lot of reasons people do this. 0:38:04.840 --> 0:38:08.520 You might be protecting your yourself, like your self esteem, 0:38:08.600 --> 0:38:11.880 because otherwise you can you're admitting that you're may have 0:38:11.920 --> 0:38:14.759 been wrong about something, and it, you know, takes a 0:38:14.760 --> 0:38:17.839 big person to do that. You want to believe that 0:38:17.960 --> 0:38:21.440 you're right about stuff. And it also might just be 0:38:21.480 --> 0:38:25.239 difficult to process more than one hypothesis at once. It 0:38:25.520 --> 0:38:27.120 might just be a little too brain breaking. 0:38:27.440 --> 0:38:30.440 Yeah, because once you lock into an explanation, your brain 0:38:30.600 --> 0:38:32.879 just it's like, I know, we've got it. We don't 0:38:32.880 --> 0:38:35.960 have to figure this other thing out. Homeostasis, homeostasis. You know. 0:38:36.520 --> 0:38:39.200 It's it is very hard to entertain something that is 0:38:40.200 --> 0:38:42.160 counter to what we already think is true. 0:38:42.680 --> 0:38:45.319 That's right, all right everyone. As you can tell by 0:38:45.360 --> 0:38:48.600 the clock, we are taking our second break, this is 0:38:48.640 --> 0:38:49.880 a long one, and we're going to come back and 0:38:49.920 --> 0:38:51.880 talk about behavioral economics right after that. 0:38:52.080 --> 0:38:54.600 Well, wait, before we do that, let's try to explain 0:38:54.640 --> 0:38:56.200 this confirmation by a study again. 0:38:56.600 --> 0:39:29.600 Yeah, we should all right, we'll be right back, Okay, 0:39:29.840 --> 0:39:33.000 I promised talk about behavioral economics. A lot of the 0:39:33.000 --> 0:39:38.319 work that Spirsky and Konoman did was super applicable and 0:39:38.520 --> 0:39:40.239 kind of revolutionary in a lot of ways for the 0:39:40.239 --> 0:39:44.480 world of economics and how people buying behavior is affected. 0:39:45.200 --> 0:39:47.520 They didn't invent it, like Adam Smith wrote about stuff 0:39:47.560 --> 0:39:50.919 like this, and starting about World War two is when 0:39:51.440 --> 0:39:54.239 they started really kind of homing in on stuff like this, 0:39:54.760 --> 0:39:58.640 like using mathematical models, and it all kind of started 0:39:58.640 --> 0:40:03.359 with the assumption that people and companies and organizations are 0:40:03.440 --> 0:40:06.839 really just trying to pursue their self interest at the end. 0:40:06.719 --> 0:40:08.160 Of the day. Yeah, and they're going to make the 0:40:08.160 --> 0:40:12.040 most rational decision. Yeah, and that's just they And they 0:40:12.040 --> 0:40:15.080 were like, yes, we know people make irrational decisions, but 0:40:15.320 --> 0:40:17.480 these are outliers. Like if you take all of the 0:40:17.520 --> 0:40:20.960 information and their data and aggregate, you will see that 0:40:21.080 --> 0:40:24.279 humans generally try to make the most rational decision. That's 0:40:24.440 --> 0:40:28.120 just not true. People don't do that. We make all 0:40:28.160 --> 0:40:32.840 sorts of irrational decisions that very frequently run counter to 0:40:32.920 --> 0:40:37.160 our own best interests. And again we'll even reject stuff 0:40:37.280 --> 0:40:40.480 like information that would help us make decisions to our 0:40:40.480 --> 0:40:44.120 own best interests if they counter our beliefs. So there's 0:40:44.120 --> 0:40:47.120 a guy named Richard Thaler who ended up becoming a 0:40:47.160 --> 0:40:50.600 colleague of Diversky and Konnoment, and he took some of 0:40:50.640 --> 0:40:56.080 their papers, and he realized that these mistakes, these cognitive biases, 0:40:56.480 --> 0:41:00.960 they can be predictable. Right, you can actually map how 0:41:01.040 --> 0:41:04.600 somebody's going to make a bad decision. And this became 0:41:04.640 --> 0:41:06.960 the basis of behavioral economics. 0:41:07.200 --> 0:41:12.880 Yeah, he well, let's talk about this this prospect theory, 0:41:12.880 --> 0:41:16.640 because this was from Tversky and Konomon. It was an 0:41:16.680 --> 0:41:21.080 article from nineteen seventy nine from this idea of prospect 0:41:21.160 --> 0:41:25.160 theory colon an Analysis of Decision under Risk, and Livia 0:41:25.160 --> 0:41:27.919 says it's probably the most cited economics paper of all time. 0:41:28.040 --> 0:41:31.600 Like this was a revolutionary, landmark paper and they didn't 0:41:31.600 --> 0:41:33.799 write a ton of papers for researchers. They did like 0:41:33.840 --> 0:41:37.319 eight totalah, which just shows what an outsize impact they had. 0:41:38.440 --> 0:41:41.600 But they talk about in this paper a lot of 0:41:41.880 --> 0:41:46.640 attitudes about risk. One is loss a version, which is 0:41:46.680 --> 0:41:49.760 the idea that you're going to experience more emotional suffering 0:41:49.800 --> 0:41:53.600 when you lose money, then you will gain happiness if 0:41:53.600 --> 0:41:58.120 you gain something, So you may pass up an offer 0:41:58.520 --> 0:42:00.759 that gives you equal odds of winning twenty five or 0:42:00.800 --> 0:42:04.080 losing twenty. There was another example I think kind of 0:42:04.080 --> 0:42:06.360 gets it across more is there was an experiment in 0:42:06.400 --> 0:42:09.560 nineteen ninety six where they gave participants a lottery ticket 0:42:10.160 --> 0:42:12.680 and before you scratched it off or whatever, let's say 0:42:12.719 --> 0:42:14.120 it was a scratch off. They said, all right, well, 0:42:14.160 --> 0:42:17.680 hold on, before you do that, I'll give you another 0:42:17.760 --> 0:42:21.840 lottery ticket plus ten dollars in cash. And for no 0:42:22.400 --> 0:42:26.359 logical reason at all, people tended to think that that 0:42:26.400 --> 0:42:29.279 first ticket was the one, even though there was no 0:42:29.400 --> 0:42:31.399 it was a lottery ticket, there was no difference at all. 0:42:31.719 --> 0:42:33.560 They would turn down that extra ten bucks. I think 0:42:33.640 --> 0:42:35.480 less than fifty percent of them took that deal. 0:42:35.760 --> 0:42:38.760 Yeah, because in giving away or trading that first ticket, 0:42:38.840 --> 0:42:42.680 they risked a loss even though the gain was right there. 0:42:42.880 --> 0:42:46.480 Just trading the ticket, you got an extra ten bucks, right, Yeah, 0:42:45.960 --> 0:42:51.120 that's fairly irrational. We also have a lot of trouble 0:42:51.760 --> 0:42:56.160 with rare events. Yeah, we tend to overestimate them. It 0:42:56.200 --> 0:42:57.680 can be a positive event and it can be a 0:42:57.680 --> 0:43:02.480 negative event. But we're really bad at probabilities and statistics. 0:43:02.960 --> 0:43:09.960 And this is essentially it's like you won't let your 0:43:10.040 --> 0:43:12.960 kid walk to school because you're afraid of your kid 0:43:12.960 --> 0:43:15.560 being kidnapped, even though the chance of your kid being 0:43:15.640 --> 0:43:21.200 kidnapped is just ridiculously low. It's technically irrational, even though 0:43:21.360 --> 0:43:24.440 very few people would fault you for that, but it's 0:43:24.480 --> 0:43:26.040 still an irrational decision. 0:43:26.640 --> 0:43:29.560 Yeah, for sure. We talked about that in the. 0:43:31.200 --> 0:43:33.280 Well was it free range kids? 0:43:33.960 --> 0:43:36.560 Maybe I can't remember, tied in with a satanic panic 0:43:36.600 --> 0:43:38.920 and stuff like that I think definitely did back in 0:43:38.960 --> 0:43:42.800 the day. Relative rather than absolute terms. That is a theory, 0:43:43.960 --> 0:43:48.319 monetary theory where and there's a great example. You might 0:43:48.400 --> 0:43:50.399 drive an extra ten minutes in a car to buy 0:43:50.400 --> 0:43:52.920 a shirt that you know is selling the shirt for 0:43:52.960 --> 0:43:55.120 twenty bucks rather than the one closer to you that 0:43:55.160 --> 0:43:57.520 sells it for thirty. But you're not going to do 0:43:57.560 --> 0:44:00.040 that because that saves you ten bucks. You won't s 0:44:00.200 --> 0:44:04.279 twenty dollars on a car even though you may even 0:44:04.400 --> 0:44:06.960 have to drive five minutes down the road, because you're like, oh, 0:44:07.040 --> 0:44:10.120 it's twenty dollars, the car is twenty thousand. But it's 0:44:10.200 --> 0:44:13.440 really a relative, you know, absolute thing, as you're saving 0:44:13.800 --> 0:44:15.360 twice as much money as you did on that T 0:44:15.480 --> 0:44:16.080 shirt purchase. 0:44:16.320 --> 0:44:19.840 Right, But it's like you said, it's all relative again, 0:44:20.160 --> 0:44:25.040 totally irrational. But all this stuff relates to economics, and 0:44:25.480 --> 0:44:27.520 like you said, this stuff can be replicated. There's a 0:44:27.560 --> 0:44:32.560 twenty twenty study that looked at the prospect theory in particular, 0:44:33.120 --> 0:44:37.279 and this major study was conducted in nineteen countries and 0:44:37.360 --> 0:44:40.960 thirteen different languages and held up not bad. No, that's 0:44:41.040 --> 0:44:44.440 not bad at all. And so it's not just economics. 0:44:44.480 --> 0:44:48.160 It's not just being exploited by the wine list or 0:44:49.400 --> 0:44:53.480 you know, Kentucky Fried Chicken or something like that to 0:44:53.600 --> 0:44:57.960 make you buy their stuff. This actually this can have 0:44:58.040 --> 0:45:01.360 like life and death consequences too, although I guess so 0:45:01.480 --> 0:45:04.279 can wine. In Kentucky Fried chicken. 0:45:04.719 --> 0:45:06.960 You know what you're gonna get a Kentucky fried chicken? 0:45:07.000 --> 0:45:08.080 What PEPSI? 0:45:08.760 --> 0:45:11.359 That's right, you will get some pepsi. You know how 0:45:11.400 --> 0:45:13.880 I know that cause you just had Kentucky fried Chicken. 0:45:14.480 --> 0:45:16.720 I did. After our tour. I was a little tired 0:45:16.760 --> 0:45:19.240 and needed just some fried chicken. So I got fried chicken. 0:45:19.280 --> 0:45:21.360 What do you get just the original or extra crispy? 0:45:21.360 --> 0:45:23.280 Because you're crazy if you don't get extra crispy. 0:45:23.760 --> 0:45:28.400 I get extra crispy. But they were out they could satisfy. 0:45:28.480 --> 0:45:30.400 I got the three piece. They had two more pieces 0:45:30.400 --> 0:45:32.160 of extra crispy, and they asked if one piece of 0:45:33.239 --> 0:45:36.319 O R was available, and I was like, yeah, sure, 0:45:36.320 --> 0:45:37.920 I'm not gonna not eat a piece of chicken. 0:45:40.400 --> 0:45:43.200 It is good. They do chicken, right, Yeah they do. 0:45:43.920 --> 0:45:45.520 Did you get the mashed potatoes and gravy? 0:45:45.960 --> 0:45:48.680 You know it? Buddy times too, and extra biscuit. I 0:45:48.680 --> 0:45:52.760 went all in. It was a rare treat eating frenzy. 0:45:52.880 --> 0:45:53.920 Did you drink a PEPSI? 0:45:54.360 --> 0:45:54.719 I did? 0:45:54.840 --> 0:45:58.160 Awesome. Well that all fits somehow. I don't know how, 0:45:58.239 --> 0:46:02.960 but it somehow fits this this episode so where I 0:46:03.040 --> 0:46:05.120 was saying that this can be life and death, as 0:46:05.160 --> 0:46:08.840 with medicine, because although doctors have God complexes and like 0:46:08.880 --> 0:46:11.759 to present themselves as infallible, they are quite fallible. They're 0:46:11.840 --> 0:46:15.359 humans and they can suffer the same cognitive biases as us. 0:46:15.800 --> 0:46:19.240 But they have your life in their hands. We rarely 0:46:19.280 --> 0:46:21.200 have others' lives in our hands. 0:46:21.880 --> 0:46:23.439 Yeah. Do you watch the show the Pit? 0:46:24.000 --> 0:46:26.759 I tried and I just did not grab me. I 0:46:26.800 --> 0:46:28.960 gave it like ten minutes, but I hear nothing but 0:46:29.040 --> 0:46:29.640 good things. 0:46:30.160 --> 0:46:31.799 Yeah, I mean, I really like it. I've never been 0:46:31.840 --> 0:46:33.680 a hospital show guy, so this is kind of one 0:46:33.719 --> 0:46:36.000 of my first forays into it, but I like it 0:46:36.000 --> 0:46:38.320 a lot. I haven't started season two, but I noticed 0:46:38.320 --> 0:46:42.440 when reading through these bias like medical biases that they do, 0:46:43.320 --> 0:46:45.520 or at least Noah Wiley does a really good job 0:46:45.560 --> 0:46:49.759 on the show with these younger residents trying to bust 0:46:49.840 --> 0:46:51.840 through and a lot of this stuff comes up. He 0:46:51.880 --> 0:46:57.040 doesn't say, hey, that's affect heuristic. He just will talk 0:46:57.080 --> 0:46:59.440 about what that is. And now that I know the definitions, 0:46:59.440 --> 0:47:01.640 I'm like, oh, he's talking about as an outcome bias 0:47:02.239 --> 0:47:05.200 or an anchoring bias. It's fairly interesting. 0:47:05.320 --> 0:47:08.160 Yeah. Rather than say, like being presented with a really 0:47:08.239 --> 0:47:10.680 high price for a bottle of wine to make the 0:47:10.719 --> 0:47:14.080 other overpriced wine seem like a bargain, this can be 0:47:14.200 --> 0:47:17.760 like your first lab work comes back and that forms 0:47:17.800 --> 0:47:23.480 the anchoring biased impression of your condition. And even as 0:47:23.640 --> 0:47:27.080 new lab work comes back, that doctor may fail to 0:47:27.520 --> 0:47:31.440 adjust their view of your condition because they're not taking 0:47:31.480 --> 0:47:34.040 into account this new stuff. They're giving more weight to 0:47:34.080 --> 0:47:37.560 that original, that original number. So yeah, and that's just 0:47:37.600 --> 0:47:39.959 the anchoring bias. The way that it can affect there's, 0:47:40.040 --> 0:47:41.759 like you said, there's all sorts of other ways for 0:47:41.800 --> 0:47:44.279 it to happen, and all of it can result in 0:47:44.719 --> 0:47:48.800 poorer outcomes for patients just because their doctors are humans, 0:47:49.239 --> 0:47:52.919 and we don't really approach cognitive biases in a really 0:47:53.960 --> 0:47:55.560 methodical or deliberate way. 0:47:56.640 --> 0:47:58.640 Yeah. They In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, 0:47:58.640 --> 0:48:00.359 they do this so much on the show. The show 0:48:00.400 --> 0:48:05.600 could be called medical confirmation bias the show because you 0:48:05.640 --> 0:48:08.000 see it all the time. Outcome bias is when a 0:48:08.080 --> 0:48:10.960 shift in the patient's health you're convinced is the result 0:48:10.960 --> 0:48:13.600 of a treatment, like it's because of that thing I did, 0:48:13.880 --> 0:48:17.759 or affect heuristic that I mentioned, an emotional reaction to 0:48:17.800 --> 0:48:21.799 a patient, you know, kind of overrunning you know, deliberating 0:48:21.800 --> 0:48:24.000 on this thing in a logical way. This happens all 0:48:24.080 --> 0:48:25.000 the time on the show. 0:48:25.480 --> 0:48:28.600 Yeah. Well, another field that it happens with this forensic science, 0:48:28.640 --> 0:48:31.000 which we've gone to great links to kind of point out, 0:48:31.120 --> 0:48:35.120 is junks in the most in most cases, and a 0:48:35.160 --> 0:48:37.759 lot of that junk is just based on cognitive biases. 0:48:38.719 --> 0:48:41.080 Yeah, for sure. I mean certainly the way they do 0:48:41.120 --> 0:48:45.120 lineups is flawed. I mean the way they I feel like, 0:48:45.200 --> 0:48:46.759 you're right, we've done this a lot on the on 0:48:46.800 --> 0:48:49.239 the show. The way they have done a lot of 0:48:49.280 --> 0:48:53.359 this is super flawed. And I think maybe they're looking 0:48:53.360 --> 0:48:54.960 at it some but not a lot. 0:48:55.239 --> 0:49:00.759 No, So if you want to fight cognitive bias in 0:49:00.800 --> 0:49:03.920 your own mind, Chuck, what do you do? What do 0:49:04.000 --> 0:49:04.279 you do? 0:49:05.800 --> 0:49:07.560 Well, there's a list of good tips here, and I 0:49:07.560 --> 0:49:10.640 think these are pretty good tips. The first one is 0:49:10.719 --> 0:49:12.640 just being aware that you have these, which is something 0:49:12.680 --> 0:49:14.400 that we've already kind of kind of worked through on 0:49:14.440 --> 0:49:16.200 this episode, except for you, of course, because you don't 0:49:16.200 --> 0:49:21.680 have these. Sure, but studies show that like just being aware, 0:49:22.360 --> 0:49:24.359 it's not one of those things where like, well, being 0:49:24.360 --> 0:49:26.440 aware is have the problem. It's like being aware seems 0:49:26.480 --> 0:49:27.600 like two percent of the problem. 0:49:27.760 --> 0:49:32.480 Yeah, it's like you're aware that you have an unconscious bias. 0:49:32.520 --> 0:49:35.560 It doesn't make you understand the bias. You just know 0:49:35.719 --> 0:49:39.200 that they're there, Right, that's the problem with is unconscious. 0:49:40.000 --> 0:49:40.359 What else? 0:49:40.520 --> 0:49:43.400 There are some like actual things you can do like 0:49:43.560 --> 0:49:48.040 delay decision making. Yeah, don't don't come to snap judgments. 0:49:48.480 --> 0:49:52.279 Go get more information, Go get information from a contradictory 0:49:52.320 --> 0:49:55.800 source or different source or something like that. And then 0:49:55.920 --> 0:49:57.839 it like kind of tied into that. You can have 0:49:57.960 --> 0:50:02.080 like personal like rule like if there's a big decision, 0:50:02.320 --> 0:50:06.520 you will not make that decision until you've slept on it. Yeah, 0:50:06.560 --> 0:50:10.799 for example, don't buy a TV unless your friend says, yeah, 0:50:11.040 --> 0:50:12.040 good idea. 0:50:12.960 --> 0:50:17.200 Try and consider your past experience for sure, because optimism 0:50:17.280 --> 0:50:21.600 biased could come into play, like hey, worked out last time, yeah, 0:50:21.640 --> 0:50:23.880 Like why would I why would I take more time 0:50:24.080 --> 0:50:24.600 this time? 0:50:24.920 --> 0:50:27.160 Yeah? And that's another way that you can kind of 0:50:27.200 --> 0:50:29.680 do that. An exercise you can do is write down 0:50:29.880 --> 0:50:33.000 your expectations for an outcome and then go back and 0:50:33.040 --> 0:50:34.960 look at it afterward and see if you were right 0:50:35.040 --> 0:50:38.000 or not. Can kind of help you realize like, uh, 0:50:38.080 --> 0:50:40.759 I do kind of tend toward the optimism bias. 0:50:41.000 --> 0:50:43.280 Yeah, because I believe that was one of the other biases. 0:50:43.480 --> 0:50:46.440 Is even like it is hard to recognize because you're 0:50:46.440 --> 0:50:49.520 biased and that you misremember what you thought going into it. 0:50:49.520 --> 0:50:51.280 So writing it down is a good that's a good. 0:50:51.120 --> 0:50:54.360 One, right, But if you're super super unconsciously biased, you 0:50:54.440 --> 0:50:57.319 might be like someone else wrote this in my handwriting, Right, 0:50:58.040 --> 0:50:59.120 I've never been this wrong. 0:51:00.920 --> 0:51:03.320 What about Thomas Bayes and Baysian reasoning. 0:51:03.840 --> 0:51:06.480 So he was a minister from the eighteenth century, and 0:51:06.560 --> 0:51:10.640 he basically came up with a standardized formula for taking 0:51:10.680 --> 0:51:14.840 into account the probability of an outcome, right that things 0:51:14.960 --> 0:51:18.120 aren't essentially so I saw this on less wrong dot 0:51:18.200 --> 0:51:21.080 org founded by one of the guys who wrote, if 0:51:21.120 --> 0:51:24.480 anyone builds it, everyone dies about Ai Eliotz or Yukowski. 0:51:25.080 --> 0:51:27.120 The whole point of less wrong dot org is to 0:51:27.360 --> 0:51:31.439 overcome your biases in a methodical way. And they love 0:51:31.520 --> 0:51:34.600 Baysian reasoning, and it basically says, there's no such thing 0:51:34.640 --> 0:51:39.440 as something is just true. Everything is just a probability, 0:51:39.480 --> 0:51:42.560 and you can kind of try to determine how probable 0:51:42.640 --> 0:51:46.600 something is based on whatever evidence you can gather about it. 0:51:46.680 --> 0:51:48.440 Just basically going through life like that. 0:51:49.080 --> 0:51:53.600 You know, who hates that website? Who l E s 0:51:53.800 --> 0:51:57.120 R O NNG That dude who started his own personal 0:51:57.280 --> 0:52:01.000 comedy website right, less wrong dot God. That's right, he's 0:52:01.040 --> 0:52:01.880 just getting smashed. 0:52:03.560 --> 0:52:04.279 What else, Chuck? 0:52:06.800 --> 0:52:08.840 What else is I cultivate a growth mindset? 0:52:09.080 --> 0:52:09.920 That's a big one. 0:52:10.239 --> 0:52:13.480 Hey, I make mistakes. I screw things up, and like 0:52:13.600 --> 0:52:16.120 I need to recognize that and try and grow from 0:52:16.120 --> 0:52:21.080 that rather than you know, just being confirmed with my 0:52:21.120 --> 0:52:22.280 own biases constantly. 0:52:22.640 --> 0:52:24.960 Yeah, maybe like looking around at some of the ways 0:52:25.000 --> 0:52:29.319 that you're commonly exploited, say like by advertisers, Like scarcity 0:52:29.400 --> 0:52:31.880 is one when somebody says act now supplies are limited. 0:52:31.920 --> 0:52:37.719 They're creating a scarcity mindset in you social proof basically 0:52:37.800 --> 0:52:40.200 like these people like this, so you probably should too, 0:52:40.200 --> 0:52:41.719 and you're like, oh, I should like that too. 0:52:42.320 --> 0:52:42.760 Yeah. 0:52:42.800 --> 0:52:45.680 And then two other things I saw. There's something called 0:52:46.360 --> 0:52:54.280 cognitive bias mod modification I think is what it is. Okay, 0:52:54.400 --> 0:52:57.400 you can use this for like treating anxiety, right, Like 0:52:57.480 --> 0:53:02.879 people like tend to seek out negative facial expressions. Oh yeah, 0:53:02.920 --> 0:53:07.040 and this treatment is like like here's a thousand frownie faces. 0:53:07.520 --> 0:53:10.840 Find the smiley face in there, and just screen after screen, 0:53:10.880 --> 0:53:13.359 you're looking for the smiley face, and you're training your 0:53:13.360 --> 0:53:18.640 brain to stop putting as much weight on negative facial expressions, 0:53:19.160 --> 0:53:23.839 just using like basically exploiting your cognitive bias to get 0:53:23.880 --> 0:53:25.440 over your cognitive bias. 0:53:25.840 --> 0:53:26.480 Oh wow. 0:53:26.719 --> 0:53:30.839 And then the last thing, Chuck is apparently AI are 0:53:30.880 --> 0:53:35.560 starting to show signs of emergent cognitive biases because they 0:53:35.640 --> 0:53:40.279 use heuristics too, so they're starting to make cognitive they're 0:53:40.280 --> 0:53:44.000 starting to make errors in judgment in predictable ways, which 0:53:44.000 --> 0:53:46.600 are cognitive biases, just like humans. 0:53:47.280 --> 0:53:48.879 Rob Zombie more human than human. 0:53:49.080 --> 0:53:51.479 That's right, you got anything else? 0:53:51.920 --> 0:53:52.759 I got nothing else. 0:53:52.840 --> 0:53:56.520 This is a good one. This is fun. Chuck, I'm going, well, 0:53:56.560 --> 0:53:59.160 since Chuck and I both liked this episode, that means 0:53:59.160 --> 0:54:02.440 we have no choice but for listener mail to be triggered. 0:54:02.719 --> 0:54:06.799 Right now, I'm going to call this follow up on 0:54:07.080 --> 0:54:11.920 a Sebastopol because I wondered what the connection there was, Hey, guys, 0:54:12.200 --> 0:54:15.960 because if you didn't listen Sebastopol, California, and we were 0:54:15.960 --> 0:54:20.160 talking about the Sebastopold in the Crimean War, and I 0:54:20.200 --> 0:54:22.879 was like, there's no way that's a coincidence. And it's not. Hey, guys, 0:54:22.920 --> 0:54:26.200 listening to the podcast on the Light Brigade from Sonoma County. 0:54:26.320 --> 0:54:31.400 Our Sebastopol was named after Sebastopod. And here's a little information. 0:54:31.640 --> 0:54:35.440 The settlement was apparently originally named pine Grove, and the 0:54:35.520 --> 0:54:40.040 name changed to Sebastopol was attributed to a bar fight 0:54:40.120 --> 0:54:44.879 in the eighteen fifties which allegedly compared by a bystander 0:54:45.440 --> 0:54:49.799 to the long siege of the seaport of Sebastopol during 0:54:49.840 --> 0:54:53.440 the Crimean War. Wow, so the original name survives in 0:54:53.480 --> 0:54:56.440 the name of the Pine Grove General Store downtown only, 0:54:57.280 --> 0:55:00.920 and that is it. There's also the rush there Russian 0:55:00.960 --> 0:55:04.000 River Valley, so apparently there are some Russian influence in 0:55:04.040 --> 0:55:05.480 that area which I didn't know about. And that is 0:55:05.480 --> 0:55:06.279 from Marsha Ford. 0:55:06.920 --> 0:55:09.879 Yeah. Also, we want to apologize to all of our 0:55:10.600 --> 0:55:13.759 Iron Maiden fans who wrote in to be like, yeah, 0:55:14.120 --> 0:55:17.000 that song of the Trooper is about that whole battle. 0:55:18.000 --> 0:55:21.120 Yeah, I didn't know. I am not. I like Iron Maiden, 0:55:21.640 --> 0:55:23.600 but I didn't have as much shame upon my head 0:55:23.640 --> 0:55:26.760 as you. But you didn't reading the lyrics, it doesn't 0:55:26.800 --> 0:55:31.640 say you know crimean war in charge of the light Brigade, 0:55:31.640 --> 0:55:31.920 does it? 0:55:32.400 --> 0:55:34.880 I don't know. I haven't heard it in a while. 0:55:35.200 --> 0:55:37.239 I'm a big fan of the poster. I love the 0:55:37.280 --> 0:55:38.120 poster a lot. 0:55:38.440 --> 0:55:39.040 Yeah, me too. 0:55:39.920 --> 0:55:42.399 Well, sorry all of you Iron Maiden fans out there. 0:55:42.440 --> 0:55:43.879 We'll try to do better next time. 0:55:44.040 --> 0:55:45.160 Yeah, missed opportunity. 0:55:45.200 --> 0:55:47.480 Who is that that wrote in about Sebastopol? 0:55:48.000 --> 0:55:49.040 That was Marcia, I believe. 0:55:49.080 --> 0:55:53.120 Thanks Marcia, Marcia, Marsha Marsha. We really appreciate you, and 0:55:53.160 --> 0:55:55.600 if you want to be like Marcia, you can email 0:55:55.680 --> 0:55:58.520 us as well. Send it off to Stuff podcast at 0:55:58.520 --> 0:56:03.520 iHeartRadio dot com. 0:56:03.680 --> 0:56:06.560 Stuff you Should Know is a production of iHeartRadio. For 0:56:06.640 --> 0:56:10.839 more podcasts Myheart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio, app, Apple podcasts, 0:56:10.920 --> 0:56:12.760 or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.