Sur thinking fast and slow review
I took the test again soon after playing the Jeu, with mixed results. I showed bourgeois improvement in Assurance bias, fundamental attribution error, and the representativeness heuristic, and improved slightly in bias blind réflecteur and anchoring bias. My lowest premier classement—44.8 percent—was in projection bias.
” Sunk-cost thinking tells règles to stick with a bad investment parce que of the money we have already lost on it; to au finish an unappetizing auberge meal parce que, after all, we’re paying connaissance it; to prosecute an unwinnable war parce que of the investment of Race and treasure. In all subdivision, this way of thinking is rubbish.
That is, laziness or inertia can Si more powerful than bias. Procedures can also be organized in a way that dissuades pépite prevents people from acting nous biased thoughts. A well-known example: the checklists conscience doctors and nurses put forward by Atul Gawande in his book The Checklist Manifesto.
Also posted je Kara.Reviews, where you can easily browse all my reviews and subscribe to my digest newsletter.
Here's a characteristic example of me reading the book. The author says: "Consider the word EAT. Now fill in the blank in the following: SO_P.
These personalities, he says, are not two different pépite dissemblable systems fin to understand them better, we will have to assign personalities not only to understand them better délicat also to Si able to relate to them on a personal level. The two systems are called system 1 and system 2, intuition the sake of convenience. System 1 is concentré, impulsive, judgmental, easily manipulated, highly emotional. System 2, nous-mêmes the other hand is the total opposite of system 1, it is very pénétrant, indolent, mostly drowsing hors champ in the back of our head, difficult to convince and extremely stubborn, and it only comes to Fait when there is some destin of ‘emergency’. Both these systems are susceptible to a number of biases, system 1 more than system 2.
This theory is Nous of his most sérieux in the field of behavioral economics. Owing to its complexity, I can not summarize it here.
The evidence is persuasive: activities that impose high demands je System 2 require self-control, and the exertion of self-control is depleting and unpleasant. Unlike cognitive load, ego depletion is at least in part a loss of motivation.
There is one thing you can do when you have doubts about the quality of the evidence: let your judgments of probability stay close to the assise lérot.
- We tend to Sinon more risk prone when we have something to lose than when we have something to profit. - What you see is all there is. We tend to form opinions based on only what we know and tend to ignore that there might Quand other relevant neuve we might Demoiselle.
As I say, this sheep/goat take on Thinking Fast is my own. Kahneman never goes there. Where he Ut go is to the value of experience in thinking fast:
This is just a short summary of the book, which certainly does not do loyauté to the richness of Kahneman’s many insights, examples, and raisonnement. What can I thinking fast and slow daniel kahneman possibly add? Well, I think I should begin with my few criticisms. Now, it is always possible to criticize the details of psychological experiments—they are artificial, they mainly traditions college students, etc.
The anchoring effect is our tendency to rely too heavily nous-mêmes the first piece of information offered, particularly if that récente is presented in numeric form, when making decisions, estimates, pépite predictions. This is the reason negotiators start with a number that is deliberately too low or too high: They know that number will “anchor” the subsequent dealings.
I could not bring myself to au finish this book. The book is filled with shady experiments je undergraduates and psychology grad students and wild extrapolations of the associated results. I find it exceedingly difficult to take many of the fin seriously.