Chapter 1 and 2 review

Availability heuristic:

judging the frequency of an event or attribute by asking ourselves how easily we can bring examples to mind from memory.

Considering the opposite:

a technique to reduce biased evaluation of evidence, where we ask ourselves either one of two questions: (i) How would I have treated this evidence if I had the opposite belief? (ii) How would I have treated this evidence if it went the opposite way?

Optional stopping:

allowing the search for evidence to end when convenient; this may skew the evidence if (perhaps unbeknownst to us) we are more likely to stop looking when the evidence collected so far supports our first or favored view.

Cognitive illusions:

an involuntary error in our thinking or memory due to System 1, which continues to seem correct even if we consciously realize it's not.

Ch. 2: MINDSET

Learning Objectives: --> The importance of having the goal of discovery rather than defense --> What is meant by "accuracy," as it applies to binary beliefs and to degrees of confidence --> The three stages of reasoning with evidence --> How confirmation bias can involve restricted search, including possibility freeze --> The need to deliberately seek out alternative views as well as evidence supporting them --> How confirmation bias can involve biased evaluation of evidence --> The importance of decoupling to overcome biased evaluation --> Why the bias blindspot means it's not helpful to just remind ourselves to be fair --> The introspection illusion and the tricky role of self-deception in motivated reasoning --> Why opposing sides of controversial issues are wrong to accuse each other of deliberate bias --> Two ways of considering the opposite to help overcome biased evaluation

Ch. 1 : REASONING

Learning Objectives: --> the difference between specific and general reasoning skills --> why good reasoning requires facts, skills, and the right mindset the features that distinguish System 1 and System 2 processes --> how conflict between the two systems generates cognitive illusions --> the usefulness of the elephant and rider metaphor --> how we can be led into pitfalls by a stubborn, distracted, or motivated mind -->the broad outlines of availability heuristic, belief perseverance, confirmation bias, evidence primacy effect, and motivated reasoning --> why the take-home lesson is not that we can never "trust our gut"

Heuristic:

a cognitive shortcut used to bypass the more effortful type of reasoning that would be required to arrive at an accurate answer. Heuristics are susceptible to systematic and predictable errors.

Cognitive pitfalls:

a common, predictable error in human reasoning. Includes mental glitches uncovered by cognitive psychologists, as well as logical fallacies.

Evidence:

a fact is evidence for a claim if coming to know it should make us more confident in that claim. The notion of evidence is more rigorously defined in Chapter 5.

Argument:

a series of claims presented as support for a conclusion.

Biased evaluation:

evaluating the strength of potential evidence in a way that is influenced by our initial view, whether it's motivated or not. This is one mechanism that leads to confirmation bias.

Motivated reasoning:

forming or maintaining a belief at least partly because, at some level, we want it to be true. This manifests itself in selective standards for belief, seeking and accepting evidence that confirms desired beliefs, and ignoring or discounting evidence that disconfirms them.

Evidence primacy effect:

in a process where information is acquired over time, the tendency to give early information more evidential weight than late information. This tendency arises when we develop opinions early on, leading to confirmation bias when interpreting later information, or simply a failure to pay as much attention to it.

Skilled intuition:

the ability to make fast and accurate judgments about a situation by recognizing learned patterns in it. This requires training under specific kinds of conditions (see Chapter 11).

Updating on the evidence:

revising our prior beliefs in response to new evidence, so that the confidence we have in a belief will match its degree of support.

Decoupling:

separating our prior degree of confidence in a claim from our assessments of the strength of a new argument or a new piece of evidence about that claim.

System 2:

the collection of cognitive processes that are directly controlled, effortful, and transparent. (The distinction between the two systems is one of degree, and the two systems often overlap, but it is still useful to distinguish them.)

System 1:

the collection of cognitive processes that feel automatic and effortless but not transparent. These include specialized processes interpret sensory data and are the source of our impressions, feelings, intuitions, and impulses. (The distinction between the two systems is one of degree, and the two systems often overlap, but it is still useful to distinguish them.)

Transparency:

the degree to which information processing itself (rather than just its output) is done consciously, in such a way that one is aware of the steps being taken.

Accuracy:

the extent to which our beliefs reflect the way things actually are, much like a map reflects the way that a territory is. applies not only to binary beliefs, but also to degrees of confidence. For example, if the cat is not on the mat, then believing that the cat is definitely on the mat is less than believing it's probably on the mat.

Search stage:

the first stage of the reasoning process, where we identify a range of possibilities and any evidence that may support them.

Cognitive reflection:

the habit of checking initial impressions supplied by System 1, and overriding them when appropriate.

Introspection Illusion:

the misguided assumption that our own cognitive biases are transparent to us, and as a result, that we can diagnose these biases in ourselves through introspection.

Evaluation stage:

the second stage in the reasoning process, when we assess the strength of the potential evidence we've gathered.

Restricted search:

the tendency not to seeking out the full range of alternative views or the full range of evidence that favors each view.

Belief perseverance:

the tendency to continue holding a belief even if its original support has been discredited, and in the face of contrary evidence.

Bias blindspot:

the tendency to fail to recognize biases as they affect us, even when we recognize them in others.

Confirmation bias:

the tendency to notice or construe things as evidence for our pre-existing views, and to neglect or discount evidence for contrary views. Confirmation bias can be present with or without an underlying motive to have the belief in the first place.

Possibility freeze:

the tendency to only consider one or two possibilities in detail, and thereby end up too confident that one of them is correct.

Updating stage:

the third and final stage in the reasoning process, when we revise our degrees of confidence appropriately.

Degrees of confidence:

treating beliefs as coming with different levels of certainty. Just as we can be absolutely certain that x is true, we can also think that x is probably true, that x might be true, or that x is probably not true.

Binary belief:

treating beliefs as if they are on/off. For example, we either believe that the cat is on the mat or that the cat is not on the mat, without allowing for different degrees of confidence.