anitsh
commented
2 years ago The authors used a form of verbal shadowing, which impairs aspects of working memory and executive function). For those not under cognitive load, judgments mirrored past work: Intentional harm was viewed as much worse than accidental harm, and accidental harm was viewed as moderately worse than cases in which the protagonists had a benign intent and did not cause harm (though it occurred through other means). Thus, participants cared both about the protagonist's intent and whether they caused harm or were merely present when it occurred. For those under cognitive load, a very different pattern emerged. Now, accidental harm was viewed as much worse than cases involving coincidental harm. Most surprisingly, participants now no longer viewed cases of intentional and accidental harm as different—they viewed them as equally bad. Importantly, the authors also showed that this pattern of results was specific to moral judgment and was not due to an inability to decode information about intentions under load.
Our goal is to extend this paradigm to cover the two key features of the outcome-to-intent shift.
The authors included cases of intentional harm, accidental harm, and coincidental harm, but not cases of attempted harm. Cases of attempted harm are a critical comparison case, as they show less of a developmental shift than cases of accidental harm.
Cognitive load alters judgments of accidental harm, but not that it alters them relatively more than judgments of attempted harm.
The impact of cognitive load on the processing of intentions versus outcomes.
The impact of cognitive load have been interpreted as demonstrating that cognitive load reduces the impact of intentions on moral judgment.
Congnitive Bias
We choose the familiar over the unfamiliar because we are scared of the unknown. That’s the basis of the cognitive bias called ambiguity aversion bias.
We must understand how our brains are hardwired to operate.
Biases collectively influence much of our thoughts and ultimately, decision making. And sometimes many of these biases are inevitable. We simply don't have the time to evaluate every thought in every decision for the presence of any bias. But understanding these biases is very helpful in learning how they can lead us to poor decisions in life.
Cognitive biases are a major critical thinking barrier. We must keep them in mind when you are about to make an important decision.
Our mind gets so used to running along certain neural pathways that it can’t easily change. We become less flexible thinking.
Emotions are probably the biggest critical thinking barrier.
Helps improves your decision-making skills.
Cognitive biases heavily distort our thinking. We think our thinking is good but we’re blind, unaware of the errors.
Since there are so many things that happen all the time. The brain creates something like thinking shortcuts.
Gerd Gigerenzer , a German psychologist, who has studied the use of bounded rationality and heuristics in decision making.
He has criticized the framing of cognitive biases as errors in judgment, and favors interpreting them as arising from rational deviations from logical thought.
Bounded rationality is the idea that rationality is limited when individuals make decisions, and under these limitations, rational individuals will select a decision that is satisfactory rather than optimal.
Limitations include the difficulty of the problem requiring a decision, the cognitive capability of the mind, and the time available to make the decision. Decision-makers, in this view, act as satisficers, seeking a satisfactory solution, with everything that he/she have at the moment rather than an optimal solution.
Therefore, humans do not undertake a full cost-benefit analysis to determine the optimal decision, but rather, choose an option that fulfills their adequacy criteria.
An example of this being within organizations when they must adhere to the operating conditions of their company, this has the opportunity to result in bounded rationality as the organization is not able to choose the optimal option.
A cognitive bias is a systematic pattern of deviation from norm or rationality in judgment. Individuals create their own "subjective reality" from their perception of the input. An individual's construction of reality, not the objective input, may dictate their behavior in the world. Thus, cognitive biases may sometimes lead to perceptual distortion, inaccurate judgment, illogical interpretation, or what is broadly called irrationality.
What got you here won’t get you there. You need to unlearn certain principles and tactics so you can make room for better ones.
A common reason people stagnate is because they don’t update their mental models. We are prone to seeking things that confirm our existing beliefs. We relentlessly search for facts that support everything we think. But this leads us to nowhere. We simply stay in the same position. Never advancing.
Something that often happens in our daily life and as well in big organizations is that they hold to things they did for years. Never updating their views. That’s why the following is considered the most dangerous phrase in business: “We’ve always done it this way!”
But as smart folks say, “What got you here won’t get you there.”
Or if I can slightly change a quote from the great book Accelerated Expertise, your “learning thinking advances when flawed mental models are replaced, and is stable when a model is refined and gets harder to disconfirm.”
All of this requires abandoning/unlearning outdated concepts that you currently hold and replacing them with better ones.
Different types of thinking
Critical thinking is your ability to analyze a piece of information from different perspectives while recognizing your own biases. Plus, realize that in our world, a single action rarely has a single cause. There are always multiple consequences.
Challenging your initial thoughts is the best way to find the truth.
Useful questions to ignite critical thinking: What’s another way to look at this issue? Who would be affected by this? What is the real problem I am trying to solve
Concrete Thinking, thinking inside the box. Unlike critical thinking, you are making conclusions based on your first associations without giving much thought to what might happen or what is the greater meaning.
Useful questions to avoid concrete thinking: Is it true? What is the evidence that supports the claim? What is the evidence that doesn’t support the claim?
Abstract thinking is your ability to understand the greater meaning. You no longer see only objects. You make associations. You make conclusions while taking into consideration your feelings and emotions. Make associations and analogies. Creative people are considered abstract thinkers. they take one simple idea and expand it.
Questions to ignite abstract thinking: How this idea relates to the bigger picture? Can I make this simpler? How can I make this more interesting?
Reflective thinking is quite simple: You reflect on an idea, concept, a plan, to improve it in some way. Reflective thinking is essential for finding solutions to problems and overcoming obstacles. We take all relevant facts, so you can find a better solution to the problem.
This type of thinking is also valuable to: Identify areas for change and improvement. Respond adequately to new challenges. Use existing solutions applied to different domains to solve problems.
It allows to create an unbiased analysis of your current situation, like the skills we have and figure out where exactly we need to further develop.
Good questions to summon reflective thinking: What can I do with what I know? What did I learn from the event that I did not know before? Based on what I have learned, how should I act in the future?
Creative thinking is the skill to construct something new, original, unusually good, and even bizarrely strange. The goal is to come up with fresh ideas.
It allows concepts from different domains to enter the scene and alter views. We are proactively trying to connect pieces that initially might seem that they don’t fit, but try to see what will happen.
An important part of creative thinking is to let your mind wander. People commonly fail at creative thinking because they judge their ideas too soon. Never allowing them to fully develop. The reality is that good ideas emerge after a handful of bad ideas.
Questions to ignite creative thinking: If I have all the LEGOs in the world, what would I build? What do I hope will be invented in 100 years? How would I approach building it today?
Non-directed thinking, also called associate thinking, can be approached in two ways.
The first one, as noted, is when people aimlessly wander. They don’t direct their thoughts to a goal of some sort because they don’t have such.
The other way is to purposefully let your mind bounce around. You do this to disengage for a while and allow the random thoughts that emerge to give you fresh ideas to solve your problems.
Questions to give yourself some sort of direction when applying associative thinking: What ignited the current chain of thoughts – a feeling, an event? Should I keep pursuing the concepts or steer my mind to another concept? Can I apply the thoughts I had to my ongoing problems?
Divergent thinking is an ability to find creative solutions to problems by summoning several answers and thinking about alternative scenarios.
The problem with divergent thinking is that you are limited by your own thinking. Brainstorming sessions can help. You can ask for help.
Divergent thinking might seem pretty similar to critical thinking. It’s not. Critical thinking is best used to find errors in your judgment while divergent – also known as lateral thinking – is more focused on moving from one known idea to new ideas.
Questions to ignite divergent thinking: Ask why as many times as you can: Why does this exist? Why it was done the way it is? Choose a random word from the dictionary – say pencil. How do the characteristics of the pencil apply to your problem? For instance, a pencil has an eraser. What do I need to erase to move forward? Create a list of provocative claims. How can I use the most outlandish ones to move my thinking forward?
When you mix the above thinking types together, you can move away from your ordinary thinking and find better solutions to handle your daily challenges.
escape the concepts’ society and all major tech companies are trying to force upon. focus less on what others are sharing online and more on your own wants and needs.
In the world of systems thinking, everything is related. It’s a great way to understand complex ideas and find the perfect spot to interfere to make a positive contribution.
No one ever teaches us how to think better. We simply try our best. Improving your ability to think starts with recognizing the need to make improvements.
Understand the value of improving your cognitive skills. We can probably spot mistakes in our ability to reason and the way we make judgments. Plus, realize the need to expand your skill set.
Widely Viewed Biases
Dunning-Kruger Effect
In essence, it means that more competent practitioners underestimate their abilities while those with less expertise believe they are better than they really are. Some of the inaccurate evaluation of skills relates to an ignorance of what competency actually looks like.
As Donald Rumsfeld infamously said, “There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.”.
In other words, less competent individuals don’t know what they don’t know. Keep the Dunning-Kruger effect in mind when someone on your team becomes enamored with yet another technology fad.
Old Guard vs New Guard
In any organization -- especially a rapidly scaling org -- you will have an "old guard" meets "new guard" dynamic. When you see the patterns, it is easier to approach this with empathy and curiosity. There is rarely right/wrong...rather different perspectives.
Conway's Law
Any organization that designs a system (defined more broadly here than just information systems) will inevitably produce a design whose structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure.
Groupthink
Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Cohesiveness, or the desire for cohesiveness, in a group may produce a tendency among its members to agree at all costs. This causes the group to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation. HBR example article
The Confirmation Bias
The confirmation bias is the tendency to listen more often to information that confirms our existing beliefs. Through this bias, people tend to favor information that reinforces the things they already think or believe.
The Anchoring Bias
The anchoring bias is the tendency to be overly influenced by the first piece of information that we hear.
The Actor-Observer Bias
The actor-observer bias is the tendency to attribute our actions to external influences and other people's actions to internal ones.
The False Consensus Effect
The false consensus effect is the tendency people have to overestimate how much other people agree with their own beliefs, behaviors, attitudes, and values. For example:
Another key reason this cognitive bias trips us up so easily is that believing that other people are just like us is good for our self-esteem. It allows us to feel "normal" and maintain a positive view of ourselves in relation to other people.
This can lead people not only to incorrectly think that everyone else agrees with them—it can sometimes lead them to overvalue their own opinions. It also means that we sometimes don't consider how other people might feel when making choices.
The Halo Effect
The halo effect is the tendency for an initial impression of a person to influence what we think of them overall. Also known as the "physical attractiveness stereotype" or the "what is beautiful is 'good' principle" we are either influenced by or use the halo to influence others almost every day. For example:
One factor that may influence the halo effect is our tendency to want to be correct. If our initial impression of someone was positive, we want to look for proof that our assessment was accurate. It also helps people avoid experiencing cognitive dissonance, which involves holding contradictory beliefs.
This cognitive bias can have a powerful impact in the real world. For example, job applicants perceived as attractive and likable are also more likely to be viewed as competent, smart, and qualified for the job
The Self-Serving Bias
The self-serving bias is a tendency for people tend to give themselves credit for successes but lay the blame for failures on outside causes.
The Availability Heuristic
The availability heuristic is the tendency to estimate the probability of something happening based on how many examples readily come to mind. It is essentially a mental shortcut designed to save us time when we are trying to determine risk. The problem with relying on this way of thinking is that it often leads to poor estimates and bad decisions.
The Optimism Bias
The optimism bias is a tendency to overestimate the likelihood that good things will happen to us while underestimating the probability that negative events will impact our lives. Essentially, we tend to be too optimistic for our own good.
A satisficer is a pragmatic individual who makes decisions based on meeting requirements in a timely manner, finding the "good enough" solution and moving on.
The main parts of the brain. The Reptilian brain is in control of our innate and automatic self-preserving behavior patterns. Feeding, Fighting, Fleeing, and, you know. The Limbic brain manages the body’s movement. Also, it can record memories and behaviors that produced agreeable and disagreeable experiences. Its responsible for emotions. The Neocortex has many functions. The ability to reason, plan, solve complex problems, self-regulate and make decisions.
Resource