The human brain is capable of performing 1,016 operations per second. This means that its power is still higher than the power of any computer in existence today. But this does not mean at all that there are no limits to the capabilities of our brain.
The simplest calculator will do much better and faster calculations, and memory is often unreliable. Plus, we tend to fall into the traps of our own consciousness, which continually force us to make dubious decisions and draw false conclusions. In this article, we will discuss eleven such pitfalls or, scientifically, "cognitive biases":
Confirmation bias
We love to agree with people who agree with us. That is why we mainly visit forums where people who share our political views gather and communicate with people whose tastes and opinions are similar to ours.
We do not like individuals, groups of people or sites that make us doubt our own righteousness - psychologist B. Skinner called this phenomenon "cognitive dissonance."
This selectivity leads to the "confirmation bias" - we often subconsciously perceive only the information that "feeds" our already existing judgments, ignoring or rejecting everything that conflicts with them and threatens to destroy our usual image of the world. By the way, the Internet only reinforces this trend.
Promotional video:
Intragroup bias
Intragroup bias is a phenomenon similar to the confirmation bias discussed above. This is a manifestation of our innate need to "feel like part of the team."
Oddly enough, this need is associated with the hormone oxytocin - the so-called "love molecule". This neurotransmitter, on the one hand, helps us create close connections with each other, on the other hand, it produces the opposite effect in relation to those who remained outside our "circle". He makes us suspicious, instills fear and even arrogance towards outsiders.
Ultimately, intragroup bias leads to an overestimation of the abilities and values of our own group and an underestimation of those about whom we have no idea.
Player error
This is a tendency to attach great importance to the events that have already taken place, the confidence that they can somehow affect our future. A classic example is a coin toss. If heads come up five times in a row, the likelihood that heads will come up next in our minds increases. In fact, it still remains 50/50.
The "positive expectation" trap inherent in gamers works in much the same way. It seems to them that after several losses, luck simply MUST turn to face them and the next game will bring them a huge jackpot. Likewise, the hot streak fallacy works.
Post-shopping rationalization
Each of us can recall at least one case when, after buying something unnecessary, non-working or prohibitively expensive, he tried to persuade himself that "it was worth it anyway." This is "post-shopping rationalization" - a program built into our minds, thanks to which we can feel a little better after doing some obvious stupidity.
This phenomenon is also known as the Stockholm buying syndrome - a subconscious desire at all costs to find an excuse for an unreasonable purchase - especially if it was very expensive.
Disregard for probability
Very few of us are afraid to get into a car, but most can admit to being in awe when we board a plane. Flying, without a doubt, is a completely unnatural state for humans and evokes associations with danger.
At the same time, almost everyone knows that the probability of dying in a car accident is many times greater than in a plane crash. And, nevertheless, our brain refuses to perceive this connection (statistically, the chance of dying while traveling by car is 1/84, by plane - 1/5000). The same phenomenon makes us afraid to die at the hands of terrorists, and not think about a much more real danger - falling down stairs or accidentally poisoning ourselves, for example.
Selectivity of observation
Selective observation is when we suddenly begin to notice something new for us everywhere. It seems to us that this “something” from a certain moment began to haunt us, while in reality it simply escaped our attention before.
Example: you buy a new car and from that moment you start seeing the same cars around and everywhere. The same happens with pregnant women who suddenly begin to notice a large number of other pregnant women around them. It could be a song or a rarely used expression. Whatever it is, the reason is not that this or that phenomenon has begun to occur more often, but that you have begun to pay attention to it more often. This also gives rise to the certainty that the similarity of any events or phenomena "cannot be a coincidence" (although in fact it can very well).
The effect of negativity
A person tends to pay more attention to bad news - and this does not mean at all the presence of psychological deviations. Scientists believe that we subconsciously perceive bad news as more important. Plus, bad news makes us more credible - perhaps because the good news seems too suspicious (or boring).
The writer and psychologist Stephen Pinker, for example, proves in his book that crime, cruelty and war on the planet are gradually becoming less and less, although most people are sure that the situation is only getting worse from year to year - a perfect example of how the negativity effect works.
Craze effect
We love to move with the crowd, although we may not realize it. When people around us choose a favorite, the part of our brain that is responsible for the individual turns off. We fall into a state of a kind of "group thinking".
For example, the thing that most of your coworkers think is “cool” has the most chances to be desired by you as well. Well, or in sports - if most of your entourage is rooting for some team, it is very difficult not to succumb to general enthusiasm.
Carryover effect
This is the tendency to think that other people think the same way as we do. Associated with this effect is a similar “false consensus” effect - the unfounded belief that others agree with us by default.
The carryover effect is that we overestimate our own "normality" and "typicality." For example, often people who are members of radical associations live with the belief that outside of their group many people share their beliefs, although there may not be such at all.
The effect of the moment
We find it difficult to correlate “ourselves today” with “tomorrows”, so we often allow ourselves to do what we like today, leaving “those who will be later” to take the rap for this fleeting pleasure. In a 1998 study, for example, 74% of shoppers opted for healthy fruit when choosing a meal for the week. And when they were asked to make a choice for the current day, 70% of the participants in the experiment reached for the chocolate.
Anchor effect
This effect is also called the "comparison trap". It has to do with our tendency to compare numbers (to get our bearings) while neglecting their true magnitude. This focus is actively used by sellers.
A classic example is a sale. We see two prices on the tag and evaluate the difference between them, not the prices themselves. If the “discount” is significant, it impresses us, even if the product is actually too expensive and discounted.
Restaurants also use this technique - they include exorbitantly expensive dishes on the menu so that the price for others, in comparison with them, seems quite reasonable. For the same reason, when making a choice, we often choose something in between - not too expensive, but not the cheapest.
