Difference between revisions of "Timeline of cognitive biases"

From Timelines
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(148 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 15: Line 15:
  
 
{| class="sortable wikitable"
 
{| class="sortable wikitable"
! Year !! Event type !! Details
+
! Year !! Category !! Type of event !! Details !! Definition (when applicable)
 
|-
 
|-
| 1747 || || "Lind conducted the first systematic [[w:Controlled experiment|clinical trial]] in 1747."<ref>Carlisle, Rodney (2004). ''Scientific American Inventions and Discoveries'', John Wiley & Songs, Inc., New Jersey. p. 393. {{isbn|0-471-24410-4}}.</ref>
+
| c.180 CE || Social bias || Concept development|| Many philosophers and social theorists observe and consider the phenomenon of belief in a just world, going back to at least as early as the [[w:Pyrrhonism|Pyrrhonist]] philosopher {{w|Sextus Empiricus}}, writing ''circa'' 180 CE, who argues against this belief.<ref>Sextus Empiricus, "Outlines of Pyrrhonism", Book 1, Chapter 13, Section 32</ref> || "The {{w|just-world hypothesis}} is the belief that people get what they deserve since life is fair."<ref>{{cite web |title=Just-World Hypothesis |url=https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Just-World+Hypothesis |website=alleydog.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1753 || || {{w|Anthropomorphism}} is first attested, originally in reference to the {{w|heresy}} of applying a human form to the [[w:Christianity|Christian]] [[w:God the Father|God]].<ref>{{citation |date=1753 |title=Chambers's Cyclopædia, Supplement }}</ref>}}<ref name=oed>''Oxford English Dictionary'', 1st ed. "anthropomorphism, ''n.''" Oxford University Press (Oxford), 1885.</ref>
+
| 1747 || || || "Lind conducted the first systematic [[w:Controlled experiment|clinical trial]] in 1747."<ref>Carlisle, Rodney (2004). ''Scientific American Inventions and Discoveries'', John Wiley & Songs, Inc., New Jersey. p. 393. {{isbn|0-471-24410-4}}.</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1776–1799 || || The {{w|declinism}} belief is traced back to {{w|Edward Gibbon}}'s work,<ref name="Salon1">{{cite web|last1=Miller|first1=Laura|title=Culture is dead — again|url=https://www.salon.com/2015/06/14/culture_is_dead_%E2%80%94_again_its_the_end_of_civilization_as_we_know_it_and_maybe_we_feel_fine/|website=Salon|accessdate=17 April 2018|date=2015-06-14}}</ref> ''{{w|The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire}}'', published between 1776 and 1788, where Gibbon argues that Rome collapsed due to the gradual loss of {{w|civic virtue}} among its citizens,<ref>J.G.A. Pocock, "Between Machiavelli and Hume: Gibbon as Civic Humanist and Philosophical Historian," ''Daedalus'' 105:3 (1976), 153–169; and in '''[[#Further reading|Further reading]]:''' Pocock, ''EEG'', 303–304; ''FDF'', 304–306.</ref>
+
| 1753 || || {{w|Anthropomorphism}} || {{w|Anthropomorphism}} is first attested, originally in reference to the {{w|heresy}} of applying a human form to the [[w:Christianity|Christian]] [[w:God the Father|God]].<ref>{{citation |date=1753 |title=Chambers's Cyclopædia, Supplement }}</ref><ref name=oed>''Oxford English Dictionary'', 1st ed. "anthropomorphism, ''n.''" Oxford University Press (Oxford), 1885.</ref> || "The interpretation of nonhuman things or events in terms of human characteristics"<ref>{{cite web |title=Anthropomorphism |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/anthropomorphism |website=britannica.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1796 || || {{w|Gambler's fallacy}}. {{w|Pierre-Simon Laplace}} describes in ''A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities'' the ways in which men calculate their probability of having sons: "I have seen men, ardently desirous of having a son, who could learn only with anxiety of the births of boys in the month when they expected to become fathers. Imagining that the ratio of these births to those of girls ought to be the same at the end of each month, they judged that the boys already born would render more probable the births next of girls." The expectant fathers feared that if more sons were born in the surrounding community, then they themselves would be more likely to have a daughter. This essay by Laplace is regarded as one of the earliest descriptions of the fallacy.<ref name="BarronLeider2010">{{cite journal|last1=Barron|first1=Greg|last2=Leider|first2=Stephen|title=The role of experience in the Gambler's Fallacy|journal=Journal of Behavioral Decision Making|url=http://www-personal.umich.edu/~leider/Papers/Gamblers_Fallacy.pdf|date=13 October 2009}}</ref>
+
| 1776–1799 || || {{w|Declinism}} || The {{w|declinism}} belief is traced back to {{w|Edward Gibbon}}'s work,<ref name="Salon1">{{cite web|last1=Miller|first1=Laura|title=Culture is dead — again|url=https://www.salon.com/2015/06/14/culture_is_dead_%E2%80%94_again_its_the_end_of_civilization_as_we_know_it_and_maybe_we_feel_fine/|website=Salon|accessdate=17 April 2018|date=2015-06-14}}</ref> ''{{w|The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire}}'', published between 1776 and 1788, where Gibbon argues that Rome collapsed due to the gradual loss of {{w|civic virtue}} among its citizens,<ref>J.G.A. Pocock, "Between Machiavelli and Hume: Gibbon as Civic Humanist and Philosophical Historian," ''Daedalus'' 105:3 (1976), 153–169; and in '''[[#Further reading|Further reading]]:''' Pocock, ''EEG'', 303–304; ''FDF'', 304–306.</ref> || "Declinism is the tendency to believe that the worst is to come"<ref>{{cite web |title=Why we feel the past is better compare to what the future holds |url=https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/declinism/ |website=thedecisionlab.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1848 || || {{w|Bandwagon effect}} "The phrase "jump on the bandwagon" first appeared in American politics in 1848 when [[Dan Rice]], a famous and popular circus clown of the time, used his bandwagon and its music to gain attention for his political campaign appearances. As his campaign became more successful, other politicians strove for a seat on the bandwagon, hoping to be associated with his success. Later, during the time of [[William Jennings Bryan]]'s 1900 presidential campaign, bandwagons had become standard in campaigns,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wordwizard.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=6642 |title=Bandwagon Effect |accessdate=2007-03-09}}</ref> and the phrase "jump on the bandwagon" was used as a derogatory term, implying that people were associating themselves with success without considering that with which they associated themselves."
+
| 1796 || || {{w|Gambler's fallacy}} || . {{w|Pierre-Simon Laplace}} describes in ''A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities'' the ways in which men calculate their probability of having sons: "I have seen men, ardently desirous of having a son, who could learn only with anxiety of the births of boys in the month when they expected to become fathers. Imagining that the ratio of these births to those of girls ought to be the same at the end of each month, they judged that the boys already born would render more probable the births next of girls." The expectant fathers feared that if more sons were born in the surrounding community, then they themselves would be more likely to have a daughter. This essay by Laplace is regarded as one of the earliest descriptions of the fallacy.<ref name="BarronLeider2010">{{cite journal|last1=Barron|first1=Greg|last2=Leider|first2=Stephen|title=The role of experience in the Gambler's Fallacy|journal=Journal of Behavioral Decision Making|url=http://www-personal.umich.edu/~leider/Papers/Gamblers_Fallacy.pdf|date=13 October 2009}}</ref> || "The Gambler's Fallacy is the misconception that something that has not happened for a long time has become 'overdue', such a coin coming up heads after a series of tails."<ref>{{cite web |title=The Gambler's Fallacy - Explained |url=https://www.thecalculatorsite.com/articles/finance/the-gamblers-fallacy.php |website=thecalculatorsite.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1882 || || "The ''[[w:wiktionary:specious|specious]] present'' is the time duration wherein a state of {{w|consciousness]] is experienced as being in the {{w|present}}.<ref name=james>{{cite book | vauthors = James W | date = 1893 | url = https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_JLcAAAAAMAAJ | title = The principles of psychology | location = New York | publisher = H. Holt and Company. | page = [https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_JLcAAAAAMAAJ/page/n624 609] }}</ref> The term was first introduced by the philosopher E. R. Clay in 1882 (E. Robert Kelly),<ref name=kelly/><ref name=andersen>{{cite journal | last1 = Andersen | first1 = Holly | last2 = Grush | first2 = Rick | name-list-format = vanc | title = A brief history of time-consciousness: historical precursors to James and Husserl | journal = Journal of the History of Philosophy | date = 2009 | volume = 47 | issue = 2 | pages = 277–307 | url = http://mind.ucsd.edu/papers/bhtc/Andersen&Grush.pdf | accessdate = 2008-02-02 | doi = 10.1353/hph.0.0118 | url-status = dead | archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20080216100320/http://mind.ucsd.edu/papers/bhtc/Andersen%26Grush.pdf | archivedate = 2008-02-16 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.126.3276 }}</ref>
+
| 1798 || || || The term {{w|stereotype}} is first used in the [[w:Printing industry|printing trade]] by {{w|Firmin Didot}}, to describe a printing plate that duplicated any {{w|typography}}. The duplicate printing plate, or the stereotype, is used for printing instead of the original.<ref name="Stereotypes Defined">{{cite web |title=Stereotypes Defined |url=https://stereotypeliberia.wordpress.com/about/stereeotypes-defined/ |website=stereotypeliberia.wordpress.com |accessdate=10 April 2020}}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1906 || || "The first known use of {{w|bandwagon effect}} was in 1906"<ref>{{cite web |title=bandwagon effect |url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bandwagon%20effect |website=merriam-webster.com |accessdate=7 April 2020}}</ref>  
+
| 1847 || || {{w|Semmelweis effect}} || The term {{w|Semmelweis effect}} derives from the name of a Hungarian physician, {{w|Ignaz Semmelweis}}, who discovered in 1847 that childbed fever mortality rates fell ten-fold when doctors disinfected their hands with a chlorine solution before moving from one patient to another, or, most particularly, after an autopsy. The Semmelweis effect is a metaphor for the {{w|reflex}}-like tendency to reject new evidence or new knowledge because it contradicts established norms, beliefs, or {{w|paradigm}}s.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Mortell|first1=Manfred|last2=Balkhy|first2=Hanan H.|last3=Tannous|first3=Elias B.|last4=Jong|first4=Mei Thiee|title=Physician ‘defiance’ towards hand hygiene compliance: Is there a theory–practice–ethics gap?|journal=Journal of the Saudi Heart Association|date=July 2013|volume=25|issue=3|pages=203–208|doi=10.1016/j.jsha.2013.04.003|pmc=3809478|pmid=24174860}}</ref> || " refers to the tendency to automatically reject new information or knowledge because it contradicts current thinking or beliefs."<ref>{{cite web |title=Semmelweis Reflex (Semmelweis Effect) |url=https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Semmelweis+Reflex+%28Semmelweis+Effect%29 |website=alleydog.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1913 || || The term "{{w|Monte Carlo fallacy}}" originates from the best known [[w:Gambler's fallacy#Monte Carlo Casino|example]] of the phenomenon, which occurs in the {{w|Monte Carlo Casino}}.<ref name= "monte_carlo">{{Cite web|url=http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150127-why-we-gamble-like-monkeys|title=Why we gamble like monkeys|work=BBC.com|date=2015-01-02}}</ref>
+
| 1848 || || {{w|Bandwagon effect}} || {{w|Bandwagon effect}} "The phrase "jump on the bandwagon" first appeared in American politics in 1848 when [[Dan Rice]], a famous and popular circus clown of the time, used his bandwagon and its music to gain attention for his political campaign appearances. As his campaign became more successful, other politicians strove for a seat on the bandwagon, hoping to be associated with his success. Later, during the time of [[William Jennings Bryan]]'s 1900 presidential campaign, bandwagons had become standard in campaigns,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wordwizard.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=6642 |title=Bandwagon Effect |accessdate=2007-03-09}}</ref> and the phrase "jump on the bandwagon" was used as a derogatory term, implying that people were associating themselves with success without considering that with which they associated themselves." || "is a psychological phenomenon whereby people do something primarily because other people are doing it, regardless of their own beliefs, which they may ignore or override."<ref>{{cite web |title=The Bandwagon Effect |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/stronger-the-broken-places/201708/the-bandwagon-effect |website=psychologytoday.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1920 || || "First coined back in 1920, the halo effect describes how our impression of a person forms a halo around our conception of their character." "The term was coined by psychologist Edwin Thorndike in 1920."<ref>{{cite web |title=This Cognitive Bias Explains Why Pretty People Make 12% More Money Than Everybody Else |url=https://www.businessinsider.com.au/halo-effect-money-beauty-bias-2014-11 |website=businessinsider.com |accessdate=6 April 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=What Is the Halo Effect? |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/the-halo-effect |website=psychologytoday.com |accessdate=6 April 2020}}</ref>
+
| 1850 || || || The first reference to “stereotype” appears as a noun that means “image perpetuated without change.<ref name="Stereotypes Defined"/> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1927 || || Russian psychologist {{w|Bluma Zeigarnik}} publishes in the journal ''[[Psychological Research|Psychologische Forschung]]'' a report on a series of experiments uncovering the processes underlying the phenomenon later called {{w|Zeigarnik effect}}.<ref>Zeigarnik 1927: "Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter Handlungen". ''[[Psychologische Forschung]]'' 9, 1-85.</ref>
+
| 1860 || || {{w|Weber–Fechner law}} || Both [[w:Weber–Fechner law|Weber's law and Fechner's law]] are published by [[w:Gustav Fechner|Gustav Theodor Fechner]] in the work ''Elemente der Psychophysik'' (''Elements of Psychophysics''). This publication is the first work ever in this field, and where Fechner coins the term {{w|psychophysics}} to describe the interdisciplinary study of how humans perceive physical magnitudes.<ref name="Fechner1">{{cite book
 +
|last=Fechner
 +
|first=Gustav Theodor
 +
|editor-last1=Howes
 +
|editor-first1=D H
 +
|editor-last2=Boring
 +
|editor-first2=E G
 +
|translator-last=Adler
 +
|translator-first=H E
 +
|title=Elements of psychophysics
 +
|trans-title=Elemente der Psychophysik
 +
|volume=volume 1
 +
|location=United States of America
 +
|publisher=Holt, Rinehart and Winston
 +
|year=1966
 +
|orig-year=First published .1860
 +
}}</ref> || "The law states that the change in a stimulus that will be just noticeable is a constant ratio of the original stimulus."<ref>{{cite web |title=Weber's law |url=https://www.britannica.com/science/Webers-law |website=britannica.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1930 || || The ''[[w:wiktionary:specious|specious]] present'' is further developed by {{w|William James}}.<ref name=andersen /> "James defined the specious present to be "the prototype of all conceived times... the short duration of which we are immediately and incessantly sensible". In "Scientific Thought" (1930), [[C. D. Broad]] further elaborated on the concept of the specious present and considered that the specious present may be considered as the temporal equivalent of a sensory datum.<ref name=andersen /> ||
+
| 1866 || || {{w|Pareidolia}} || {{w|Pareidolia}} "The German word ''pareidolie'' was used in German articles by [[w:Karl Ludwig Kahlbaum|Dr. Karl Ludwig Kahlbaum]] — for example in his 1866 paper "On Delusion of the Senses". When Kahlbaum's paper was reviewed the following year (1867) in ''The Journal of Mental Science'', Volume 13, ''pareidolie'' was translated as pareidolia: "…partial hallucination, perception of secondary images, or pareidolia.""<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=IM06AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA238&dq=%22pareidolia%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjPysqt0ejUAhWe14MKHbdkCdIQ6AEIXzAJ#v=onepage&q=%22pareidolia%22&f=false ] Sibbald, M.D. "Report on the Progress of Psychological Medicine; German Psychological Literature", ''The Journal of Mental Science'', Volume 13.  1867. p. 238</ref> || " the tendency to perceive a specific, often meaningful image in a random or ambiguous visual pattern."<ref>{{cite web |last1= |first1= |title=pareidolia |url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pareidolia |website=merriam-webster.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1945 || || {{w|Karl Duncker}} defines {{w|functional fixedness}} as being a "mental block against using an object in a new way that is required to solve a problem".<ref name=Duncker1945>Duncker, K. (1945). "On problem solving". ''[[Psychological Monographs]]'', 58:5 (Whole No. 270).</ref>
+
| 1874 || Memory bias || {{w|Cryptomnesia}} || The first documented instance of {{w|cryptomnesia}} occurs with the medium {{w|Stainton Moses}}.<ref>Brian Righi. (2008). ''Chapter 4: Talking Boards and Ghostly Goo''. In ''Ghosts, Apparitions and Poltergeists''. Llewellyn Publications. {{ISBN|978-0738713632}} "An early example of this occurred in 1874 with he medium William Stanton Moses, who communicated with the spirits of two brothers who had recently died in India. Upon investigation, it was discovered that one week prior to the séance, their obituary had appeared in the newspaper. This was of some importance because Moses's communications with the two spirits contained nothing that wasn't already printed in the newspaper. When the spirits were pressed for further information, they were unable to provide any. Researchers concluded that Moses had seen the obituary, forgotten it, and then resurfaced the memory during the séance."</ref><ref>[[Robert Todd Carroll]]. (2014). [http://skepdic.com/cryptomn.html "Cryptomnesia"]. ''{{w|The Skeptic's Dictionary}}''. Retrieved 2014-07-12.</ref> || "an implicit memory phenomenon in which people mistakenly believe that a current thought or idea is a product of their own creation when, in fact, they have encountered it previously and then forgotten it"<ref>{{cite web |title=cryptomnesia |url=https://dictionary.apa.org/cryptomnesia |website=dictionary.apa.org |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1946 || || " In 1946, Berkson first illustrated the presence of a false correlation due to this last reason, which is known as Berkson's paradox and is one of the most famous paradox in probability and statistics."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Batsidis |first1=Apostolos |last2=Tzavelas |first2=George |last3=Alexopoulos |first3=Panagiotis |title=Berkson's paradox and weighted distributions: An application to Alzheimer's disease |doi=10.1002/bimj.201900046 |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bimj.201900046}}</ref>  
+
| 1876 || || || German experimental psychologist {{w|Gustav Fechner}} conducts the earliest known research on the {{w|mere-exposure effect}}.<ref>{{cite web |title=Mere Exposure Effect |url=https://www.wiwi.europa-uni.de/de/lehrstuhl/fine/mikro/bilder_und_pdf-dateien/WS0910/VLBehEconomics/Ausarbeitungen/MereExposure.pdf |website=wiwi.europa-uni.de |accessdate=10 April 2020}}</ref> || "It means that people prefer things that they are most familiar with"<ref>{{cite web |title=6 Conversion Principles You Can Learn From The Mere-Exposure Effect |url=https://marketingland.com/6-conversion-principles-can-learn-mere-exposure-effect-140430 |website=marketingland.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1954 || || The {{w|Social comparison theory}} is initially proposed by {{w|social psychologist}} {{w|Leon Festinger}}. It centers on the belief that there is a drive within individuals to gain accurate self-evaluations.<ref name="Festinger1954">{{cite journal | author = Festinger L | year = 1954 | title = A theory of social comparison processes | url = | journal = Human Relations | volume = 7 | issue = 2| pages = 117–140 | doi=10.1177/001872675400700202}}</ref>
+
| 1882 || || || "The ''[[w:wiktionary:specious|specious]] present'' is the time duration wherein a state of {{w|consciousness}} is experienced as being in the {{w|present}}.<ref name=james>{{cite book | vauthors = James W | date = 1893 | url = https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_JLcAAAAAMAAJ | title = The principles of psychology | location = New York | publisher = H. Holt and Company. | page = [https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_JLcAAAAAMAAJ/page/n624 609] }}</ref> The term was first introduced by the philosopher E. R. Clay in 1882 (E. Robert Kelly),<ref name=kelly/><ref name=andersen>{{cite journal | last1 = Andersen | first1 = Holly | last2 = Grush | first2 = Rick | name-list-format = vanc | title = A brief history of time-consciousness: historical precursors to James and Husserl | journal = Journal of the History of Philosophy | date = 2009 | volume = 47 | issue = 2 | pages = 277–307 | url = http://mind.ucsd.edu/papers/bhtc/Andersen&Grush.pdf | accessdate = 2008-02-02 | doi = 10.1353/hph.0.0118 | url-status = dead | archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20080216100320/http://mind.ucsd.edu/papers/bhtc/Andersen%26Grush.pdf | archivedate = 2008-02-16 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.126.3276 }}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1956 || || The term "{{w|Barnum effect}}" is coined by psychologist {{w|Paul Meehl}} in his essay ''Wanted – A Good Cookbook'', because he relates the vague personality descriptions used in certain "pseudo-successful" psychological tests to those given by showman {{w|P. T. Barnum}}.<ref name=Meehl1956>{{cite journal|last1=Meehl |first1=Paul E. |title=Wanted – A Good Cookbook |journal=American Psychologist |date=1956 |volume=11 |issue=6 |pages=263–272 |doi=10.1037/h0044164 |df= }}</ref><ref name="Dutton1988">{{cite journal|last1=Dutton|first1=D. L.|title=The cold reading technique|journal=Experientia|date=1988|volume=44|issue=4|pages=326–332|doi=10.1007/BF01961271|url=http://denisdutton.com/cold_reading.htm|language=en|pmid=3360083}}</ref>
+
| 1885 || || {{w|Spacing effect}} || The phenomenon of {{w|spacing effect}} is first identified by {{w|Hermann Ebbinghaus}}, and his detailed study of it is published in his book ''Über das Gedächtnis. Untersuchungen zur experimentellen Psychologie'' (''Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology''). || " The spacing effect refers to the finding that long-term memory is enhanced when learning events are spaced apart in time, rather than massed in immediate succession"<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Vlach |first1=Haley A. |last2=Sandhofer |first2=Catherine M. |title=Distributing Learning Over Time: The Spacing Effect in Children’s Acquisition and Generalization of Science Concepts |doi=10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01781.x |pmid=22616822 |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3399982/ |pmc=3399982}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1960 || || English psychhologist Peter Wason first describes the {{w|confirmation bias}}.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Curious Case of Confirmation Bias |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/seeing-what-others-dont/201905/the-curious-case-confirmation-bias |website=psychologytoday.com |accessdate=7 April 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Acks |first1=Alex |title=The Bubble of Confirmation Bias |url=https://books.google.com.ar/books?id=hPWCDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA9&dq=confirmation+bias%22+was+coined+by+English+psychologist+Peter+Wason&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiMnaen1dboAhVAIrkGHX4TAwEQ6AEIMTAB#v=onepage&q=confirmation%20bias%22%20was%20coined%20by%20English%20psychologist%20Peter%20Wason&f=false}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Myers |first1=David G. |title=Psychology |url=https://books.google.com.ar/books?id=OqZZAAAAYAAJ&q=confirmation+bias%22+was+coined+by+English+psychologist+Peter+Wason&dq=confirmation+bias%22+was+coined+by+English+psychologist+Peter+Wason&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiMnaen1dboAhVAIrkGHX4TAwEQ6AEISzAE}}</ref>
+
| 1890 || || {{w|Tip of the tongue}} || The term "{{w|tip of the tongue}}" is borrowed from colloquial usage,<ref name="Schwartz 1999">{{Cite journal | last1=Schwartz| first1=BL.| title=Sparkling at the end of the tongue: the etiology of tip-of-the-tongue phenomenology.| journal=Psychonomic Bulletin & Review| volume=6| issue=3| pages=379–93|date=Sep 1999 | url=http://www2.fiu.edu/~schwartb/sparkling.pdf | pmid=12198776 | doi=10.3758/bf03210827}}</ref> and possibly a {{w|calque}} from the French phrase ''avoir le mot sur le bout de la langue'' ("having the word on the tip of the tongue"). The tip of the tongue phenomenon was first described as a psychological phenomenon in the text ''[[The Principles of Psychology]]'' by [[William James]] (1890), although he did not label it as such.<ref name="James">James, W. (1890). ''Principles of Psychology''. Retrieved from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/James/Principles/</ref> || "a state in which one cannot quite recall a familiar word but can recall words of similar form and meaning"<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Brown |first1=Roger |last2=McNeill |first2=David |title=The “tip of the tongue” phenomenon |doi=10.1016/S0022-5371(66)80040-3 |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022537166800403}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1960 || || "The classic example of subjects' {{w|congruence bias}} was discovered by {{w|Peter Cathcart Wason}}"
+
| 1893 || Memory bias || {{w|Childhood amnesia}} || {{w|Childhood amnesia}} is first formally reported by psychologist Caroline Miles in her article ''A study of individual psychology''  by the ''American Journal of Psychology''.<ref name=WhereOhWhere>{{cite journal|last=Bauer|first=P|title=Oh where, oh where have those early memories gone? A developmental perspective on childhood amnesia|journal=Psychological Science Agenda|volume=18|year=2004|url=http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2004/12/bauer.aspx|issue=12 }}</ref> || " refers to the fact that most people cannot remember events that occurred before the age of 3 or 4"<ref>{{cite web |title=Childhood Amnesia |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/childhood-amnesia |website=sciencedirect.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1961 || || {{w|Ambiguity effect}} is first described by {{w|Daniel Ellsberg}}.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Borcherding|first1=Katrin|last2=Laričev|first2=Oleg Ivanovič|last3=Messick|first3=David M.|title=Contemporary Issues in Decision Making|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=W3l9AAAAMAAJ|year=1990|publisher=North-Holland|isbn=978-0-444-88618-7|page=50}}</ref>
+
| 1906 || || {{w|Bandwagon effect}} || "The first known use of {{w|bandwagon effect}} was in 1906"<ref>{{cite web |title=bandwagon effect |url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bandwagon%20effect |website=merriam-webster.com |accessdate=7 April 2020}}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1967 || || "Chapman (1967) described a bias in the judgment of the frequency with which two events co-occur. This demonstration showed that the [[co-occurrence]] of paired stimuli resulted in participants overestimating the frequency of the pairings." ""{{w|Illusory correlation}}" was originally coined by Chapman and Chapman (1967) to describe people's tendencies to overestimate relationships between two groups when distinctive and unusual information is presented.<ref name="Chapman1967">{{cite journal|last1=Chapman|first1=L|title=Illusory correlation in observational report|journal=Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior|volume=6|issue=1|year=1967|pages=151–155|doi=10.1016/S0022-5371(67)80066-5}}</ref>"<ref>{{cite journal|last=Chapman|first=L.J|title=Illusory correlation in observational report|journal=Journal of Verbal Learning|year=1967|volume=6|pages=151–155|doi=10.1016/s0022-5371(67)80066-5}}</ref>
+
| 1906 || Social bias || {{w|In-group favoritism}} || Sociologist [[w:William Graham Sumner|William Sumner]] posits that humans are a species that join together in groups by their very nature. However, he also maintains that humans have an innate tendency to favor their own group over others, proclaiming how "each group nourishes its own pride and vanity, boasts itself superior, exists in its own divinities, and looks with contempt on outsiders" (p.&nbsp;13).<ref>Sumner, William Graham. (1906). ''Folkways: A Study of the Social Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores, and Morals''. Boston, MA: Ginn.</ref> || "the tendency to favor members of one's own group over those in other groups"<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Everett |first1=Jim A. C. |last2=Faber |first2=Nadira S. |last3=Crockett |first3=Molly |title=Preferences and beliefs in ingroup favoritism |doi=10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00015 |pmid=25762906 |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4327620/ |pmc=4327620}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1968 || || The {{w|conservatism (belief revision)}} bias is discussed by {{w|Ward Edwards}}.<ref name="edwards1">Edwards, Ward. "Conservatism in Human Information Processing (excerpted)". In Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic and Amos Tversky. (1982). ''Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases''. New York: Cambridge University Press. {{ISBN|978-0521284141}} Original work published 1968.</ref>
+
| 1909 || Memory bias || {{w|Testing effect}} || The first documented empirical studies on the testing effect are published by Edwina E. Abbott.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Abbott|first1=Edwina|date=1909|title=On the analysis of the factors of recall in the learning process|url=https://insights.ovid.com/psychological-monographs-general-applied/pmga/1909/11/010/analysis-factor-recall-learning-process/5/00006828|journal=Psychological Monographs: General and Applied|volume=11|issue=1|pages=159–177|via=Ovid|doi=10.1037/h0093018}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last1=Larsen|first1=Douglas P.|last2=Butler|first2=Andrew C.|date=2013|editor-last=Walsh, K.|title=Test-enhanced learning|url=https://books.google.com/?id=KW2rAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA443&dq=Test-enhanced+learning#v=onepage&q=Test-enhanced%20learning&f=false|journal=In Oxford Textbook of Medical Education|volume=|issue=|pages=443–452|doi=|via=|isbn=9780199652679}}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1969 || || Researchers confirm the {{w|Ben Franklin effect}}.<ref>{{cite web |title=To Become Super-Likable, Practice “The Ben Franklin Effect” |url=https://medium.com/swlh/practice-the-ben-franklin-effect-to-become-super-likable-23f98bf1ecdb |website=medium.com |accessdate=13 March 2020}}</ref>
+
| 1913 || || {{w|Monte Carlo fallacy}} || The term "{{w|Monte Carlo fallacy}}" originates from the best known [[w:Gambler's fallacy#Monte Carlo Casino|example]] of the phenomenon, which occurs in the {{w|Monte Carlo Casino}}.<ref name= "monte_carlo">{{Cite web|url=http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150127-why-we-gamble-like-monkeys|title=Why we gamble like monkeys|work=BBC.com|date=2015-01-02}}</ref> || "occurs when an individual erroneously believes that a certain random event is less likely or more likely, given a previous event or a series of events"<ref>{{cite web |title=Gambler's Fallacy |url=https://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/gamblersfallacy.asp |website=investopedia.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1971 || || Lichtenstein and Slovic study and experiment on the {{w|preference reversal}} inconsistency.<ref name="Atladóttir"/>
+
| 1914 || || {{w|Cross-race effect}} || The first research on the {{w|cross-race effect}} is published.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Feingold | first1 = CA | year = 1914 | title = The influence of environment on identification of persons and things | url = https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol5/iss1/6| journal = Journal of Criminal Law and Police Science | volume = 5 | issue = 1| pages = 39–51 | doi=10.2307/1133283| jstor = 1133283 }}</ref> || "The tendency for eyewitnesses to be better at recognizing members of their own race/ethnicity than members of other races."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Laub |first1=Cindy E. |last2=Meissner |first2=Christian A. |last3=Susa |first3=Kyle J. |title=The Cross-Race Effect: Resistant to Instructions |doi=10.1155/2013/745836 |url=https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jcrim/2013/745836/}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1920 || Social bias || Halo effect || The {{w|halo effect}} is named by psychologist {{w|Edward Thorndike}}<ref>{{Cite book
 +
|title=The Advanced Dictionary of Marketing, Scott G. Dacko, 2008: Marketing
 +
|date=2008-06-18  |publisher=Oxford University Press  |isbn=9780199286003  |location=Oxford  |pages=248}}</ref> in reference to a person being perceived as having a [[w:Halo (religious iconography)|halo]]. He gives the phenomenon its name in his article ''A Constant Error in Psychological Ratings''.<ref name=":2">{{harvnb | Thorndike | 1920}}</ref> In "Constant Error", Thorndike sets out to replicate the study in hopes of pinning down the bias that he thought was present in these ratings. Subsequent researchers would study it in relation to {{w|attractiveness}} and its bearing on the judicial and educational systems.<ref name="BBdang">{{Cite journal|last=Sigall|first=Harold|last2=Ostrove|first2=Nancy|date=1975-03-01|title=Beautiful but Dangerous: Effects of Offender Attractiveness and Nature of the Crime on Juridic Judgment|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232451231|journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology|volume=31|issue=3|pages=410–414|doi=10.1037/h0076472}}</ref> Thorndike originally coins the term referring only to people; however, its use would be greatly expanded especially in the area of brand marketing.<ref name=":2" /> "First coined back in 1920, the halo effect describes how our impression of a person forms a halo around our conception of their character." "The term was coined by psychologist Edwin Thorndike in 1920."<ref>{{cite web |title=This Cognitive Bias Explains Why Pretty People Make 12% More Money Than Everybody Else |url=https://www.businessinsider.com.au/halo-effect-money-beauty-bias-2014-11 |website=businessinsider.com |accessdate=6 April 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=What Is the Halo Effect? |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/the-halo-effect |website=psychologytoday.com |accessdate=6 April 2020}}</ref> || "Error in reasoning in which an impression formed from a single trait or characteristic is allowed to influence multiple judgments or ratings of unrelated factors."<ref>{{cite web |title=Halo effect |url=https://www.britannica.com/science/halo-effect |website=britannica.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1922 || || || The term “stereotype” is first used in the modern psychological sense by American journalist Walter Lippmann in his work ''Public Opinion''.<ref name="Stereotypes Defined"/> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1927 || || Memory bias || Russian psychologist {{w|Bluma Zeigarnik}} publishes in the journal ''[[Psychological Research|Psychologische Forschung]]'' a report on a series of experiments uncovering the processes underlying the phenomenon later called {{w|Zeigarnik effect}}.<ref>Zeigarnik 1927: "Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter Handlungen". ''[[Psychologische Forschung]]'' 9, 1-85.</ref> Russian psychologist {{w|Bluma Zeigarnik}} first studies the phenomenon after her professor and [[Gestalt psychology|Gestalt]] psychologist [[Kurt Lewin]] noticed that a [[waiter]] had better recollections of still unpaid orders. However, after the completion of the task – after everyone had paid – he was unable to remember any more details of the orders. Zeigarnik then designed a series of experiments to uncover the processes underlying this phenomenon. Her research report was published in 1927, in the journal ''[[Psychological Research|Psychologische Forschung]].''<ref>Zeigarnik 1927: "Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter Handlungen". ''[[Psychologische Forschung]]'' 9, 1-85.</ref> || "Tendency to remember interrupted or incomplete tasks or events more easily than tasks that have been completed."<ref>{{cite web |title=Zeigarnik Effect |url=https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/psychpedia/zeigarnik-effect |website=goodtherapy.org |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1928 || || {{w|Money Illusion}} || {{w|Irving Fisher}} publishes ''The {{w|Money Illusion}}'', which develops the concept of the same name.<ref>{{Citation | title = The Money Illusion | last = Fisher | first = Irving | publisher = Adelphi Company | year = 1928 |location=New York }}</ref> || "It posits that people have a tendency to view their wealth and income in nominal dollar terms, rather than recognize its real value, adjusted for inflation."<ref>{{cite web |title=Money Illusion |url=https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/money_illusion.asp |website=investopedia.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1930 || || || The ''[[w:wiktionary:specious|specious]] present'' is further developed by {{w|William James}}.<ref name=andersen /> "James defined the specious present to be "the prototype of all conceived times... the short duration of which we are immediately and incessantly sensible". In "Scientific Thought" (1930), [[C. D. Broad]] further elaborated on the concept of the specious present and considered that the specious present may be considered as the temporal equivalent of a sensory datum.<ref name=andersen /> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1932 || Memory bias || || Some of the earliest evidence for the Fading Affect Bias dates back to a study by Cason, who does a study using a retrospective procedure where participants recall and rate past events and emotion when prompted finds that recalled emotional intensity for positive events is generally stronger than that of negative events.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Fleming|first=G. W. T. H.|date=January 1933|title=The Learning and Retention of Pleasant and Unpleasant Activities. (Arch. of Psychol., No. 134, 1932.) Cason, H.|journal=Journal of Mental Science|volume=79|issue=324|pages=187–188|doi=10.1192/bjp.79.324.187-c|issn=0368-315X}}</ref> || "It indicates that the emotional response prompted by positive memories often tends to be stronger than the emotional response prompted by negative memories."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Skowronski |first1=John J. |last2=Walker |first2=W. Richard |last3=Henderson |first3=Dawn X. |last4=Bond |first4=Gary D. |title=Chapter Three - The Fading Affect Bias: Its History, Its Implications, and Its Future |doi=10.1016/B978-0-12-800052-6.00003-2 |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128000526000032}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1933 || Memory bias || {{w|Von Restorff effect}} || The {{w|Von Restorff effect}} theory is coined by German psychiatrist and pediatrician {{w|Hedwig von Restorff}}, who, in her study, finds that when participants are presented with a list of categorically similar items with one distinctive, isolated item on the list, memory for the item is improved.<ref name="vonRestorff1933">{{cite journal|last1=von Restorff|first1=Hedwig|title=Über die Wirkung von Bereichsbildungen im Spurenfeld|journal=Psychologische Forschung [Psychological Research]|date=1933|volume=18|issue=1|pages=299–342|doi=10.1007/BF02409636|trans-title=The effects of field formation in the trace field|url=http://www.utsa.edu/mind/von_restorff_translation.htm|language=de}}</ref> || "It predicts that when multiple similar objects are present, the one that differs from the rest is most likely to be remembered."<ref>{{cite web |title=The Von Restorff effect |url=https://lawsofux.com/von-restorff-effect |website=lawsofux.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1945 || || {{w|Functional fixedness}} || {{w|Karl Duncker}} defines {{w|functional fixedness}} as being a "mental block against using an object in a new way that is required to solve a problem".<ref name=Duncker1945>Duncker, K. (1945). "On problem solving". ''[[Psychological Monographs]]'', 58:5 (Whole No. 270).</ref> || "It is the inability to realize that something known to have a particular use may also be used to perform other functions."<ref>{{cite web |title=Functional fixedness |url=https://www.britannica.com/science/functional-fixedness |website=britannica.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1946 || || || " In 1946, Berkson first illustrated the presence of a false correlation due to this last reason, which is known as Berkson's paradox and is one of the most famous paradox in probability and statistics."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Batsidis |first1=Apostolos |last2=Tzavelas |first2=George |last3=Alexopoulos |first3=Panagiotis |title=Berkson's paradox and weighted distributions: An application to Alzheimer's disease |doi=10.1002/bimj.201900046 |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bimj.201900046}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1954 || || {{w|Social comparison theory}} || The {{w|Social comparison theory}} is initially proposed by {{w|social psychologist}} {{w|Leon Festinger}}. It centers on the belief that there is a drive within individuals to gain accurate self-evaluations.<ref name="Festinger1954">{{cite journal | author = Festinger L | year = 1954 | title = A theory of social comparison processes | url = | journal = Human Relations | volume = 7 | issue = 2| pages = 117–140 | doi=10.1177/001872675400700202}}</ref> || "It is the idea that individuals determine their own social and personal worth based on how they stack up against others"<ref>{{cite web |title=Social Comparison Theory |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/basics/social-comparison-theory |website=psychologytoday.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1956 || || {{w|Barnum effect}} || The term "{{w|Barnum effect}}" is coined by psychologist {{w|Paul Meehl}} in his essay ''Wanted – A Good Cookbook'', because he relates the vague personality descriptions used in certain "pseudo-successful" psychological tests to those given by showman {{w|P. T. Barnum}}.<ref name=Meehl1956>{{cite journal|last1=Meehl |first1=Paul E. |title=Wanted – A Good Cookbook |journal=American Psychologist |date=1956 |volume=11 |issue=6 |pages=263–272 |doi=10.1037/h0044164 |df= }}</ref><ref name="Dutton1988">{{cite journal|last1=Dutton|first1=D. L.|title=The cold reading technique|journal=Experientia|date=1988|volume=44|issue=4|pages=326–332|doi=10.1007/BF01961271|url=http://denisdutton.com/cold_reading.htm|language=en|pmid=3360083}}</ref> || "the phenomenon that occurs when individuals believe that personality descriptions apply specifically to them (more so than to other people), despite the fact that the description is actually filled with information that applies to everyone."<ref>{{cite web |title=Barnum Effect |url=https://www.britannica.com/science/Barnum-Effect |website=britannica.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1957 || || {{w|Parkinson's law of triviality}} || "{{w|Parkinson's law of triviality}} is {{w|C. Northcote Parkinson}}'s 1957 argument that members of an organization give disproportionate weight to trivial issues."<ref name="parkinson">{{cite book |first=C. Northcote |last=Parkinson |title = Parkinson's Law, or the Pursuit of Progress |publisher=John Murray |isbn=0140091076|year=1958}}</ref> || "explains that people will give more energy and focus to trivial or unimportant items than to more important and complex ones."<ref>{{cite web |title=How to Handle Bikeshedding: Parkinson’s Law of Triviality |url=https://projectbliss.net/bikeshedding-parkinsons-law-of-triviality/ |website=projectbliss.net |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1960 || || {{w|Confirmation bias}} || English psychhologist Peter Wason first describes the {{w|confirmation bias}}.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Curious Case of Confirmation Bias |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/seeing-what-others-dont/201905/the-curious-case-confirmation-bias |website=psychologytoday.com |accessdate=7 April 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Acks |first1=Alex |title=The Bubble of Confirmation Bias |url=https://books.google.com.ar/books?id=hPWCDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA9&dq=confirmation+bias%22+was+coined+by+English+psychologist+Peter+Wason&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiMnaen1dboAhVAIrkGHX4TAwEQ6AEIMTAB#v=onepage&q=confirmation%20bias%22%20was%20coined%20by%20English%20psychologist%20Peter%20Wason&f=false}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Myers |first1=David G. |title=Psychology |url=https://books.google.com.ar/books?id=OqZZAAAAYAAJ&q=confirmation+bias%22+was+coined+by+English+psychologist+Peter+Wason&dq=confirmation+bias%22+was+coined+by+English+psychologist+Peter+Wason&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiMnaen1dboAhVAIrkGHX4TAwEQ6AEISzAE}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1960 || || {{w|Congruence bias}} || "The classic example of subjects' {{w|congruence bias}} was discovered by {{w|Peter Cathcart Wason}}" || "The tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, instead of considering possible alternatives."<ref>{{cite web |title=Cognitive Bias in Decision Making |url=https://associationanalytics.com/2015/11/30/cognitive-bias-in-decision-making/ |website=associationanalytics.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1961 || || {{w|Authority bias}} || {{w|Authority bias}}. The {{w|Milgram experiment}} is the classic experiment that established its existence.<ref>{{cite book |author=Ellis RM |title=Middle Way Philosophy: Omnibus Edition |year=2015 |publisher=[[Lulu (company)|Lulu Press]] | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xG9rCgAAQBAJ&dq=Ellis+RM+Middle+Way+Philosophy%3A+Omnibus+Edition&q=authority#v=onepage&q=milgram&f=false|isbn=9781326351892 }}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1961 || || {{w|Ambiguity effect}} || {{w|Ambiguity effect}} is first described by {{w|Daniel Ellsberg}}.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Borcherding|first1=Katrin|last2=Laričev|first2=Oleg Ivanovič|last3=Messick|first3=David M.|title=Contemporary Issues in Decision Making|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=W3l9AAAAMAAJ|year=1990|publisher=North-Holland|isbn=978-0-444-88618-7|page=50}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1964 || || {{w|Telescoping effect}} || {{w|Telescoping effect}}. The original work on telescoping is usually attributed to a 1964 article by Neter and Waksberg in the ''[[Journal of the American Statistical Association]]''.<ref name=Rubin>{{cite journal |last1=Rubin |first1=David C. |last2=Baddeley |first2=Alan D. |date=1989 |title=Telescoping is not time compression: A model |journal=Memory & Cognition |doi=10.3758/BF03202626 |pmid=2811662 |volume=17 |issue=6|pages=653–661}}</ref> The term telescoping comes from the idea that time seems to shrink toward the present in the way that the distance to objects seems to shrink when they are viewed through a telescope.<ref name=Rubin/> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1964 || || {{w|Law of the instrument}} || The first recorded statement of the concept of {{w|Law of the instrument}} is {{w|Abraham Kaplan}}'s: "I call it ''the law of the instrument,'' and it may be formulated as follows: Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding."<ref>
 +
{{cite book
 +
| title = The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science
 +
| author = Abraham Kaplan
 +
| publisher = San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co
 +
| year = 1964
 +
| page = 28
 +
| url = https://books.google.com/books?id=OYe6fsXSP3IC&pg=PA28| isbn = 9781412836296
 +
}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1966 || || || An experiment shows that people remember a group of words better if they are within the same theme category. Such words that generate recall by association are known as ''semantic cues''.<ref name="Tulving1966">{{cite journal|last1=Tulving|first1=Endel|last2=Pearlstone|first2=Zena|title=Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words|journal=Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior|date=1966|volume=5|issue=4|pages=381–391|doi=10.1016/S0022-5371(66)80048-8}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1967 || || {{w|Risk compensation}} || {{w|Risk compensation}}. In Sweden, following [[w:Dagen H|the change from driving on the left to driving on the right]] there is a drop in crashes and fatalities, which is linked to the increased apparent risk. The number of motor insurance claims going down by 40%, returning to normal over the next six weeks.<ref>{{cite book|title=Risk and Freedom: Record of Road Safety Regulation|first=John |last=Adams|publisher=Brefi Press|year=1985|isbn=9780948537059}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|quote=On the day of the change, only 150 minor accidents were reported. Traffic accidents over the next few months went down. ... By 1969, however, accidents were back at normal levels|title=Dagen H: The day Sweden switched sides of the road|work=Washington Post|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/dagen-h-the-day-sweden-switched-sides-of-the-road-photo/2012/02/17/gIQAOwFVKR_blog.html|first=Elizabeth|last=Flock|date=2012-02-17}}</ref> Fatality levels would take two years to return to normal.<ref>"On September 4 there were 125 reported traffic accidents as opposed to 130-196 from the previous Mondays. No traffic fatalities were linked to the switch. In fact, fatalities dropped for two years, possibly because drivers were more vigilant after the switch." Sweden finally began driving on the right side of the road in 1967 ''The Examiner'' Sept 2, 2009</ref><ref group="n">{{harvtxt|Rudin-Brown |Jamson|2013}} "An example of risk overestimation in the short run is offered by the experience in Sweden when that country changed from left- to right-hand driving in the fall of 1967.  This intervention led to a marked surge in perceived risk that exceeded the target level and thus was followed by a very cautious behavior that caused a major decrease in road fatalities.  ...the accident rate returned to 'normal' within 2 years."</ref> || "Risk compensation (RC) postulates that humans have a built-in level of acceptable risk-taking and that our behaviour adjusts to this level in a homeostatic manner"<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mok |first1=D |last2=Gore |first2=G |last3=Hagel |first3=B |last4=Mok |first4=E |last5=Magdalinos |first5=H |last6=Pless |first6=B |title=Risk compensation in children’s activities: A pilot study |doi=10.1093/pch/9.5.327 |pmid=19657519 |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2721187/ |pmc=2721187}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1967 || || || "Chapman (1967) described a bias in the judgment of the frequency with which two events co-occur. This demonstration showed that the [[co-occurrence]] of paired stimuli resulted in participants overestimating the frequency of the pairings." ""{{w|Illusory correlation}}" was originally coined by Chapman and Chapman (1967) to describe people's tendencies to overestimate relationships between two groups when distinctive and unusual information is presented.<ref name="Chapman1967">{{cite journal|last1=Chapman|first1=L|title=Illusory correlation in observational report|journal=Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior|volume=6|issue=1|year=1967|pages=151–155|doi=10.1016/S0022-5371(67)80066-5}}</ref>"<ref>{{cite journal|last=Chapman|first=L.J|title=Illusory correlation in observational report|journal=Journal of Verbal Learning|year=1967|volume=6|pages=151–155|doi=10.1016/s0022-5371(67)80066-5}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1967 || Social bias || {{w|Fundamental attribution error}} || {{w|Edward E. Jones}} and Victor Harris conduct a classic experiment<ref name="JonesHarris67">{{cite journal|last=Jones|first=E. E.|last2=Harris|first2=V. A.|year=1967|title=The attribution of attitudes|journal=Journal of Experimental Social Psychology|volume=3|issue=1|pages=1–24|doi=10.1016/0022-1031(67)90034-0}}</ref> that would later give rise to the phrase {{w|Fundamental attribution error}}, coined by {{w|Lee Ross}}<ref>{{cite book|title=Advances in experimental social psychology|last=Ross|first=L.|publisher=Academic Press|year=1977|isbn=978-0-12-015210-0|editor-last=Berkowitz|editor-first=L.|volume=10|location=New York|pages=173–220|chapter=The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process}}</ref> || "is the tendency for people to over-emphasize dispositional, or personality-based explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing situational explanations".<ref>{{cite web |title=Fundamental Attribution Error |url=https://www.simplypsychology.org/fundamental-attribution.html |website=simplypsychology.org |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1968 || || [[W:conservatism (belief revision)|Conservatism bias]] || The {{w|conservatism (belief revision)}} bias is discussed by {{w|Ward Edwards}}.<ref name="edwards1">Edwards, Ward. "Conservatism in Human Information Processing (excerpted)". In Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic and Amos Tversky. (1982). ''Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases''. New York: Cambridge University Press. {{ISBN|978-0521284141}} Original work published 1968.</ref> || "Conservatism bias is a mental process in which people maintain their past views or predictions at the cost of recognizing new information."<ref>{{cite web |title=Conservatism Bias |url=https://dwassetmgmt.com/conservatism-bias/ |website=dwassetmgmt.com |accessdate=8 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1968 || || {{w|Pygmalion Effect}} || "The {{w|Pygmalion Effect}} (also called the Galatea effect) originates with researchers Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobsen in 1968."<ref>{{cite web |title=Statistics How To |url=https://www.statisticshowto.com/pygmalion-effect-rosenthal/ |website=statisticshowto.com |accessdate=7 April 2020}}</ref> || "refers to the phenomenon of people improving their performance when others have high expectations of them."<ref>{{cite web |title=Pygmalion Effect |url=https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Pygmalion+Effect |website=alleydog.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-  
 
|-  
| 1973 || || {{w|Hindsight bias}}. {{w|Baruch Fischhoff}} attends a seminar where {{w|Paul E. Meehl}} states an observation that clinicians often overestimate their ability to have foreseen the outcome of a particular case, as they claim to have known it all along.<ref name="Fischhoff 2007">{{cite journal | last1 = Fischhoff | first1 = B | year = 2007 | title = An early history of hindsight research | url = | journal = Social Cognition | volume = 25 | issue = | pages = 10–13 | doi = 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.10 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.365.6826 }}</ref>
+
| 1969 || || {{w|Ben Franklin effect}} || Researchers confirm the {{w|Ben Franklin effect}}.<ref>{{cite web |title=To Become Super-Likable, Practice “The Ben Franklin Effect” |url=https://medium.com/swlh/practice-the-ben-franklin-effect-to-become-super-likable-23f98bf1ecdb |website=medium.com |accessdate=13 March 2020}}</ref> || "t refers to an altruistic reaction that makes a person more likely to do a favor for someone that they have already completed a favor for; more likely than they are to return a favor to someone who has completed a favor for them."<ref>{{cite web |title=Ben Franklin Effect |url=https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Ben+Franklin+Effect |website=alleydog.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1969 || || Suffix effect || ". This phenomenon is called the suffix effect, and it is important because of the argument by Crowder and Morton (1969) that the effect is a reflection of the contribution of the auditory sensory memory or echoic memory to recall in the nonsuffix control condition"<ref>{{cite web |title=The suffix effect: How many positions are involved? |url=https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/BF03197612.pdf |website=link.springer.com |accessdate=5 May 2020}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1971 || || {{w|Preference reversal}} || Lichtenstein and Slovic study and experiment on the {{w|preference reversal}} inconsistency.<ref name="Atladóttir"/> || "Preference reversal (Lichtenstein & Slovic, 1973) refers to a change in the relative frequency by which one option is favored over another in behavioral experiments, as evident in the less-is-better-effect or ratio bias, for example, or framing effects more generally. Preference reversals contradict the predictions of rational choice"<ref>{{cite web |title=Preference reversal |url=https://www.behavioraleconomics.com/resources/mini-encyclopedia-of-be/preference-reversal/ |website=behavioraleconomics.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1971 || Social bias || {{w|Actor–observer asymmetry}} || The concept of {{w|actor–observer asymmetry}} (also actor–observer bias) is introduced by Jones and Nisbett. It explains the errors that one makes when forming attributions about the behavior of others.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Malle |first1=BF |title=The actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: a (surprising) meta-analysis. |doi=10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.895 |pmid=17073526 |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17073526}}</ref> || "states that people tend to explain their own behavior with situation causes and other people's behavior with person causes. "<ref>{{cite web |title=The actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: A (surprising) meta-analysis. |url=https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-20202-004 |website=psycnet.apa.org |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1972 || || || The {{w|Levels of Processing model}} is created by {{w|Fergus I. M. Craik}} and Robert S. Lockhart.<ref>Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671.</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1973 || || {{w|Hindsight bias}} || {{w|Baruch Fischhoff}} attends a seminar where {{w|Paul E. Meehl}} states an observation that clinicians often overestimate their ability to have foreseen the outcome of a particular case, as they claim to have known it all along.<ref name="Fischhoff 2007">{{cite journal | last1 = Fischhoff | first1 = B | year = 2007 | title = An early history of hindsight research | url = | journal = Social Cognition | volume = 25 | issue = | pages = 10–13 | doi = 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.10 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.365.6826 }}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1973 || || {{w|Illusion of validity}} || The {{w|illusion of validity}} bias is first described by {{w|Amos Tversky}} and {{w|Daniel Kahneman}} in their paper.<ref>{{cite web |title=Why are we overconfident in our predictions? |url=https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/illusion-of-validity/ |website=thedecisionlab.com |accessdate=10 April 2020}}</ref> || "The illusion of validity is cognitive bias that occurs when an individual overestimates their ability to predict an outcome when analyzing a set of data - especially when the data appears to have a consistent pattern or appears to 'tell a story"<ref>{{cite web |title=Illusion Of Validity |url=https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Illusion+Of+Validity |website=alleydog.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1974 || Memory bias || || {{w|Elizabeth Loftus}} and John Palmer conduct a study to investigate the effects of language on the development of {{w|false memory}}.<ref name="Loftus1">{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/s0022-5371(74)80011-3 |title=Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory |journal=Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior |volume=13 |issue=5 |pages=585–589 |year=1974 |last1=Loftus |first1=Elizabeth F. |last2=Palmer |first2=John C. }}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1974 || || || " One of the common heuristics used when making judgements is the anchoring and adjustment heuristic, first described in 1974 (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). In this heuristic, when people estimate an unknown quantity (say, the length of the average American commute) they begin with an ‘anchor’ of information they do know (say, their own commute) and adjust until an acceptable value is reached. This anchor could be based on information given to a person (such as the advertised price of new car before bargaining) or it could be drawn from personal experience (the price a friend paid for a new car)."<ref name="One of the common">{{cite journal |last1=Ralph |first1=Kelcie |last2=Delbosc |first2=Alexa |title=I’m multimodal, aren’t you? How ego-centric anchoring biases experts’ perceptions of travel patterns |doi=10.1016/j.tra.2017.04.027 |url=One of the common heuristics used when making judgements is the anchoring and adjustment heuristic, first described in 1974 (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). In this heuristic, when people estimate an unknown quantity (say, the length of the average American commute) they begin with an ‘anchor’ of information they do know (say, their own commute) and adjust until an acceptable value is reached. This anchor could be based on information given to a person (such as the advertised price of new car before bargaining) or it could be drawn from personal experience (the price a friend paid for a new car).}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1975 || || || American psychologist {{w|Stanley Smith Stevens}} proposes that the strength of a stimulus (e.g., the brightness of a light, the severity of a crime) is encoded neurally in a way that is independent of [[w:stimulus modality|modality]]. [[w:Daniel Kahneman|Kahneman]] and Frederick would build on this idea, arguing that the target attribute and heuristic attribute could be unrelated.<ref name="revisited"/> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1975 || Social bias || || Miller and Ross conduct a study that is one of the earliest to assess not only {{w|self-serving bias}} but also the attributions for successes and failures within this theory.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Larson|first=James|author2=Rutger U |author3=Douglass Coll |title=Evidence for a self-serving bias in the attribution of causality|journal=Journal of Personality|volume=45|issue=3|pages=430–441|doi=10.1111/j.1467-6494.1977.tb00162.x |year=1977}}</ref> || "A self-serving bias is the common habit of a person taking credit for positive events or outcomes, but blaming outside factors for negative events."<ref>{{cite web |title=What Is a Self-Serving Bias and What Are Some Examples of It? |url=https://www.healthline.com/health/self-serving-bias |website=healthline.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1976 || Behavioral bias || || {{w|Escalation of commitment}} is first described by Barry M. Staw in his paper ''Knee deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action''.<ref name=Staw1976>{{cite journal|last1=Staw|first1=Barry M.|title=Knee-deep in the big muddy: a study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action|journal=Organizational Behavior and Human Performance|date=1976|volume=16|issue=1|pages=27–44|doi=10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2|citeseerx=10.1.1.470.3668}}</ref> || "It refers to the irrational behavior of investing additional resources in a failing project."<ref>{{cite web |title=Escalation of Commitment: Definition, Causes & Examples |url=https://bizfluent.com/13720599/escalation-of-commitment-definition-causes-examples |website=bizfluent.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1976 || Social bias || {{w|Ultimate attribution error}} || Prior to Pettigrew's formalization of the {{w|ultimate attribution error}}, Birt Duncan finds that [[w:White people|White]] participants view [[w:Black people|Black]] individuals as more violent than White individuals in an "ambiguous shove" situation, where a Black or White person accidentally shoves a White person.<ref name="Duncan 1976 75–93">{{cite journal|last=Duncan|first= B. L.|title= Differential social perception and attribution if intergroup violence: Testing the lower limits of stereotyping of Blacks|journal= [[Journal of Personality and Social Psychology]]|year= 1976|volume= 34|issue= 4|pages= 75–93|doi= 10.1037/0022-3514.34.4.590|url= https://semanticscholar.org/paper/be311d0db3ad5857f7ff9587cb65cf1c590baa5c}}</ref> || "The tendency for persons from one group (the ingroup) to determine that any bad acts by members of an outgroup—for example, a racial or ethnic minority group—are caused by internal attributes or traits rather than by outside circumstances or situations, while viewing their positive behaviors as merely exceptions to the rule or the result of luck."<ref>{{cite web |title=APA Dictionary of Psychology |url=https://dictionary.apa.org/ultimate-attribution-error |website=dictionary.apa.org |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1977 || Memory bias || {{w|Misattribution of memory}} || {{w|Misattribution of memory}}. Early research done by Brown and Kulik finds that flashbulb memories are similar to photographs because they can be described in accurate, vivid detail. In this study, participants describe their circumstances about the moment they learned of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy as well as other similar traumatic events. Participants are able to describe what they were doing, things around them, and other details.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Brown, R., Kulik J.|date=1977|title=Flashbulb memories|url=|journal=Cognition|volume=5|pages=73–99|doi=10.1016/0010-0277(77)90018-X}}</ref> || "When a memory is distorted because of the source, context, or our imagination."<ref>{{cite web |title=Misattribution Effect |url=https://sites.google.com/site/falsememory02/current-research/misattribution |website=sites.google.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1977 || || {{w|Illusory truth effect}} || The {{w|illusory truth effect}} is first identified in a study at {{w|Villanova University}} and {{w|Temple University}}.<ref name="Hasher1977">{{cite journal|last1=Hasher |first1=Lynn |last2=Goldstein |first2=David |last3=Toppino |first3=Thomas |title=Frequency and the conference of referential validity |journal=Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior |date=1977 |volume=16 |issue=1 |pages=107–112 |doi=10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80012-1 |url=http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/users/hasher/PDF/Frequency%20and%20the%20conference%20Hasher%20et%20al%201977.pdf |url-status=bot: unknown |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160515062305/http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/users/hasher/PDF/Frequency%20and%20the%20conference%20Hasher%20et%20al%201977.pdf |archivedate=2016-05-15 }}</ref><ref name="PLOS ONE">{{cite journal|title=People with Easier to Pronounce Names Promote Truthiness of Claims|journal=PLOS ONE|volume=9|issue=2|pages=e88671|date=September 6, 2014 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0088671|pmid=24586368|pmc=3935838|last1=Newman|first1=Eryn J.|last2=Sanson|first2=Mevagh|last3=Miller|first3=Emily K.|last4=Quigley-Mcbride|first4=Adele|last5=Foster|first5=Jeffrey L.|last6=Bernstein|first6=Daniel M.|last7=Garry|first7=Maryanne|bibcode=2014PLoSO...988671N}}</ref> || "It occurs when repeating a statement increases the belief that it’s true even when the statement is actually false."<ref>{{cite web |title=Illusory Truth, Lies, and Political Propaganda: Part 1 |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psych-unseen/202001/illusory-truth-lies-and-political-propaganda-part-1 |website=psychologytoday.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1977 || Social bias || [[w:False-consensus effect|false consensus effect]] || A study conducted by {{w|Lee Ross}} and colleagues provides early evidence for a {{w|cognitive bias}} called the [[w:False-consensus effect|false consensus effect]], which is the tendency for people to overestimate the extent to which others share the same views.<ref>{{Cite journal|title = The "false consensus effect": An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes|journal = Journal of Experimental Social Psychology|pages = 279–301|volume = 13|issue = 3|doi = 10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-x|first = Lee|last = Ross|first2 = David|last2 = Greene|first3 = Pamela|last3 = House|year = 1977}}</ref> || "It refers to the tendency to overestimate consensus for one′s attitudes and behaviors."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Alicke |first1=Mark |last2=Largo |first2=Edward |title=The Role of Self in the False Consensus Effect |doi=10.1006/jesp.1995.1002 |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022103185710025}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1978 || Memory bias || {{w|Misinformation effect}} || Loftus, Miller, and Burns conduct the original {{w|misinformation effect}} study.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Zaragoza |first1=Maria S. |last2=Belli |first2=Robert F. |last3=Payment |first3=Kristie E. |title=Misinformation Effectsand the Suggestibility of Eyewitness Memory}}</ref> || "It happens when a person's memory becomes less accurate due to information that happens after the event."<ref>{{cite web |title=What Is Misinformation Effect? |url=https://www.growthramp.io/articles/misinformation-effect |website=growthramp.io |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1979 || || {{w|Bacon principle}} || "In 1979, professor of psychology and author Charles G. Lord sought answers[1] as to whether we might overcome the {{w|Bacon principle}}, or whether humans are always held hostage to their initial beliefs even in the face of compelling and contradictory evidence." ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1979 || Social bias || || Thomas Nagel identifies four kinds of {{w|moral luck}} in his essay.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Rudy Hiller |first1=Fernando |title=How to (dis)solve Nagel's paradox about moral luck and responsibility |doi=10.1590/0100-6045.2016.V39N1.FRH |url=http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452016000100005}}</ref> || "Moral luck occurs when the features of action which generate a particular moral assessment lie significantly beyond the control of the agent who is so assessed."<ref>{{cite web |title=Moral Luck |url=https://philpapers.org/browse/moral-luck |website=philpapers.org |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1979 || Social bias || {{w|Ultimate attribution error}} || The {{w|ultimate attribution error}} is first established by Thomas F. Pettigrew in his publication ''The Ultimate Attribution Error: Extending Allport's Cognitive Analysis of Prejudice''.<ref name="Pettigrew (T.F)">{{cite journal|last=Pettigrew|first=T. F.|title=The ultimate attribution error: Extending Allport's cognitive analysis of prejudice|journal=[[Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin]]|year=1979|volume=5|issue=4|pages=461–476|doi=10.1177/014616727900500407}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1979 || || {{w|Planning fallacy}} || The '{{w|planning fallacy}} is first proposed by {{w|Daniel Kahneman}} and {{w|Amos Tversky}},<ref name="PezzoLitman2006">{{cite journal|last1=Pezzo|first1=Mark V.|last2=Litman|first2=Jordan A.|last3=Pezzo|first3=Stephanie P.|title=On the distinction between yuppies and hippies: Individual differences in prediction biases for planning future tasks |journal=Personality and Individual Differences|volume=41|issue=7|year=2006|pages=1359–1371|issn=0191-8869|doi=10.1016/j.paid.2006.03.029}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Kahneman|first1=Daniel|last2=Tversky|first2=Amos|date=1977|title=Intuitive prediction: Biases and corrective procedures|url=http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a047747.pdf}} Decision Research Technical Report PTR-1042-77-6. In {{cite book|title=Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases|journal=Science|volume=185|issue=4157|last1=Kahneman|first1=Daniel|last2=Tversky|first2=Amos|year=1982|isbn=978-0511809477|editor-last1=Kahneman|editor-first1=Daniel|pages=414–421|chapter=Intuitive prediction: Biases and corrective procedures|doi=10.1017/CBO9780511809477.031|pmid=17835457|editor-last2=Slovic|editor-first2=Paul|editor-last3=Tversky|editor-first3=Amos}}</ref> || "The planning fallacy refers to a prediction phenomenon, all too familiar to many, wherein people underestimate the time it will take to complete a future task, despite knowledge that previous tasks have generally taken longer than planned"<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Buehler |first1=Roger |last2=Griffin |first2=Dale |last3=Peetz |first3=Johanna |title=Chapter One - The Planning Fallacy: Cognitive, Motivational, and Social Origins |doi=10.1016/S0065-2601(10)43001-4 |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260110430014}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1980 || Social bias || Egocentric bias || The term "egocentric bias" is first coined by {{w|Anthony Greenwald}}, a psychologist at {{w|Ohio State University}}.<ref name=":1">{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1984/06/12/science/a-bias-puts-self-at-center-of-everything.html|title=A bias puts self at center of everything|last=Goleman|first=Daniel|date=1984-06-12|newspaper=The New York Times|access-date=2016-12-09}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1980 || Social bias || {{w|Group attribution error}} || {{w|Group attribution error}} type I. Ruth Hamill, Richard E. Nisbett, and Timothy DeCamp Wilson were the first to study this form of group attribution error in detail in their 1980 paper ''Insensitivity to Sample Bias: Generalizing From Atypical Cases.'' In their study, the researchers provided participants with a case study about an individual welfare recipient. Half of the participants were given statistics showing that the individual was typical for a welfare recipient and had been on the program for the typical amount of time, while the other half of participants were given statistics showing that the welfare recipient had been on the program much longer than normal. The results of the study revealed that participants did indeed draw extremely negative opinions of all welfare recipients as a result of the case study. It was also found that the differences in statistics provided to the two groups had trivial to no effect on the level of group attribution error.<ref name=":04">{{cite journal|last1=Hamill|first1=Ruth|last2=Wilson|first2=Timothy D.|last3=Nisbett|first3=Richard E.|date=1980|title=Insensitivity to sample bias: Generalizing from atypical cases|url=https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/92179/InsensitivityToSampleBias.pdf|url-status=bot: unknown|journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology|volume=39|issue=4|pages=578–589|doi=10.1037/0022-3514.39.4.578|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160511145714/https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/92179/InsensitivityToSampleBias.pdf|archivedate=2016-05-11}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1980 || || {{w|subjective validation}} || The term ''{{w|subjective validation}}'' first appears in the book ''{{w|The Psychology of the Psychic}}'' by {{w|David F. Marks}} and Richard Kammann.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Frazier|first1=Kendrick|title=Science Confronts the Paranormal|date=1986|publisher=Prometheus Books|isbn=|page=101}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1982 || Social bias || {{w|Trait ascription bias}} || {{w|Trait ascription bias}}. In a study involving fifty-six undergraduate psychology students from the University of Bielefeld, Kammer et al.  demonstrate  that subjects rate their own variability on each of 20 trait terms to be considerably higher than their peers.<ref name=kammer>{{cite journal |last=Kammer |first=D. |year=1982 |title=Differences in trait ascriptions to self and friend: Unconfounding intensity from variability |journal=Psychological Reports |volume=51 |issue=1 |pages=99–102 |doi=10.2466/pr0.1982.51.1.99 }}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1983 || || {{w|third-person effect}} || Sociologist W. Phillips Davison first articulates the {{w|third-person effect}} hypothesis. || "is the commonly held belief that other people are more affected, due to personal prejudices, by mass media than you yourself are. This view, largely due to a personal conceit, is caused by the self-concept of being more astute and aware than others, or of being less vulnerable to persuasion than others."<ref>{{cite web |title=Third-Person Effect |url=https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Third-Person+Effect |website=alleydog.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1985 || Social bias || {{w|Group attribution error}} || {{w|Group attribution error}}. Type II. "The second form of group attribution error was first reported by Scott T. Allison and David Messick in 1985" ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1985 || || {{w|Disposition effect}} || The {{w|disposition effect}} anomaly is identified and named by Hersh Shefrin and Meir Statman. In their study, Shefrin and Statman note that "people dislike incurring losses much more than they enjoy making gains, and people are willing to gamble in the domain of losses." Consequently, "investors will hold onto stocks that have lost value...and will be eager to sell stocks that have risen in value." The researchers coined the term "disposition effect" to describe this tendency of holding on to losing stocks too long and to sell off well-performing stocks too readily. Shefrin colloquially described this as a "predisposition toward get-evenitis." John R. Nofsinger has called this sort of investment behavior as a product of the desire to avoid regret and seek pride.<ref name="Behavioural Finance">{{cite web|title=Disposition Effect|url=http://disposition-effect.behaviouralfinance.net/|website=Behavioural Finance|accessdate=11 January 2017|url-status=live|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20170324030730/http://disposition-effect.behaviouralfinance.net/|archivedate=24 March 2017}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1985 || || {{w|Hot-hand fallacy}} || The {{w|hot-hand fallacy}} is first described in a paper by {{w|Amos Tversky}}, {{w|Thomas Gilovich}}, and Robert Vallone. ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1986 || || {{w|Bizarreness effect}} || McDaniel and Einstein argue that bizarreness intrinsically does not enhance memory in their paper.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Iaccino |first1=J. F. |last2=Sowa |first2=S. J. |date=February 1989 |title=Bizarre imagery in paired-associate learning: an effective mnemonic aid with mixed context, delayed testing, and self-paced conditions |volume=68 |issue=1 |pages=307–16 |pmid=2928063 |doi=10.2466/pms.1989.68.1.307 |journal=Percept mot Skills}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1988 || Experiment || [[w:Information bias (psychology)|Information bias]] || In an experiment by Baron, Beattie and Hershey, subjects considered this diagnostic problem involving fictitious diseases.<ref name="Baron2006">{{cite book|last=Baron|first=Jonathan|title=Thinking and Deciding|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Fc5fQgAACAAJ|edition=4th|year=2006|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-68043-1|page=177|chapter=Information bias and the value of information}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1988 || || {{w|Reactive devaluation}} || The {{w|Reactive devaluation}} bias is proposed by {{w|Lee Ross}} and Constance Stillinger.<ref name=RossStillinger1988>Lee Ross, Constance A. Stillinger, "Psychological barriers to conflict resolution", Stanford Center on Conflict and Negotiation, Stanford University, 1988, [https://books.google.com/books?id=R2QrAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=reactive p. 4]</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1988 || || {{w|Status quo bias}} || {{w|Samuelson}} and {{w|Zeckhauser}} demonstrate {{w|status quo bias}} using a questionnaire in which subjects faced a series of decision problems, which were alternately framed to be with and without a pre-existing status quo position. Subjects tended to remain with the status quo when such a position was offered to them.<ref name=Samuelson>{{cite journal | last1 = Samuelson | first1 = W. | last2 = Zeckhauser | first2 = R. | year = 1988 | title = Status quo bias in decision making | url = | journal = Journal of Risk and Uncertainty | volume = 1 | issue = | pages = 7–59 | doi=10.1007/bf00055564| citeseerx = 10.1.1.632.3193 }}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1989 || || {{w|Curse of knowledge}} || The term "{{w|curse of knowledge}}" is coined in a ''{{w|Journal of Political Economy}}'' article by economists {{w|Colin Camerer}}, {{w|George Loewenstein}}, and Martin Weber. || The curse of knowledge causes people to fail to account for the fact that others don't know the same things that they do.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Curse of Knowledge: What It Is and How to Account for It |url=https://effectiviology.com/curse-of-knowledge/ |website=effectiviology.com |accessdate=6 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1990 || Emotional bias || {{w|Endowment effect}} || Kahneman, Knetsch and Thaler publish a paper containing the first experimental test of the {{w|Endowment Effect}}.<ref name="Atladóttir">{{cite journal |last1=Atladóttir |first1=Kristín |title=The Endowment Effect and other biases in creative goods transactions |url=https://skemman.is/bitstream/1946/8659/1/20.The_Endowment_Effect_Kristin.pdf |issn=1670-8288}}</ref> || It refers to an emotional bias that causes individuals to value an owned object higher, often irrationally, than its market value.
 +
|-
 +
| 1991 || Social bias || {{w|Illusory superiority}} || The term illusory superiority is first used by the researchers Van Yperen and Buunk. || "Indicates an individual who has a belief that they are somehow inherently superior to others".<ref>{{cite web |title=Illusory Superiority |url=https://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Illusory+Superiority |website=alleydog.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 +
|-
 +
| 1994 || || || The {{w|Women are wonderful effect}} term is coined by researchers {{w|Alice Eagly}} and {{w|Antonio Mladinic}} in a paper, where they question the widely-held view that there was prejudice against women.<ref>{{cite web |title=“Women Are Wonderful” Effect |url=https://www.scribd.com/document/274926319/Women-Are-Wonderful-Effect |website=scribd.com |accessdate=10 April 2020}}</ref> ||
 +
|-
 +
| 1995 || || || "Implicit bias was first described in a 1995 publication by Tony Greenwald and Mahzarin Banaji"<ref>{{cite web |title=PROJECT IMPLICIT LECTURES AND WORKSHOPS |url=https://www.projectimplicit.net/lectures.html |website=projectimplicit.net |accessdate=12 March 2020}}</ref> || "Research on implicit bias suggests that people can act on the basis of prejudice and stereotypes without intending to do so."<ref>{{cite web |title=Implicit Bias |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicit-bias/ |website=plato.stanford.edu |accessdate=8 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1973 || || The {{w|illusion of validity}} bias is first described by {{w|Amos Tversky}} and {{w|Daniel Kahneman}} in their paper.
+
| 1996 || || || {{w|Daniel Kahneman}} and {{w|Amos Tversky}} argue that cognitive biases have efficient practical implications for areas including clinical judgment, entrepreneurship, finance, and management.<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Kahneman, D. |author2=Tversky, A.  |last-author-amp=yes |title=On the reality of cognitive illusions|journal=Psychological Review|year=1996|volume=103|issue=3|pages=582–591|doi=10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.582|pmid=8759048|url=http://psy.ucsd.edu/%7Emckenzie/KahnemanTversky1996PsychRev.pdf|citeseerx=10.1.1.174.5117  }}</ref><ref name="S.X. Zhang and J. Cueto 2015">{{cite journal |author1=S.X. Zhang |author2=J. Cueto |title=The Study of Bias in Entrepreneurship |journal= Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice |volume=41 |issue=3 |pages=419–454 |doi= 10.1111/etap.12212  |year=2015 }}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1974 || || " One of the common heuristics used when making judgements is the anchoring and adjustment heuristic, first described in 1974 (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). In this heuristic, when people estimate an unknown quantity (say, the length of the average American commute) they begin with an ‘anchor’ of information they do know (say, their own commute) and adjust until an acceptable value is reached. This anchor could be based on information given to a person (such as the advertised price of new car before bargaining) or it could be drawn from personal experience (the price a friend paid for a new car)."<ref name="One of the common">{{cite journal |last1=Ralph |first1=Kelcie |last2=Delbosc |first2=Alexa |title=I’m multimodal, aren’t you? How ego-centric anchoring biases experts’ perceptions of travel patterns |doi=10.1016/j.tra.2017.04.027 |url=One of the common heuristics used when making judgements is the anchoring and adjustment heuristic, first described in 1974 (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). In this heuristic, when people estimate an unknown quantity (say, the length of the average American commute) they begin with an ‘anchor’ of information they do know (say, their own commute) and adjust until an acceptable value is reached. This anchor could be based on information given to a person (such as the advertised price of new car before bargaining) or it could be drawn from personal experience (the price a friend paid for a new car).}}</ref>  
+
| 1998 || Experiment || || {{w|Impact bias}}. "In Gilbert et al., 1998, there was a conducted study on individuals participating in a [[job interview]].  The participants were separated into two groups; the ''unfair decision condition'' (where the decision of being hired was left up to a single MBA student with sole authority listening to the interview) and the ''fair decision condition'' (where the decision was made by a team of MBA students who had to independently and unanimously decide the fate of the interviewee). Then, certain participants were chosen to forecast how they would feel if they were chosen or not chosen for the job immediately after learning if they had been hired or fired and then they had to predict how they would feel ten minutes after hearing the news. Then following the interview, all participants were given letters notifying them they had not been selected for the job.  All participants were then required to fill out a questionnaire that reported their current happiness.  Then after waiting ten minutes, the experimenter presented all the participants with another questionnaire that once again asked them to report their current level of happiness." || "Impact bias refers to a human tendency to overestimate emotional responses to events and experiences"<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Medway |first1=Dominic |last2=Foos |first2=Adrienne |last3=Goatman |first3=Anna |title=Impact bias in student evaluations of higher education |journal=Studies in Higher Education |doi=10.1080/03075079.2015.1071345 |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03075079.2015.1071345 |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1975 || || "In 1975, psychologist [[Stanley Smith Stevens]] proposed that the strength of a stimulus (e.g., the brightness of a light, the severity of a crime) is encoded neurally in a way that is independent of [[stimulus modality|modality]]. Kahneman and Frederick built on this idea, arguing that the target attribute and heuristic attribute could be unrelated."<ref name="revisited"/>
+
| 1998 || || || The {{w|implicit-association test}} is introduced in the scientific literature by {{w|Anthony Greenwald}}, Debbie McGhee, and Jordan Schwartz.<ref name="Greenwald 1998" /> || "A reaction time based categorization task that measures the differential associative strength between bipolar targets and evaluative attribute concepts as an approach to indexing implicit beliefs or biases."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Healy |first1=Graham F. |last2=Boran |first2=Lorraine |last3=Smeaton |first3=Alan F. |title=Neural Patterns of the Implicit Association Test |doi=10.3389/fnhum.2015.00605 |pmid=26635570 |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4656831/ |pmc=4656831}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1977 || || The {{w|illusory truth effect}} is first identified in a study at {{w|Villanova University}} and {{w|Temple University}}.<ref name="Hasher1977">{{cite journal|last1=Hasher |first1=Lynn |last2=Goldstein |first2=David |last3=Toppino |first3=Thomas |title=Frequency and the conference of referential validity |journal=Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior |date=1977 |volume=16 |issue=1 |pages=107–112 |doi=10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80012-1 |url=http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/users/hasher/PDF/Frequency%20and%20the%20conference%20Hasher%20et%20al%201977.pdf |url-status=bot: unknown |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160515062305/http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/users/hasher/PDF/Frequency%20and%20the%20conference%20Hasher%20et%20al%201977.pdf |archivedate=2016-05-15 }}</ref><ref name="PLOS ONE">{{cite journal|title=People with Easier to Pronounce Names Promote Truthiness of Claims|journal=PLOS ONE|volume=9|issue=2|pages=e88671|date=September 6, 2014 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0088671|pmid=24586368|pmc=3935838|last1=Newman|first1=Eryn J.|last2=Sanson|first2=Mevagh|last3=Miller|first3=Emily K.|last4=Quigley-Mcbride|first4=Adele|last5=Foster|first5=Jeffrey L.|last6=Bernstein|first6=Daniel M.|last7=Garry|first7=Maryanne|bibcode=2014PLoSO...988671N}}</ref>
+
| 1998 || || || {{w|Less-is-better effect}}. "In a 1998 study, Hsee, a professor at the Graduate School of Business of [[The University of Chicago]], discovered a less-is-better effect in three contexts: "(1) a person giving a $45 scarf (from scarves ranging from $5-$50) as a gift was perceived to be more generous than one giving a $55 coat (from coats ranging from $50-$500); (2) an overfilled ice cream serving with 7 oz of ice cream was valued more than an underfilled serving with 8 oz of ice cream; (3) a dinnerware set with 24 intact pieces was judged more favourably than one with 31 intact pieces (including the same 24) plus a few broken ones.""<ref name="hsee">{{cite journal|last=Hsee|first=Christopher K.|title=Less Is Better: When Low-value Options Are Valued More Highly than High-value Options|journal=Journal of Behavioral Decision Making|year=1998|volume=11|issue=2|pages=107–121|doi=10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199806)11:2<107::AID-BDM292>3.0.CO;2-Y |url=http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/christopher.hsee/vita/papers/LessIsBetter.pdf}}</ref> || "The Less-is-better Effect is the tendency to prefer the smaller or the lesser alternative when choosing individually, but not when evaluating together."<ref>{{cite web |title=Why we prefer the smaller or the lesser alternative |url=https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/less-is-better-effect/ |website=thedecisionlab.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1979 || || "In 1979, professor of psychology and author Charles G. Lord sought answers[1] as to whether we might overcome the {{w|Bacon principle}}, or whether humans are always held hostage to their initial beliefs even in the face of compelling and contradictory evidence."
+
| 1999 || Concept introduction || || The psychological phenomenon of illusory superiority known as {{w|Dunning–Kruger effect}} is identified as a form of cognitive bias in Kruger and Dunning's 1999 study, ''Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments''.<ref name="Kruger"/> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1985 || || The {{w|disposition effect}} anomaly is identified and named by Hersh Shefrin and Meir Statman. In their study, Shefrin and Statman note that "people dislike incurring losses much more than they enjoy making gains, and people are willing to gamble in the domain of losses." Consequently, "investors will hold onto stocks that have lost value...and will be eager to sell stocks that have risen in value." The researchers coined the term "disposition effect" to describe this tendency of holding on to losing stocks too long and to sell off well-performing stocks too readily. Shefrin colloquially described this as a "predisposition toward get-evenitis." John R. Nofsinger has called this sort of investment behavior as a product of the desire to avoid regret and seek pride.<ref name="Behavioural Finance">{{cite web|title=Disposition Effect|url=http://disposition-effect.behaviouralfinance.net/|website=Behavioural Finance|accessdate=11 January 2017|url-status=live|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20170324030730/http://disposition-effect.behaviouralfinance.net/|archivedate=24 March 2017}}</ref>
+
| 1999 || || || The term "{{w|spotlight effect}}" is coined by {{w|Thomas Gilovich}} and Kenneth Savitsky.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |pmid = 10707330|year = 2000|last1 = Gilovich|first1 = T.|title = The spotlight effect in social judgment: An egocentric bias in estimates of the salience of one's own actions and appearance|journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology|volume = 78|issue = 2|pages = 211–222|last2 = Medvec|first2 = V. H.|last3 = Savitsky|first3 = K.|doi = 10.1037//0022-3514.78.2.211|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131030215508/http://www.psych.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/Gilo.Medvec.Sav_.pdf}}</ref> The phenomenon first appears in the world of psychology in the journal ''{{w|Current Directions in Psychological Science}}''. ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1985 || || The {{w|hot-hand fallacy}} is first described in a paper by {{w|Amos Tversky}}, {{w|Thomas Gilovich}}, and Robert Vallone.
+
| 1999 || Social bias || || The formal proposal of {{w|naïve cynicism}} comes from Kruger and Gilovich's study called "'Naive cynicism' in everyday theories of responsibility assessment: On biased assumptions of bias".<ref name="Kruger 1999" /> [[economics]],<ref name="Heath 2006">{{cite journal|last1=Heath|first1=Joseph|title=Business ethics without stakeholders|journal=Business Ethics Quarterly|volume=16|issue=4|pages=533–557|url=http://benjaminferguson.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Heath-2006-Business-Ethics-Quarterly.pdf|doi=10.5840/beq200616448|date=2006}}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1988 || Experiment || [[w:Information bias (psychology)|Information bias]]. In an experiment by Baron, Beattie and Hershey, subjects considered this diagnostic problem involving fictitious diseases.<ref name="Baron2006">{{cite book|last=Baron|first=Jonathan|title=Thinking and Deciding|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Fc5fQgAACAAJ|edition=4th|year=2006|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-68043-1|page=177|chapter=Information bias and the value of information}}</ref>
+
| 2002 || || Concept introduction || {{w|Daniel Kahneman}} and {{w|Shane Frederick}} propose the process of {{w|attribute substitution}}.<ref name="revisited">{{cite book |last= Kahneman |first=Daniel |first2=Shane |last2=Frederick  |title=Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment |editor=Thomas Gilovich |editor2=Dale Griffin |editor3=Daniel Kahneman |publisher =Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge |year=2002 |pages=49–81 |chapter=Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment |isbn=978-0-521-79679-8 |oclc=47364085}}</ref> || "{{w|Attribute substitution}} occurs when an individual has to make a judgment (of a target attribute) that is computationally complex, and instead substitutes a more easily calculated heuristic attribute."<ref>{{cite web |title=Attribute substitution- a quick guide |url=https://biasandbelief.wordpress.com/2009/06/01/attribute-substitution/ |website=biasandbelief.wordpress.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1989 || || The term "{{w|curse of knowledge}}" is coined in a ''{{w|Journal of Political Economy}}'' article by economists {{w|Colin Camerer}}, {{w|George Loewenstein}}, and Martin Weber.
+
| 2002 || Research || || {{w|Bystander effect}}. Research indicates that priming a social context may inhibit helping behavior. Imagining being around one other person or being around a group of people can affect a person's willingness to help.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Garcia | first1 = S.M. | last2 = Weaver | first2 = K. | last3 = Darley | first3 = J.M. | last4 = Moskowitz | first4 = G.B. | year = 2002 | title = Crowded minds: the implicit bystander effect | url = | journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volume = 83 | issue = 4| pages = 843–853 | doi=10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.843| pmid = 12374439 }}</ref> || "The bystander effect occurs when the presence of others discourages an individual from intervening in an emergency situation."<ref>{{cite web |title=Bystander Effect |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/basics/bystander-effect |website=psychologytoday.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1990 || || Kahneman, Knetsch and Thaler publish a paper containing the first experimental test of the {{w|Endowment Effect}}.<ref name="Atladóttir">{{cite journal |last1=Atladóttir |first1=Kristín |title=The Endowment Effect and other biases in creative goods transactions |url=https://skemman.is/bitstream/1946/8659/1/20.The_Endowment_Effect_Kristin.pdf |issn=1670-8288}}</ref>  
+
| 2003 || || || The term "projection bias" is first introduced in the paper ''Projection Bias in Predicting Future Utility'' by Loewenstein, O'Donoghue and Rabin.<ref name=Frederick2011>{{cite book|last1=Frederick|first1=Shane|last2=Loewenstein|first2=George|last3=O'Donoghue|first3=Ted|editor1-last=Camerer|editor1-first=Colin F.|editor2-last=Loewenstein|editor2-first=George|editor3-last=Rabin|editor3-first=Matthew|title=Advances in Behavioral Economics|date=2011|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=978-1400829118|pages=187–188|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=sA4jJOjwCW4C&pg=PA187|language=en|chapter=Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review|ref=harv}}</ref> || "It refers to people’s assumption that their tastes or preferences will remain the same over time"<ref>{{cite web |title=Projection bias |url=https://www.behavioraleconomics.com/resources/mini-encyclopedia-of-be/projection-bias/ |website=behavioraleconomics.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 1995 || || "Implicit bias was first described in a 1995 publication by Tony Greenwald and Mahzarin Banaji"<ref>{{cite web |title=PROJECT IMPLICIT LECTURES AND WORKSHOPS |url=https://www.projectimplicit.net/lectures.html |website=projectimplicit.net |accessdate=12 March 2020}}</ref>
+
| 2003 || || || {{w|Shitij Kapur}} proposes that a hyperdopaminergic state, at a "brain" level of description, leads to an aberrant assignment of salience to the elements of one's experience, at a "mind" level.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1176/appi.ajp.160.1.13 |pmid=12505794 |title=Psychosis as a State of Aberrant Salience: A Framework Linking Biology, Phenomenology, and Pharmacology in Schizophrenia |journal=American Journal of Psychiatry |volume=160 |issue=1 |pages=13–23 |year=2003 |last1=Kapur |first1=Shitij }}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1996 || || {{w|Daniel Kahneman}} and {{w|Amos Tversky}} argue that cognitive biases have efficient practical implications for areas including clinical judgment, entrepreneurship, finance, and management.<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Kahneman, D. |author2=Tversky, A.  |last-author-amp=yes |title=On the reality of cognitive illusions|journal=Psychological Review|year=1996|volume=103|issue=3|pages=582–591|doi=10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.582|pmid=8759048|url=http://psy.ucsd.edu/%7Emckenzie/KahnemanTversky1996PsychRev.pdf|citeseerx=10.1.1.174.5117  }}</ref><ref name="S.X. Zhang and J. Cueto 2015">{{cite journal |author1=S.X. Zhang |author2=J. Cueto |title=The Study of Bias in Entrepreneurship |journal= Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice |volume=41 |issue=3 |pages=419–454 |doi= 10.1111/etap.12212  |year=2015 }}</ref>
+
| 2004 || || || "One of the most common anchors is personal experience, which is the basis of ego-centric decision-making. Estimating the behaviors, attitudes and thoughts of other people is complex and effortful; anchoring and adjustment makes this process simpler by substituting one’s own perspective and adjusting until a reasonable estimate has been achieved (Epley et al., 2004). "<ref name="One of the common"/> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1998 || Experiment || {{w|Impact bias}}. "In Gilbert et al., 1998, there was a conducted study on individuals participating in a [[job interview]].  The participants were separated into two groups; the ''unfair decision condition'' (where the decision of being hired was left up to a single MBA student with sole authority listening to the interview) and the ''fair decision condition'' (where the decision was made by a team of MBA students who had to independently and unanimously decide the fate of the interviewee). Then, certain participants were chosen to forecast how they would feel if they were chosen or not chosen for the job immediately after learning if they had been hired or fired and then they had to predict how they would feel ten minutes after hearing the news. Then following the interview, all participants were given letters notifying them they had not been selected for the job.  All participants were then required to fill out a questionnaire that reported their current happiness.  Then after waiting ten minutes, the experimenter presented all the participants with another questionnaire that once again asked them to report their current level of happiness."
+
| 2004 || || || The concept of the {{w|distinction bias}} is advanced by Christopher K. Hsee and Jiao Zhang of the {{w|University of Chicago}} as an explanation for differences in evaluations of options between joint evaluation mode and separate evaluation mode. || "The tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them together than separately"
 
|-
 
|-
| 1998 || || The {{w|implicit-association test}} is introduced in the scientific literature by {{w|Anthony Greenwald}}, Debbie McGhee, and Jordan Schwartz.<ref name="Greenwald 1998" /
+
| 2006 || || || Overcoming Bias launches as a group blog on the "general theme of how to move our beliefs closer to reality, in the face of our natural biases such as overconfidence and wishful thinking, and our bias to believe we have corrected for such biases, when we have done no such thing."<ref>{{cite web |title=Overcoming Bias |url=http://www.overcomingbias.com/about |website=overcomingbias.com |accessdate=13 March 2020}}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 1999 || Concept introduction || The psychological phenomenon of illusory superiority known as {{w|Dunning–Kruger effect}} is identified as a form of cognitive bias in Kruger and Dunning's 1999 study, ''Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments''.<ref name="Kruger"/>
+
| 2006 || {{w|Behavioral bias}} || || The {{w|Ostrich effect}} is coined by Galai & Sade.<ref>{{cite journal |title=The "Ostrich Effect" and the Relationship between the Liquidity and the Yields of Financial Assets |journal=The Journal of Business |doi=10.2139/ssrn.431180}}</ref> || "The ostrich effect bias is a tendency to ignore dangerous or negative information by ignoring it or burying one's head in the sand"<ref>{{cite web |title=Ostrich Effect |url=https://www.thinkingcollaborative.com/stj/ostrich-effect/ |website=thinkingcollaborative.com |accessdate=8 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 2002 || Concept introduction || "In a 2002 revision of the theory, Kahneman and {{w|Shane Frederick}} proposed {{w|attribute substitution}} as a process underlying these and other effects."<ref name="revisited">{{cite book |last= Kahneman |first=Daniel |first2=Shane |last2=Frederick  |title=Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment |editor=Thomas Gilovich |editor2=Dale Griffin |editor3=Daniel Kahneman |publisher =Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge |year=2002 |pages=49–81 |chapter=Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment |isbn=978-0-521-79679-8 |oclc=47364085}}</ref>
+
| 2008 || Social bias || || {{w|Cheerleader effect}}. "The phrase was coined by the character {{w|Barney Stinson}} in "{{w|Not a Father's Day}}", an episode of the television series ''{{w|How I Met Your Mother}}'', first aired in November 2008. Barney points out to his friends a group of women that initially seem attractive, but who all seem to be very ugly when examined individually. This point is made again by [[w:Ted Mosby|Ted]] and [[w:Robin Scherbatsky|Robin]] later in the episode, who note that some of Barney's friends also only seem attractive in a group."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/11/cheerleader-effect-why-people-are-more-beautiful-in-groups/281119/|title=Cheerleader Effect: Why People Are More Beautiful in Groups|work=[[The Atlantic]]|last=Hamblin|first=James|date=November 4, 2013|accessdate=December 5, 2015}}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 2002 || Research || {{w|Bystander effect}}. Research indicates that priming a social context may inhibit helping behavior. Imagining being around one other person or being around a group of people can affect a person's willingness to help.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Garcia | first1 = S.M. | last2 = Weaver | first2 = K. | last3 = Darley | first3 = J.M. | last4 = Moskowitz | first4 = G.B. | year = 2002 | title = Crowded minds: the implicit bystander effect | url = | journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volume = 83 | issue = 4| pages = 843–853 | doi=10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.843| pmid = 12374439 }}</ref>  
+
| 2009 || || || The concept of {{w|denomination effect}} is proposed by Priya Raghubir, professor at the {{w|New York University Stern School of Business}}, and Joydeep Srivastava, professor at [[w:University of Maryland, College Park|University of Maryland]], in their paper.<ref name="NPR">{{cite news|title=Why We Spend Coins Faster Than Bills|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104063298|accessdate=7 April 2020|publisher=NPR|date=May 12, 2009}}</ref> || "Theoretical form of cognitive bias relating to currency, whereby people are less likely to spend larger bills than their equivalent value in smaller bills."<ref>{{cite web |title=Denomination effect |url=http://nlpnotes.com/denomination-effect/ |website=nlpnotes.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 2004 || || "One of the most common anchors is personal experience, which is the basis of ego-centric decision-making. Estimating the behaviors, attitudes and thoughts of other people is complex and effortful; anchoring and adjustment makes this process simpler by substituting one’s own perspective and adjusting until a reasonable estimate has been achieved (Epley et al., 2004). "<ref name="One of the common"/>
+
| 2010 || || || The ''Handbook of Social Psychology'' recognizes {{w|naïve realism}} as one of "four hard-won insights about [[w:Perception|human perception]], [[w:Thought|thinking]], {{w|motivation}} and {{w|behavior}} that... represent important, indeed foundational, contributions of {{w|social psychology}}."<ref name=":2">Ross, L.; Lepper, M.; Ward, A., [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy001001/full History of Social Psychology: Insights, Challenges, and Contributions to Theory and Application]. In Fiske, S. T., In Gilbert, D. T., In Lindzey, G., & Jongsma, A. E. (2010).&nbsp;''Handbook of Social Psychology''. ''Vol.1.'' Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. {{DOI|10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy001001}}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 2004 || || The concept of the {{w|distinction bias}} is advanced by Christopher K. Hsee and Jiao Zhang of the {{w|University of Chicago}} as an explanation for differences in evaluations of options between joint evaluation mode and separate evaluation mode.
+
| 2011 || || || The {{w|IKEA effect}} is identified and named by {{w|Michael I. Norton}} of {{w|Harvard Business School}}, Daniel Mochon of {{w|Yale}}, and {{w|Dan Ariely}} of {{w|Duke University}}, who publish the results of three studies in this year. || "The Ikea Effect is the cognitive phenomena where customers get more excited and place a higher value in the products they have partially created, modified or personalized."<ref>{{cite web |title=What is the Ikea Effect? |url=https://www.bloomreach.com/en/blog/2019/08/ikea-effect.html |website=bloomreach.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 2006 || || "Overcoming Bias began in November ’06 as a group blog on the general theme of how to move our beliefs closer to reality, in the face of our natural biases such as overconfidence and wishful thinking, and our bias to believe we have corrected for such biases, when we have done no such thing."<ref>{{cite web |title=Overcoming Bias |url=http://www.overcomingbias.com/about |website=overcomingbias.com |accessdate=13 March 2020}}</ref>
+
| 2011 || || || "Cognitive Bias: The Google Effect. Also known as “digital amnesia”, the aptly named Google Effect describes our tendency to forget information that can be easily accessed online. First described in 2011 by Betsy Sparrow (Columbia University) and her colleagues, their paper described the results of several memory experiments involving technology."<ref name="thecustomer.net">{{cite web |title=Marketers Need To Be Aware Of Cognitive Bias |url=https://thecustomer.net/marketers-need-to-be-aware-of-cognitive-bias/?cn-reloaded=1 |website=thecustomer.net |accessdate=12 March 2020}}</ref> || The tendency to forget information which can be promptly searched on Google.
 
|-
 
|-
| 2009 || || The concept of {{w|denomination effect}} is proposed by Priya Raghubir, professor at the {{w|New York University Stern School of Business}}, and Joydeep Srivastava, professor at [[w:University of Maryland, College Park|University of Maryland]], in their paper.<ref name="NPR">{{cite news|title=Why We Spend Coins Faster Than Bills|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=104063298|accessdate=7 April 2020|publisher=NPR|date=May 12, 2009}}</ref>
+
| 2011 || || || The {{w|Look-elsewhere effect}}, more generally known in statistics as the {{w|problem of multiple comparisons}}, gains some media attention in the context of the search for the {{w|Higgs boson}} at the {{w|Large Hadron Collider}}.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomchiversscience/100123873/an-unconfirmed-sighting-of-the-elusive-higgs-boson/|title=An unconfirmed sighting of the elusive Higgs boson|author=Tom Chivers|date=2011-12-13|publisher=Daily Telegraph}}</ref> || "It occurs when a statistically significant observation is found but, actually, arose by chance and due to the size of the parameter space and sample observed."<ref>{{cite web |title=When a statistically significant observation should be overlooked. |url=https://thedecisionlab.com/biases/look-elsewhere-effect/ |website=thedecisionlab.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 2011 || || The {{w|IKEA effect}} is identified and named by {{w|Michael I. Norton}} of {{w|Harvard Business School}}, Daniel Mochon of {{w|Yale}}, and {{w|Dan Ariely}} of {{w|Duke University}}, who publish the results of three studies in this year.
+
| 2011 || || || The phenomenon known as {{w|Google effect}} is first described and named by Betsy Sparrow ([[w:Columbia University|Columbia]]), Jenny Liu ([[w:University of Wisconsin-Madison|Wisconsin]]) and Daniel M. Wegner ([[w:Harvard University|Harvard]]) in their paper.<ref name="Columbia">{{cite web|url=http://news.columbia.edu/research/2490 |title=Study Finds That Memory Works Differently in the Age of Google |publisher=[[Columbia University]] |date=July 14, 2011 |url-status=bot: unknown |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110717092619/http://news.columbia.edu/research/2490 |archivedate=July 17, 2011 }}</ref> ||
 
|-
 
|-
| 2011 || || "Cognitive Bias: The Google Effect. Also known as “digital amnesia”, the aptly named Google Effect describes our tendency to forget information that can be easily accessed online. First described in 2011 by Betsy Sparrow (Columbia University) and her colleagues, their paper described the results of several memory experiments involving technology."<ref name="thecustomer.net">{{cite web |title=Marketers Need To Be Aware Of Cognitive Bias |url=https://thecustomer.net/marketers-need-to-be-aware-of-cognitive-bias/?cn-reloaded=1 |website=thecustomer.net |accessdate=12 March 2020}}</ref>  
+
| 2012 || || || In an article in ''{{w|Psychological Bulletin}}'' it is suggested the {{w|subadditivity effect}} can be explained by an {{w|information-theoretic}} generative mechanism that assumes a noisy conversion of objective evidence (observation) into subjective estimates (judgment).<ref name="HilbertPsychBull">{{cite journal|last1=Hilbert|first1=Martin|title=Toward a synthesis of cognitive biases: How noisy information processing can bias human decision making|journal=Psychological Bulletin|date=2012|volume=138|issue=2|pages=211–237|doi=10.1037/a0025940|url=http://www.martinhilbert.net/HilbertPsychBull.pdf|pmid=22122235|url-status=bot: unknown|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304023236/http://www.martinhilbert.net/HilbertPsychBull.pdf|archivedate=2016-03-04|citeseerx=10.1.1.432.8763}}</ref> || "The tendency to judge probability of the whole to be less than the probabilities of the parts"<ref>{{cite web |title=Today's term from psychology is Subadditivity Effect. |url=https://steemit.com/life/@jevh/today-s-term-from-psychology-is-subadditivity-effect |website=steemit.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
| 2013 || || The term “End of History Illusion” originates in a journal article by psychologists Jordi Quoidbach, [[w:Daniel Gilbert (psychologist)|Daniel Gilbert]], and {{w|Timothy Wilson}} detailing their research on the phenomenon and leveraging the phrase coined by [[w:The End of History and the Last Man|Francis Fukuyama's 1992 book of the same name]].<ref name="Quoidbach2013">{{cite journal |last1= Quoidbach |first1= Jordi |last2= Gilbert |first2= Daniel T. |authorlink2= Daniel Gilbert (psychologist) |last3= Wilson |first3= Timothy D. |authorlink3= Timothy Wilson |date= 2013-01-04 |title= The End of History Illusion |journal= [[Science (journal)|Science]] |volume= 339 |issue= 6115 |pages= 96–98 |doi= 10.1126/science.1229294 |pmid= 23288539 |url= http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/Quoidbach%20et%20al%202013.pdf |quote= Young people, middle-aged people, and older people all believed they had changed a lot in the past but would change relatively little in the future. |url-status= bot: unknown |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20130113214951/http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/Quoidbach%20et%20al%202013.pdf |archivedate= 2013-01-13 |bibcode= 2013Sci...339...96Q }}</ref>
+
| 2013 || || || The term “End of History Illusion” originates in a journal article by psychologists Jordi Quoidbach, [[w:Daniel Gilbert (psychologist)|Daniel Gilbert]], and {{w|Timothy Wilson}} detailing their research on the phenomenon and leveraging the phrase coined by [[w:The End of History and the Last Man|Francis Fukuyama's 1992 book of the same name]].<ref name="Quoidbach2013">{{cite journal |last1= Quoidbach |first1= Jordi |last2= Gilbert |first2= Daniel T. |authorlink2= Daniel Gilbert (psychologist) |last3= Wilson |first3= Timothy D. |authorlink3= Timothy Wilson |date= 2013-01-04 |title= The End of History Illusion |journal= [[Science (journal)|Science]] |volume= 339 |issue= 6115 |pages= 96–98 |doi= 10.1126/science.1229294 |pmid= 23288539 |url= http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/Quoidbach%20et%20al%202013.pdf |quote= Young people, middle-aged people, and older people all believed they had changed a lot in the past but would change relatively little in the future. |url-status= bot: unknown |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20130113214951/http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~dtg/Quoidbach%20et%20al%202013.pdf |archivedate= 2013-01-13 |bibcode= 2013Sci...339...96Q }}</ref> || When people tend to “underestimate how much they will change in the future.”<ref>{{cite web |title=Why You Won’t Be the Person You Expect to Be |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/04/science/study-in-science-shows-end-of-history-illusion.html |website=nytimes.com |accessdate=7 May 2020}}</ref>
 
|-
 
|-
 
|}
 
|}

Latest revision as of 18:16, 7 May 2020

This is a timeline of cognitive biases.

Sample questions

The following are some interesting questions that can be answered by reading this timeline:

Big picture

Time period Development summary More details

Full timeline

Year Category Type of event Details Definition (when applicable)
c.180 CE Social bias Concept development Many philosophers and social theorists observe and consider the phenomenon of belief in a just world, going back to at least as early as the Pyrrhonist philosopher Sextus Empiricus, writing circa 180 CE, who argues against this belief.[1] "The just-world hypothesis is the belief that people get what they deserve since life is fair."[2]
1747 "Lind conducted the first systematic clinical trial in 1747."[3]
1753 Anthropomorphism Anthropomorphism is first attested, originally in reference to the heresy of applying a human form to the Christian God.[4][5] "The interpretation of nonhuman things or events in terms of human characteristics"[6]
1776–1799 Declinism The declinism belief is traced back to Edward Gibbon's work,[7] The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, published between 1776 and 1788, where Gibbon argues that Rome collapsed due to the gradual loss of civic virtue among its citizens,[8] "Declinism is the tendency to believe that the worst is to come"[9]
1796 Gambler's fallacy . Pierre-Simon Laplace describes in A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities the ways in which men calculate their probability of having sons: "I have seen men, ardently desirous of having a son, who could learn only with anxiety of the births of boys in the month when they expected to become fathers. Imagining that the ratio of these births to those of girls ought to be the same at the end of each month, they judged that the boys already born would render more probable the births next of girls." The expectant fathers feared that if more sons were born in the surrounding community, then they themselves would be more likely to have a daughter. This essay by Laplace is regarded as one of the earliest descriptions of the fallacy.[10] "The Gambler's Fallacy is the misconception that something that has not happened for a long time has become 'overdue', such a coin coming up heads after a series of tails."[11]
1798 The term stereotype is first used in the printing trade by Firmin Didot, to describe a printing plate that duplicated any typography. The duplicate printing plate, or the stereotype, is used for printing instead of the original.[12]
1847 Semmelweis effect The term Semmelweis effect derives from the name of a Hungarian physician, Ignaz Semmelweis, who discovered in 1847 that childbed fever mortality rates fell ten-fold when doctors disinfected their hands with a chlorine solution before moving from one patient to another, or, most particularly, after an autopsy. The Semmelweis effect is a metaphor for the reflex-like tendency to reject new evidence or new knowledge because it contradicts established norms, beliefs, or paradigms.[13] " refers to the tendency to automatically reject new information or knowledge because it contradicts current thinking or beliefs."[14]
1848 Bandwagon effect Bandwagon effect "The phrase "jump on the bandwagon" first appeared in American politics in 1848 when Dan Rice, a famous and popular circus clown of the time, used his bandwagon and its music to gain attention for his political campaign appearances. As his campaign became more successful, other politicians strove for a seat on the bandwagon, hoping to be associated with his success. Later, during the time of William Jennings Bryan's 1900 presidential campaign, bandwagons had become standard in campaigns,[15] and the phrase "jump on the bandwagon" was used as a derogatory term, implying that people were associating themselves with success without considering that with which they associated themselves." "is a psychological phenomenon whereby people do something primarily because other people are doing it, regardless of their own beliefs, which they may ignore or override."[16]
1850 The first reference to “stereotype” appears as a noun that means “image perpetuated without change.”[12]
1860 Weber–Fechner law Both Weber's law and Fechner's law are published by Gustav Theodor Fechner in the work Elemente der Psychophysik (Elements of Psychophysics). This publication is the first work ever in this field, and where Fechner coins the term psychophysics to describe the interdisciplinary study of how humans perceive physical magnitudes.[17] "The law states that the change in a stimulus that will be just noticeable is a constant ratio of the original stimulus."[18]
1866 Pareidolia Pareidolia "The German word pareidolie was used in German articles by Dr. Karl Ludwig Kahlbaum — for example in his 1866 paper "On Delusion of the Senses". When Kahlbaum's paper was reviewed the following year (1867) in The Journal of Mental Science, Volume 13, pareidolie was translated as pareidolia: "…partial hallucination, perception of secondary images, or pareidolia.""[19] " the tendency to perceive a specific, often meaningful image in a random or ambiguous visual pattern."[20]
1874 Memory bias Cryptomnesia The first documented instance of cryptomnesia occurs with the medium Stainton Moses.[21][22] "an implicit memory phenomenon in which people mistakenly believe that a current thought or idea is a product of their own creation when, in fact, they have encountered it previously and then forgotten it"[23]
1876 German experimental psychologist Gustav Fechner conducts the earliest known research on the mere-exposure effect.[24] "It means that people prefer things that they are most familiar with"[25]
1882 "The specious present is the time duration wherein a state of consciousness is experienced as being in the present.[26] The term was first introduced by the philosopher E. R. Clay in 1882 (E. Robert Kelly),[27][28]
1885 Spacing effect The phenomenon of spacing effect is first identified by Hermann Ebbinghaus, and his detailed study of it is published in his book Über das Gedächtnis. Untersuchungen zur experimentellen Psychologie (Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology). " The spacing effect refers to the finding that long-term memory is enhanced when learning events are spaced apart in time, rather than massed in immediate succession"[29]
1890 Tip of the tongue The term "tip of the tongue" is borrowed from colloquial usage,[30] and possibly a calque from the French phrase avoir le mot sur le bout de la langue ("having the word on the tip of the tongue"). The tip of the tongue phenomenon was first described as a psychological phenomenon in the text The Principles of Psychology by William James (1890), although he did not label it as such.[31] "a state in which one cannot quite recall a familiar word but can recall words of similar form and meaning"[32]
1893 Memory bias Childhood amnesia Childhood amnesia is first formally reported by psychologist Caroline Miles in her article A study of individual psychology by the American Journal of Psychology.[33] " refers to the fact that most people cannot remember events that occurred before the age of 3 or 4"[34]
1906 Bandwagon effect "The first known use of bandwagon effect was in 1906"[35]
1906 Social bias In-group favoritism Sociologist William Sumner posits that humans are a species that join together in groups by their very nature. However, he also maintains that humans have an innate tendency to favor their own group over others, proclaiming how "each group nourishes its own pride and vanity, boasts itself superior, exists in its own divinities, and looks with contempt on outsiders" (p. 13).[36] "the tendency to favor members of one's own group over those in other groups"[37]
1909 Memory bias Testing effect The first documented empirical studies on the testing effect are published by Edwina E. Abbott.[38][39]
1913 Monte Carlo fallacy The term "Monte Carlo fallacy" originates from the best known example of the phenomenon, which occurs in the Monte Carlo Casino.[40] "occurs when an individual erroneously believes that a certain random event is less likely or more likely, given a previous event or a series of events"[41]
1914 Cross-race effect The first research on the cross-race effect is published.[42] "The tendency for eyewitnesses to be better at recognizing members of their own race/ethnicity than members of other races."[43]
1920 Social bias Halo effect The halo effect is named by psychologist Edward Thorndike[44] in reference to a person being perceived as having a halo. He gives the phenomenon its name in his article A Constant Error in Psychological Ratings.[45] In "Constant Error", Thorndike sets out to replicate the study in hopes of pinning down the bias that he thought was present in these ratings. Subsequent researchers would study it in relation to attractiveness and its bearing on the judicial and educational systems.[46] Thorndike originally coins the term referring only to people; however, its use would be greatly expanded especially in the area of brand marketing.[45] "First coined back in 1920, the halo effect describes how our impression of a person forms a halo around our conception of their character." "The term was coined by psychologist Edwin Thorndike in 1920."[47][48] "Error in reasoning in which an impression formed from a single trait or characteristic is allowed to influence multiple judgments or ratings of unrelated factors."[49]
1922 The term “stereotype” is first used in the modern psychological sense by American journalist Walter Lippmann in his work Public Opinion.[12]
1927 Memory bias Russian psychologist Bluma Zeigarnik publishes in the journal Psychologische Forschung a report on a series of experiments uncovering the processes underlying the phenomenon later called Zeigarnik effect.[50] Russian psychologist Bluma Zeigarnik first studies the phenomenon after her professor and Gestalt psychologist Kurt Lewin noticed that a waiter had better recollections of still unpaid orders. However, after the completion of the task – after everyone had paid – he was unable to remember any more details of the orders. Zeigarnik then designed a series of experiments to uncover the processes underlying this phenomenon. Her research report was published in 1927, in the journal Psychologische Forschung.[51] "Tendency to remember interrupted or incomplete tasks or events more easily than tasks that have been completed."[52]
1928 Money Illusion Irving Fisher publishes The Money Illusion, which develops the concept of the same name.[53] "It posits that people have a tendency to view their wealth and income in nominal dollar terms, rather than recognize its real value, adjusted for inflation."[54]
1930 The specious present is further developed by William James.[28] "James defined the specious present to be "the prototype of all conceived times... the short duration of which we are immediately and incessantly sensible". In "Scientific Thought" (1930), C. D. Broad further elaborated on the concept of the specious present and considered that the specious present may be considered as the temporal equivalent of a sensory datum.[28]
1932 Memory bias Some of the earliest evidence for the Fading Affect Bias dates back to a study by Cason, who does a study using a retrospective procedure where participants recall and rate past events and emotion when prompted finds that recalled emotional intensity for positive events is generally stronger than that of negative events.[55] "It indicates that the emotional response prompted by positive memories often tends to be stronger than the emotional response prompted by negative memories."[56]
1933 Memory bias Von Restorff effect The Von Restorff effect theory is coined by German psychiatrist and pediatrician Hedwig von Restorff, who, in her study, finds that when participants are presented with a list of categorically similar items with one distinctive, isolated item on the list, memory for the item is improved.[57] "It predicts that when multiple similar objects are present, the one that differs from the rest is most likely to be remembered."[58]
1945 Functional fixedness Karl Duncker defines functional fixedness as being a "mental block against using an object in a new way that is required to solve a problem".[59] "It is the inability to realize that something known to have a particular use may also be used to perform other functions."[60]
1946 " In 1946, Berkson first illustrated the presence of a false correlation due to this last reason, which is known as Berkson's paradox and is one of the most famous paradox in probability and statistics."[61]
1954 Social comparison theory The Social comparison theory is initially proposed by social psychologist Leon Festinger. It centers on the belief that there is a drive within individuals to gain accurate self-evaluations.[62] "It is the idea that individuals determine their own social and personal worth based on how they stack up against others"[63]
1956 Barnum effect The term "Barnum effect" is coined by psychologist Paul Meehl in his essay Wanted – A Good Cookbook, because he relates the vague personality descriptions used in certain "pseudo-successful" psychological tests to those given by showman P. T. Barnum.[64][65] "the phenomenon that occurs when individuals believe that personality descriptions apply specifically to them (more so than to other people), despite the fact that the description is actually filled with information that applies to everyone."[66]
1957 Parkinson's law of triviality "Parkinson's law of triviality is C. Northcote Parkinson's 1957 argument that members of an organization give disproportionate weight to trivial issues."[67] "explains that people will give more energy and focus to trivial or unimportant items than to more important and complex ones."[68]
1960 Confirmation bias English psychhologist Peter Wason first describes the confirmation bias.[69][70][71]
1960 Congruence bias "The classic example of subjects' congruence bias was discovered by Peter Cathcart Wason" "The tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, instead of considering possible alternatives."[72]
1961 Authority bias Authority bias. The Milgram experiment is the classic experiment that established its existence.[73]
1961 Ambiguity effect Ambiguity effect is first described by Daniel Ellsberg.[74]
1964 Telescoping effect Telescoping effect. The original work on telescoping is usually attributed to a 1964 article by Neter and Waksberg in the Journal of the American Statistical Association.[75] The term telescoping comes from the idea that time seems to shrink toward the present in the way that the distance to objects seems to shrink when they are viewed through a telescope.[75]
1964 Law of the instrument The first recorded statement of the concept of Law of the instrument is Abraham Kaplan's: "I call it the law of the instrument, and it may be formulated as follows: Give a small boy a hammer, and he will find that everything he encounters needs pounding."[76]
1966 An experiment shows that people remember a group of words better if they are within the same theme category. Such words that generate recall by association are known as semantic cues.[77]
1967 Risk compensation Risk compensation. In Sweden, following the change from driving on the left to driving on the right there is a drop in crashes and fatalities, which is linked to the increased apparent risk. The number of motor insurance claims going down by 40%, returning to normal over the next six weeks.[78][79] Fatality levels would take two years to return to normal.[80][n 1] "Risk compensation (RC) postulates that humans have a built-in level of acceptable risk-taking and that our behaviour adjusts to this level in a homeostatic manner"[81]
1967 "Chapman (1967) described a bias in the judgment of the frequency with which two events co-occur. This demonstration showed that the co-occurrence of paired stimuli resulted in participants overestimating the frequency of the pairings." ""Illusory correlation" was originally coined by Chapman and Chapman (1967) to describe people's tendencies to overestimate relationships between two groups when distinctive and unusual information is presented.[82]"[83]
1967 Social bias Fundamental attribution error Edward E. Jones and Victor Harris conduct a classic experiment[84] that would later give rise to the phrase Fundamental attribution error, coined by Lee Ross[85] "is the tendency for people to over-emphasize dispositional, or personality-based explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing situational explanations".[86]
1968 Conservatism bias The conservatism (belief revision) bias is discussed by Ward Edwards.[87] "Conservatism bias is a mental process in which people maintain their past views or predictions at the cost of recognizing new information."[88]
1968 Pygmalion Effect "The Pygmalion Effect (also called the Galatea effect) originates with researchers Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobsen in 1968."[89] "refers to the phenomenon of people improving their performance when others have high expectations of them."[90]
1969 Ben Franklin effect Researchers confirm the Ben Franklin effect.[91] "t refers to an altruistic reaction that makes a person more likely to do a favor for someone that they have already completed a favor for; more likely than they are to return a favor to someone who has completed a favor for them."[92]
1969 Suffix effect ". This phenomenon is called the suffix effect, and it is important because of the argument by Crowder and Morton (1969) that the effect is a reflection of the contribution of the auditory sensory memory or echoic memory to recall in the nonsuffix control condition"[93]
1971 Preference reversal Lichtenstein and Slovic study and experiment on the preference reversal inconsistency.[94] "Preference reversal (Lichtenstein & Slovic, 1973) refers to a change in the relative frequency by which one option is favored over another in behavioral experiments, as evident in the less-is-better-effect or ratio bias, for example, or framing effects more generally. Preference reversals contradict the predictions of rational choice"[95]
1971 Social bias Actor–observer asymmetry The concept of actor–observer asymmetry (also actor–observer bias) is introduced by Jones and Nisbett. It explains the errors that one makes when forming attributions about the behavior of others.[96] "states that people tend to explain their own behavior with situation causes and other people's behavior with person causes. "[97]
1972 The Levels of Processing model is created by Fergus I. M. Craik and Robert S. Lockhart.[98]
1973 Hindsight bias Baruch Fischhoff attends a seminar where Paul E. Meehl states an observation that clinicians often overestimate their ability to have foreseen the outcome of a particular case, as they claim to have known it all along.[99]
1973 Illusion of validity The illusion of validity bias is first described by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman in their paper.[100] "The illusion of validity is cognitive bias that occurs when an individual overestimates their ability to predict an outcome when analyzing a set of data - especially when the data appears to have a consistent pattern or appears to 'tell a story"[101]
1974 Memory bias Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer conduct a study to investigate the effects of language on the development of false memory.[102]
1974 " One of the common heuristics used when making judgements is the anchoring and adjustment heuristic, first described in 1974 (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). In this heuristic, when people estimate an unknown quantity (say, the length of the average American commute) they begin with an ‘anchor’ of information they do know (say, their own commute) and adjust until an acceptable value is reached. This anchor could be based on information given to a person (such as the advertised price of new car before bargaining) or it could be drawn from personal experience (the price a friend paid for a new car)."[103]
1975 American psychologist Stanley Smith Stevens proposes that the strength of a stimulus (e.g., the brightness of a light, the severity of a crime) is encoded neurally in a way that is independent of modality. Kahneman and Frederick would build on this idea, arguing that the target attribute and heuristic attribute could be unrelated.[104]
1975 Social bias Miller and Ross conduct a study that is one of the earliest to assess not only self-serving bias but also the attributions for successes and failures within this theory.[105] "A self-serving bias is the common habit of a person taking credit for positive events or outcomes, but blaming outside factors for negative events."[106]
1976 Behavioral bias Escalation of commitment is first described by Barry M. Staw in his paper Knee deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action.[107] "It refers to the irrational behavior of investing additional resources in a failing project."[108]
1976 Social bias Ultimate attribution error Prior to Pettigrew's formalization of the ultimate attribution error, Birt Duncan finds that White participants view Black individuals as more violent than White individuals in an "ambiguous shove" situation, where a Black or White person accidentally shoves a White person.[109] "The tendency for persons from one group (the ingroup) to determine that any bad acts by members of an outgroup—for example, a racial or ethnic minority group—are caused by internal attributes or traits rather than by outside circumstances or situations, while viewing their positive behaviors as merely exceptions to the rule or the result of luck."[110]
1977 Memory bias Misattribution of memory Misattribution of memory. Early research done by Brown and Kulik finds that flashbulb memories are similar to photographs because they can be described in accurate, vivid detail. In this study, participants describe their circumstances about the moment they learned of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy as well as other similar traumatic events. Participants are able to describe what they were doing, things around them, and other details.[111] "When a memory is distorted because of the source, context, or our imagination."[112]
1977 Illusory truth effect The illusory truth effect is first identified in a study at Villanova University and Temple University.[113][114] "It occurs when repeating a statement increases the belief that it’s true even when the statement is actually false."[115]
1977 Social bias false consensus effect A study conducted by Lee Ross and colleagues provides early evidence for a cognitive bias called the false consensus effect, which is the tendency for people to overestimate the extent to which others share the same views.[116] "It refers to the tendency to overestimate consensus for one′s attitudes and behaviors."[117]
1978 Memory bias Misinformation effect Loftus, Miller, and Burns conduct the original misinformation effect study.[118] "It happens when a person's memory becomes less accurate due to information that happens after the event."[119]
1979 Bacon principle "In 1979, professor of psychology and author Charles G. Lord sought answers[1] as to whether we might overcome the Bacon principle, or whether humans are always held hostage to their initial beliefs even in the face of compelling and contradictory evidence."
1979 Social bias Thomas Nagel identifies four kinds of moral luck in his essay.[120] "Moral luck occurs when the features of action which generate a particular moral assessment lie significantly beyond the control of the agent who is so assessed."[121]
1979 Social bias Ultimate attribution error The ultimate attribution error is first established by Thomas F. Pettigrew in his publication The Ultimate Attribution Error: Extending Allport's Cognitive Analysis of Prejudice.[122]
1979 Planning fallacy The 'planning fallacy is first proposed by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky,[123][124] "The planning fallacy refers to a prediction phenomenon, all too familiar to many, wherein people underestimate the time it will take to complete a future task, despite knowledge that previous tasks have generally taken longer than planned"[125]
1980 Social bias Egocentric bias The term "egocentric bias" is first coined by Anthony Greenwald, a psychologist at Ohio State University.[126]
1980 Social bias Group attribution error Group attribution error type I. Ruth Hamill, Richard E. Nisbett, and Timothy DeCamp Wilson were the first to study this form of group attribution error in detail in their 1980 paper Insensitivity to Sample Bias: Generalizing From Atypical Cases. In their study, the researchers provided participants with a case study about an individual welfare recipient. Half of the participants were given statistics showing that the individual was typical for a welfare recipient and had been on the program for the typical amount of time, while the other half of participants were given statistics showing that the welfare recipient had been on the program much longer than normal. The results of the study revealed that participants did indeed draw extremely negative opinions of all welfare recipients as a result of the case study. It was also found that the differences in statistics provided to the two groups had trivial to no effect on the level of group attribution error.[127]
1980 subjective validation The term subjective validation first appears in the book The Psychology of the Psychic by David F. Marks and Richard Kammann.[128]
1982 Social bias Trait ascription bias Trait ascription bias. In a study involving fifty-six undergraduate psychology students from the University of Bielefeld, Kammer et al. demonstrate that subjects rate their own variability on each of 20 trait terms to be considerably higher than their peers.[129]
1983 third-person effect Sociologist W. Phillips Davison first articulates the third-person effect hypothesis. "is the commonly held belief that other people are more affected, due to personal prejudices, by mass media than you yourself are. This view, largely due to a personal conceit, is caused by the self-concept of being more astute and aware than others, or of being less vulnerable to persuasion than others."[130]
1985 Social bias Group attribution error Group attribution error. Type II. "The second form of group attribution error was first reported by Scott T. Allison and David Messick in 1985"
1985 Disposition effect The disposition effect anomaly is identified and named by Hersh Shefrin and Meir Statman. In their study, Shefrin and Statman note that "people dislike incurring losses much more than they enjoy making gains, and people are willing to gamble in the domain of losses." Consequently, "investors will hold onto stocks that have lost value...and will be eager to sell stocks that have risen in value." The researchers coined the term "disposition effect" to describe this tendency of holding on to losing stocks too long and to sell off well-performing stocks too readily. Shefrin colloquially described this as a "predisposition toward get-evenitis." John R. Nofsinger has called this sort of investment behavior as a product of the desire to avoid regret and seek pride.[131]
1985 Hot-hand fallacy The hot-hand fallacy is first described in a paper by Amos Tversky, Thomas Gilovich, and Robert Vallone.
1986 Bizarreness effect McDaniel and Einstein argue that bizarreness intrinsically does not enhance memory in their paper.[132]
1988 Experiment Information bias In an experiment by Baron, Beattie and Hershey, subjects considered this diagnostic problem involving fictitious diseases.[133]
1988 Reactive devaluation The Reactive devaluation bias is proposed by Lee Ross and Constance Stillinger.[134]
1988 Status quo bias Samuelson and Zeckhauser demonstrate status quo bias using a questionnaire in which subjects faced a series of decision problems, which were alternately framed to be with and without a pre-existing status quo position. Subjects tended to remain with the status quo when such a position was offered to them.[135]
1989 Curse of knowledge The term "curse of knowledge" is coined in a Journal of Political Economy article by economists Colin Camerer, George Loewenstein, and Martin Weber. The curse of knowledge causes people to fail to account for the fact that others don't know the same things that they do.[136]
1990 Emotional bias Endowment effect Kahneman, Knetsch and Thaler publish a paper containing the first experimental test of the Endowment Effect.[94] It refers to an emotional bias that causes individuals to value an owned object higher, often irrationally, than its market value.
1991 Social bias Illusory superiority The term illusory superiority is first used by the researchers Van Yperen and Buunk. "Indicates an individual who has a belief that they are somehow inherently superior to others".[137]
1994 The Women are wonderful effect term is coined by researchers Alice Eagly and Antonio Mladinic in a paper, where they question the widely-held view that there was prejudice against women.[138]
1995 "Implicit bias was first described in a 1995 publication by Tony Greenwald and Mahzarin Banaji"[139] "Research on implicit bias suggests that people can act on the basis of prejudice and stereotypes without intending to do so."[140]
1996 Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky argue that cognitive biases have efficient practical implications for areas including clinical judgment, entrepreneurship, finance, and management.[141][142]
1998 Experiment Impact bias. "In Gilbert et al., 1998, there was a conducted study on individuals participating in a job interview. The participants were separated into two groups; the unfair decision condition (where the decision of being hired was left up to a single MBA student with sole authority listening to the interview) and the fair decision condition (where the decision was made by a team of MBA students who had to independently and unanimously decide the fate of the interviewee). Then, certain participants were chosen to forecast how they would feel if they were chosen or not chosen for the job immediately after learning if they had been hired or fired and then they had to predict how they would feel ten minutes after hearing the news. Then following the interview, all participants were given letters notifying them they had not been selected for the job. All participants were then required to fill out a questionnaire that reported their current happiness. Then after waiting ten minutes, the experimenter presented all the participants with another questionnaire that once again asked them to report their current level of happiness." "Impact bias refers to a human tendency to overestimate emotional responses to events and experiences"[143]
1998 The implicit-association test is introduced in the scientific literature by Anthony Greenwald, Debbie McGhee, and Jordan Schwartz.[144] "A reaction time based categorization task that measures the differential associative strength between bipolar targets and evaluative attribute concepts as an approach to indexing implicit beliefs or biases."[145]
1998 Less-is-better effect. "In a 1998 study, Hsee, a professor at the Graduate School of Business of The University of Chicago, discovered a less-is-better effect in three contexts: "(1) a person giving a $45 scarf (from scarves ranging from $5-$50) as a gift was perceived to be more generous than one giving a $55 coat (from coats ranging from $50-$500); (2) an overfilled ice cream serving with 7 oz of ice cream was valued more than an underfilled serving with 8 oz of ice cream; (3) a dinnerware set with 24 intact pieces was judged more favourably than one with 31 intact pieces (including the same 24) plus a few broken ones.""[146] "The Less-is-better Effect is the tendency to prefer the smaller or the lesser alternative when choosing individually, but not when evaluating together."[147]
1999 Concept introduction The psychological phenomenon of illusory superiority known as Dunning–Kruger effect is identified as a form of cognitive bias in Kruger and Dunning's 1999 study, Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments.[148]
1999 The term "spotlight effect" is coined by Thomas Gilovich and Kenneth Savitsky.[149] The phenomenon first appears in the world of psychology in the journal Current Directions in Psychological Science.
1999 Social bias The formal proposal of naïve cynicism comes from Kruger and Gilovich's study called "'Naive cynicism' in everyday theories of responsibility assessment: On biased assumptions of bias".[150] economics,[151]
2002 Concept introduction Daniel Kahneman and Shane Frederick propose the process of attribute substitution.[104] "Attribute substitution occurs when an individual has to make a judgment (of a target attribute) that is computationally complex, and instead substitutes a more easily calculated heuristic attribute."[152]
2002 Research Bystander effect. Research indicates that priming a social context may inhibit helping behavior. Imagining being around one other person or being around a group of people can affect a person's willingness to help.[153] "The bystander effect occurs when the presence of others discourages an individual from intervening in an emergency situation."[154]
2003 The term "projection bias" is first introduced in the paper Projection Bias in Predicting Future Utility by Loewenstein, O'Donoghue and Rabin.[155] "It refers to people’s assumption that their tastes or preferences will remain the same over time"[156]
2003 Shitij Kapur proposes that a hyperdopaminergic state, at a "brain" level of description, leads to an aberrant assignment of salience to the elements of one's experience, at a "mind" level.[157]
2004 "One of the most common anchors is personal experience, which is the basis of ego-centric decision-making. Estimating the behaviors, attitudes and thoughts of other people is complex and effortful; anchoring and adjustment makes this process simpler by substituting one’s own perspective and adjusting until a reasonable estimate has been achieved (Epley et al., 2004). "[103]
2004 The concept of the distinction bias is advanced by Christopher K. Hsee and Jiao Zhang of the University of Chicago as an explanation for differences in evaluations of options between joint evaluation mode and separate evaluation mode. "The tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them together than separately"
2006 Overcoming Bias launches as a group blog on the "general theme of how to move our beliefs closer to reality, in the face of our natural biases such as overconfidence and wishful thinking, and our bias to believe we have corrected for such biases, when we have done no such thing."[158]
2006 Behavioral bias The Ostrich effect is coined by Galai & Sade.[159] "The ostrich effect bias is a tendency to ignore dangerous or negative information by ignoring it or burying one's head in the sand"[160]
2008 Social bias Cheerleader effect. "The phrase was coined by the character Barney Stinson in "Not a Father's Day", an episode of the television series How I Met Your Mother, first aired in November 2008. Barney points out to his friends a group of women that initially seem attractive, but who all seem to be very ugly when examined individually. This point is made again by Ted and Robin later in the episode, who note that some of Barney's friends also only seem attractive in a group."[161]
2009 The concept of denomination effect is proposed by Priya Raghubir, professor at the New York University Stern School of Business, and Joydeep Srivastava, professor at University of Maryland, in their paper.[162] "Theoretical form of cognitive bias relating to currency, whereby people are less likely to spend larger bills than their equivalent value in smaller bills."[163]
2010 The Handbook of Social Psychology recognizes naïve realism as one of "four hard-won insights about human perception, thinking, motivation and behavior that... represent important, indeed foundational, contributions of social psychology."[45]
2011 The IKEA effect is identified and named by Michael I. Norton of Harvard Business School, Daniel Mochon of Yale, and Dan Ariely of Duke University, who publish the results of three studies in this year. "The Ikea Effect is the cognitive phenomena where customers get more excited and place a higher value in the products they have partially created, modified or personalized."[164]
2011 "Cognitive Bias: The Google Effect. Also known as “digital amnesia”, the aptly named Google Effect describes our tendency to forget information that can be easily accessed online. First described in 2011 by Betsy Sparrow (Columbia University) and her colleagues, their paper described the results of several memory experiments involving technology."[165] The tendency to forget information which can be promptly searched on Google.
2011 The Look-elsewhere effect, more generally known in statistics as the problem of multiple comparisons, gains some media attention in the context of the search for the Higgs boson at the Large Hadron Collider.[166] "It occurs when a statistically significant observation is found but, actually, arose by chance and due to the size of the parameter space and sample observed."[167]
2011 The phenomenon known as Google effect is first described and named by Betsy Sparrow (Columbia), Jenny Liu (Wisconsin) and Daniel M. Wegner (Harvard) in their paper.[168]
2012 In an article in Psychological Bulletin it is suggested the subadditivity effect can be explained by an information-theoretic generative mechanism that assumes a noisy conversion of objective evidence (observation) into subjective estimates (judgment).[169] "The tendency to judge probability of the whole to be less than the probabilities of the parts"[170]
2013 The term “End of History Illusion” originates in a journal article by psychologists Jordi Quoidbach, Daniel Gilbert, and Timothy Wilson detailing their research on the phenomenon and leveraging the phrase coined by Francis Fukuyama's 1992 book of the same name.[171] When people tend to “underestimate how much they will change in the future.”[172]

Meta information on the timeline

How the timeline was built

The initial version of the timeline was written by FIXME.

Funding information for this timeline is available.

Feedback and comments

Feedback for the timeline can be provided at the following places:

  • FIXME

What the timeline is still missing

Timeline update strategy

See also

External links

References

  1. Sextus Empiricus, "Outlines of Pyrrhonism", Book 1, Chapter 13, Section 32
  2. "Just-World Hypothesis". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  3. Carlisle, Rodney (2004). Scientific American Inventions and Discoveries, John Wiley & Songs, Inc., New Jersey. p. 393. Template:Isbn.
  4. Chambers's Cyclopædia, Supplement, 1753 
  5. Oxford English Dictionary, 1st ed. "anthropomorphism, n." Oxford University Press (Oxford), 1885.
  6. "Anthropomorphism". britannica.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  7. Miller, Laura (2015-06-14). "Culture is dead — again". Salon. Retrieved 17 April 2018. 
  8. J.G.A. Pocock, "Between Machiavelli and Hume: Gibbon as Civic Humanist and Philosophical Historian," Daedalus 105:3 (1976), 153–169; and in Further reading: Pocock, EEG, 303–304; FDF, 304–306.
  9. "Why we feel the past is better compare to what the future holds". thedecisionlab.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  10. Barron, Greg; Leider, Stephen (13 October 2009). "The role of experience in the Gambler's Fallacy" (PDF). Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 
  11. "The Gambler's Fallacy - Explained". thecalculatorsite.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  12. 12.0 12.1 12.2 "Stereotypes Defined". stereotypeliberia.wordpress.com. Retrieved 10 April 2020. 
  13. Mortell, Manfred; Balkhy, Hanan H.; Tannous, Elias B.; Jong, Mei Thiee (July 2013). "Physician 'defiance' towards hand hygiene compliance: Is there a theory–practice–ethics gap?". Journal of the Saudi Heart Association. 25 (3): 203–208. PMC 3809478Freely accessible. PMID 24174860. doi:10.1016/j.jsha.2013.04.003. 
  14. "Semmelweis Reflex (Semmelweis Effect)". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  15. "Bandwagon Effect". Retrieved 2007-03-09. 
  16. "The Bandwagon Effect". psychologytoday.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  17. Fechner, Gustav Theodor (1966) [First published .1860]. Howes, D H; Boring, E G, eds. Elements of psychophysics [Elemente der Psychophysik]. volume 1. Translated by Adler, H E. United States of America: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 
  18. "Weber's law". britannica.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  19. [1] Sibbald, M.D. "Report on the Progress of Psychological Medicine; German Psychological Literature", The Journal of Mental Science, Volume 13. 1867. p. 238
  20. "pareidolia". merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  21. Brian Righi. (2008). Chapter 4: Talking Boards and Ghostly Goo. In Ghosts, Apparitions and Poltergeists. Llewellyn Publications. Template:ISBN "An early example of this occurred in 1874 with he medium William Stanton Moses, who communicated with the spirits of two brothers who had recently died in India. Upon investigation, it was discovered that one week prior to the séance, their obituary had appeared in the newspaper. This was of some importance because Moses's communications with the two spirits contained nothing that wasn't already printed in the newspaper. When the spirits were pressed for further information, they were unable to provide any. Researchers concluded that Moses had seen the obituary, forgotten it, and then resurfaced the memory during the séance."
  22. Robert Todd Carroll. (2014). "Cryptomnesia". The Skeptic's Dictionary. Retrieved 2014-07-12.
  23. "cryptomnesia". dictionary.apa.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  24. "Mere Exposure Effect" (PDF). wiwi.europa-uni.de. Retrieved 10 April 2020. 
  25. "6 Conversion Principles You Can Learn From The Mere-Exposure Effect". marketingland.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  26. James W (1893). The principles of psychology. New York: H. Holt and Company. p. 609. 
  27. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named kelly
  28. 28.0 28.1 28.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Citation/CS1/Suggestions' not found.
  29. Vlach, Haley A.; Sandhofer, Catherine M. "Distributing Learning Over Time: The Spacing Effect in Children's Acquisition and Generalization of Science Concepts". PMC 3399982Freely accessible. PMID 22616822. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01781.x. 
  30. Schwartz, BL. (Sep 1999). "Sparkling at the end of the tongue: the etiology of tip-of-the-tongue phenomenology." (PDF). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 6 (3): 379–93. PMID 12198776. doi:10.3758/bf03210827. 
  31. James, W. (1890). Principles of Psychology. Retrieved from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/James/Principles/
  32. Brown, Roger; McNeill, David. "The "tip of the tongue" phenomenon". doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(66)80040-3. 
  33. Bauer, P (2004). "Oh where, oh where have those early memories gone? A developmental perspective on childhood amnesia". Psychological Science Agenda. 18 (12). 
  34. "Childhood Amnesia". sciencedirect.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  35. "bandwagon effect". merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 7 April 2020. 
  36. Sumner, William Graham. (1906). Folkways: A Study of the Social Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores, and Morals. Boston, MA: Ginn.
  37. Everett, Jim A. C.; Faber, Nadira S.; Crockett, Molly. "Preferences and beliefs in ingroup favoritism". PMC 4327620Freely accessible. PMID 25762906. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00015. 
  38. Abbott, Edwina (1909). "On the analysis of the factors of recall in the learning process". Psychological Monographs: General and Applied. 11 (1): 159–177. doi:10.1037/h0093018 – via Ovid. 
  39. Larsen, Douglas P.; Butler, Andrew C. (2013). Walsh, K., ed. Test-enhanced learning. In Oxford Textbook of Medical Education. pp. 443–452. ISBN 9780199652679. 
  40. "Why we gamble like monkeys". BBC.com. 2015-01-02. 
  41. "Gambler's Fallacy". investopedia.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  42. Feingold, CA (1914). "The influence of environment on identification of persons and things". Journal of Criminal Law and Police Science. 5 (1): 39–51. JSTOR 1133283. doi:10.2307/1133283. 
  43. Laub, Cindy E.; Meissner, Christian A.; Susa, Kyle J. "The Cross-Race Effect: Resistant to Instructions". doi:10.1155/2013/745836. 
  44. The Advanced Dictionary of Marketing, Scott G. Dacko, 2008: Marketing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2008-06-18. p. 248. ISBN 9780199286003. 
  45. 45.0 45.1 45.2 Thorndike 1920 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name ":2" defined multiple times with different content
  46. Sigall, Harold; Ostrove, Nancy (1975-03-01). "Beautiful but Dangerous: Effects of Offender Attractiveness and Nature of the Crime on Juridic Judgment". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 31 (3): 410–414. doi:10.1037/h0076472. 
  47. "This Cognitive Bias Explains Why Pretty People Make 12% More Money Than Everybody Else". businessinsider.com. Retrieved 6 April 2020. 
  48. "What Is the Halo Effect?". psychologytoday.com. Retrieved 6 April 2020. 
  49. "Halo effect". britannica.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  50. Zeigarnik 1927: "Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter Handlungen". Psychologische Forschung 9, 1-85.
  51. Zeigarnik 1927: "Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter Handlungen". Psychologische Forschung 9, 1-85.
  52. "Zeigarnik Effect". goodtherapy.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  53. Fisher, Irving (1928), The Money Illusion, New York: Adelphi Company 
  54. "Money Illusion". investopedia.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  55. Fleming, G. W. T. H. (January 1933). "The Learning and Retention of Pleasant and Unpleasant Activities. (Arch. of Psychol., No. 134, 1932.) Cason, H.". Journal of Mental Science. 79 (324): 187–188. ISSN 0368-315X. doi:10.1192/bjp.79.324.187-c. 
  56. Skowronski, John J.; Walker, W. Richard; Henderson, Dawn X.; Bond, Gary D. "Chapter Three - The Fading Affect Bias: Its History, Its Implications, and Its Future". doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-800052-6.00003-2. 
  57. von Restorff, Hedwig (1933). "Über die Wirkung von Bereichsbildungen im Spurenfeld" [The effects of field formation in the trace field]. Psychologische Forschung [Psychological Research] (in Deutsch). 18 (1): 299–342. doi:10.1007/BF02409636. 
  58. "The Von Restorff effect". lawsofux.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  59. Duncker, K. (1945). "On problem solving". Psychological Monographs, 58:5 (Whole No. 270).
  60. "Functional fixedness". britannica.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  61. Batsidis, Apostolos; Tzavelas, George; Alexopoulos, Panagiotis. "Berkson's paradox and weighted distributions: An application to Alzheimer's disease". doi:10.1002/bimj.201900046. 
  62. Festinger L (1954). "A theory of social comparison processes". Human Relations. 7 (2): 117–140. doi:10.1177/001872675400700202. 
  63. "Social Comparison Theory". psychologytoday.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  64. Meehl, Paul E. (1956). "Wanted – A Good Cookbook". American Psychologist. 11 (6): 263–272. doi:10.1037/h0044164. 
  65. Dutton, D. L. (1988). "The cold reading technique". Experientia. 44 (4): 326–332. PMID 3360083. doi:10.1007/BF01961271. 
  66. "Barnum Effect". britannica.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  67. Parkinson, C. Northcote (1958). Parkinson's Law, or the Pursuit of Progress. John Murray. ISBN 0140091076. 
  68. "How to Handle Bikeshedding: Parkinson's Law of Triviality". projectbliss.net. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  69. "The Curious Case of Confirmation Bias". psychologytoday.com. Retrieved 7 April 2020. 
  70. Acks, Alex. The Bubble of Confirmation Bias. 
  71. Myers, David G. Psychology. 
  72. "Cognitive Bias in Decision Making". associationanalytics.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  73. Ellis RM (2015). Middle Way Philosophy: Omnibus Edition. Lulu Press. ISBN 9781326351892. 
  74. Borcherding, Katrin; Laričev, Oleg Ivanovič; Messick, David M. (1990). Contemporary Issues in Decision Making. North-Holland. p. 50. ISBN 978-0-444-88618-7. 
  75. 75.0 75.1 Rubin, David C.; Baddeley, Alan D. (1989). "Telescoping is not time compression: A model". Memory & Cognition. 17 (6): 653–661. PMID 2811662. doi:10.3758/BF03202626. 
  76. Abraham Kaplan (1964). The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science. San Francisco: Chandler Publishing Co. p. 28. ISBN 9781412836296. 
  77. Tulving, Endel; Pearlstone, Zena (1966). "Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 5 (4): 381–391. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(66)80048-8. 
  78. Adams, John (1985). Risk and Freedom: Record of Road Safety Regulation. Brefi Press. ISBN 9780948537059. 
  79. Flock, Elizabeth (2012-02-17). "Dagen H: The day Sweden switched sides of the road". Washington Post. On the day of the change, only 150 minor accidents were reported. Traffic accidents over the next few months went down. ... By 1969, however, accidents were back at normal levels 
  80. "On September 4 there were 125 reported traffic accidents as opposed to 130-196 from the previous Mondays. No traffic fatalities were linked to the switch. In fact, fatalities dropped for two years, possibly because drivers were more vigilant after the switch." Sweden finally began driving on the right side of the road in 1967 The Examiner Sept 2, 2009
  81. Mok, D; Gore, G; Hagel, B; Mok, E; Magdalinos, H; Pless, B. "Risk compensation in children's activities: A pilot study". PMC 2721187Freely accessible. PMID 19657519. doi:10.1093/pch/9.5.327. 
  82. Chapman, L (1967). "Illusory correlation in observational report". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 6 (1): 151–155. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(67)80066-5. 
  83. Chapman, L.J (1967). "Illusory correlation in observational report". Journal of Verbal Learning. 6: 151–155. doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(67)80066-5. 
  84. Jones, E. E.; Harris, V. A. (1967). "The attribution of attitudes". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 3 (1): 1–24. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(67)90034-0. 
  85. Ross, L. (1977). "The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process". In Berkowitz, L. Advances in experimental social psychology. 10. New York: Academic Press. pp. 173–220. ISBN 978-0-12-015210-0. 
  86. "Fundamental Attribution Error". simplypsychology.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  87. Edwards, Ward. "Conservatism in Human Information Processing (excerpted)". In Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic and Amos Tversky. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press. Template:ISBN Original work published 1968.
  88. "Conservatism Bias". dwassetmgmt.com. Retrieved 8 May 2020. 
  89. "Statistics How To". statisticshowto.com. Retrieved 7 April 2020. 
  90. "Pygmalion Effect". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  91. "To Become Super-Likable, Practice "The Ben Franklin Effect"". medium.com. Retrieved 13 March 2020. 
  92. "Ben Franklin Effect". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  93. "The suffix effect: How many positions are involved?" (PDF). link.springer.com. Retrieved 5 May 2020. 
  94. 94.0 94.1 Atladóttir, Kristín. "The Endowment Effect and other biases in creative goods transactions" (PDF). ISSN 1670-8288. 
  95. "Preference reversal". behavioraleconomics.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  96. Malle, BF. "The actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: a (surprising) meta-analysis.". PMID 17073526. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.895. 
  97. "The actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: A (surprising) meta-analysis.". psycnet.apa.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  98. Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671.
  99. Fischhoff, B (2007). "An early history of hindsight research". Social Cognition. 25: 10–13. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.365.6826Freely accessible. doi:10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.10. 
  100. "Why are we overconfident in our predictions?". thedecisionlab.com. Retrieved 10 April 2020. 
  101. "Illusion Of Validity". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  102. Loftus, Elizabeth F.; Palmer, John C. (1974). "Reconstruction of automobile destruction: An example of the interaction between language and memory". Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 13 (5): 585–589. doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(74)80011-3. 
  103. 103.0 103.1 Ralph, Kelcie; Delbosc, Alexa. [One of the common heuristics used when making judgements is the anchoring and adjustment heuristic, first described in 1974 (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). In this heuristic, when people estimate an unknown quantity (say, the length of the average American commute) they begin with an ‘anchor’ of information they do know (say, their own commute) and adjust until an acceptable value is reached. This anchor could be based on information given to a person (such as the advertised price of new car before bargaining) or it could be drawn from personal experience (the price a friend paid for a new car). "I'm multimodal, aren't you? How ego-centric anchoring biases experts' perceptions of travel patterns"] Check |url= value (help). doi:10.1016/j.tra.2017.04.027. 
  104. 104.0 104.1 Kahneman, Daniel; Frederick, Shane (2002). "Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment". In Thomas Gilovich; Dale Griffin; Daniel Kahneman. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 49–81. ISBN 978-0-521-79679-8. OCLC 47364085. 
  105. Larson, James; Rutger U; Douglass Coll (1977). "Evidence for a self-serving bias in the attribution of causality". Journal of Personality. 45 (3): 430–441. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1977.tb00162.x. 
  106. "What Is a Self-Serving Bias and What Are Some Examples of It?". healthline.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  107. Staw, Barry M. (1976). "Knee-deep in the big muddy: a study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action". Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 16 (1): 27–44. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.470.3668Freely accessible. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2. 
  108. "Escalation of Commitment: Definition, Causes & Examples". bizfluent.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  109. Duncan, B. L. (1976). "Differential social perception and attribution if intergroup violence: Testing the lower limits of stereotyping of Blacks". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 34 (4): 75–93. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.34.4.590. 
  110. "APA Dictionary of Psychology". dictionary.apa.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  111. Brown, R., Kulik J. (1977). "Flashbulb memories". Cognition. 5: 73–99. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(77)90018-X. 
  112. "Misattribution Effect". sites.google.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  113. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Citation/CS1/Suggestions' not found.
  114. Newman, Eryn J.; Sanson, Mevagh; Miller, Emily K.; Quigley-Mcbride, Adele; Foster, Jeffrey L.; Bernstein, Daniel M.; Garry, Maryanne (September 6, 2014). "People with Easier to Pronounce Names Promote Truthiness of Claims". PLOS ONE. 9 (2): e88671. Bibcode:2014PLoSO...988671N. PMC 3935838Freely accessible. PMID 24586368. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0088671. 
  115. "Illusory Truth, Lies, and Political Propaganda: Part 1". psychologytoday.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  116. Ross, Lee; Greene, David; House, Pamela (1977). "The "false consensus effect": An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 13 (3): 279–301. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-x. 
  117. Alicke, Mark; Largo, Edward. "The Role of Self in the False Consensus Effect". doi:10.1006/jesp.1995.1002. 
  118. Zaragoza, Maria S.; Belli, Robert F.; Payment, Kristie E. "Misinformation Effectsand the Suggestibility of Eyewitness Memory". 
  119. "What Is Misinformation Effect?". growthramp.io. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  120. Rudy Hiller, Fernando. "How to (dis)solve Nagel's paradox about moral luck and responsibility". doi:10.1590/0100-6045.2016.V39N1.FRH. 
  121. "Moral Luck". philpapers.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  122. Pettigrew, T. F. (1979). "The ultimate attribution error: Extending Allport's cognitive analysis of prejudice". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 5 (4): 461–476. doi:10.1177/014616727900500407. 
  123. Pezzo, Mark V.; Litman, Jordan A.; Pezzo, Stephanie P. (2006). "On the distinction between yuppies and hippies: Individual differences in prediction biases for planning future tasks". Personality and Individual Differences. 41 (7): 1359–1371. ISSN 0191-8869. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.03.029. 
  124. Kahneman, Daniel; Tversky, Amos (1977). "Intuitive prediction: Biases and corrective procedures" (PDF).  Decision Research Technical Report PTR-1042-77-6. In Kahneman, Daniel; Tversky, Amos (1982). "Intuitive prediction: Biases and corrective procedures". In Kahneman, Daniel; Slovic, Paul; Tversky, Amos. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science. 185. pp. 414–421. ISBN 978-0511809477. PMID 17835457. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511809477.031. 
  125. Buehler, Roger; Griffin, Dale; Peetz, Johanna. "Chapter One - The Planning Fallacy: Cognitive, Motivational, and Social Origins". doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(10)43001-4. 
  126. Goleman, Daniel (1984-06-12). "A bias puts self at center of everything". The New York Times. Retrieved 2016-12-09. 
  127. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Citation/CS1/Suggestions' not found.
  128. Frazier, Kendrick (1986). Science Confronts the Paranormal. Prometheus Books. p. 101. 
  129. Kammer, D. (1982). "Differences in trait ascriptions to self and friend: Unconfounding intensity from variability". Psychological Reports. 51 (1): 99–102. doi:10.2466/pr0.1982.51.1.99. 
  130. "Third-Person Effect". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  131. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Citation/CS1/Suggestions' not found.
  132. Iaccino, J. F.; Sowa, S. J. (February 1989). "Bizarre imagery in paired-associate learning: an effective mnemonic aid with mixed context, delayed testing, and self-paced conditions". Percept mot Skills. 68 (1): 307–16. PMID 2928063. doi:10.2466/pms.1989.68.1.307. 
  133. Baron, Jonathan (2006). "Information bias and the value of information". Thinking and Deciding (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 177. ISBN 978-0-521-68043-1. 
  134. Lee Ross, Constance A. Stillinger, "Psychological barriers to conflict resolution", Stanford Center on Conflict and Negotiation, Stanford University, 1988, p. 4
  135. Samuelson, W.; Zeckhauser, R. (1988). "Status quo bias in decision making". Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 1: 7–59. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.632.3193Freely accessible. doi:10.1007/bf00055564. 
  136. "The Curse of Knowledge: What It Is and How to Account for It". effectiviology.com. Retrieved 6 May 2020. 
  137. "Illusory Superiority". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  138. ""Women Are Wonderful" Effect". scribd.com. Retrieved 10 April 2020. 
  139. "PROJECT IMPLICIT LECTURES AND WORKSHOPS". projectimplicit.net. Retrieved 12 March 2020. 
  140. "Implicit Bias". plato.stanford.edu. Retrieved 8 May 2020. 
  141. Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1996). "On the reality of cognitive illusions" (PDF). Psychological Review. 103 (3): 582–591. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.174.5117Freely accessible. PMID 8759048. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.582. 
  142. S.X. Zhang; J. Cueto (2015). "The Study of Bias in Entrepreneurship". Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 41 (3): 419–454. doi:10.1111/etap.12212. 
  143. Medway, Dominic; Foos, Adrienne; Goatman, Anna. "Impact bias in student evaluations of higher education". Studies in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1071345. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  144. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Greenwald_1998
  145. Healy, Graham F.; Boran, Lorraine; Smeaton, Alan F. "Neural Patterns of the Implicit Association Test". PMC 4656831Freely accessible. PMID 26635570. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00605. 
  146. Hsee, Christopher K. (1998). "Less Is Better: When Low-value Options Are Valued More Highly than High-value Options" (PDF). Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 11 (2): 107–121. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199806)11:2<107::AID-BDM292>3.0.CO;2-Y. 
  147. "Why we prefer the smaller or the lesser alternative". thedecisionlab.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  148. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Kruger
  149. Gilovich, T.; Medvec, V. H.; Savitsky, K. (2000). "The spotlight effect in social judgment: An egocentric bias in estimates of the salience of one's own actions and appearance" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 78 (2): 211–222. PMID 10707330. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.78.2.211. 
  150. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Kruger_1999
  151. Heath, Joseph (2006). "Business ethics without stakeholders" (PDF). Business Ethics Quarterly. 16 (4): 533–557. doi:10.5840/beq200616448. 
  152. "Attribute substitution- a quick guide". biasandbelief.wordpress.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  153. Garcia, S.M.; Weaver, K.; Darley, J.M.; Moskowitz, G.B. (2002). "Crowded minds: the implicit bystander effect". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 83 (4): 843–853. PMID 12374439. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.843. 
  154. "Bystander Effect". psychologytoday.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  155. Frederick, Shane; Loewenstein, George; O'Donoghue, Ted (2011). "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review". In Camerer, Colin F.; Loewenstein, George; Rabin, Matthew. Advances in Behavioral Economics. Princeton University Press. pp. 187–188. ISBN 978-1400829118. 
  156. "Projection bias". behavioraleconomics.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  157. Kapur, Shitij (2003). "Psychosis as a State of Aberrant Salience: A Framework Linking Biology, Phenomenology, and Pharmacology in Schizophrenia". American Journal of Psychiatry. 160 (1): 13–23. PMID 12505794. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.160.1.13. 
  158. "Overcoming Bias". overcomingbias.com. Retrieved 13 March 2020. 
  159. "The "Ostrich Effect" and the Relationship between the Liquidity and the Yields of Financial Assets". The Journal of Business. doi:10.2139/ssrn.431180. 
  160. "Ostrich Effect". thinkingcollaborative.com. Retrieved 8 May 2020. 
  161. Hamblin, James (November 4, 2013). "Cheerleader Effect: Why People Are More Beautiful in Groups". The Atlantic. Retrieved December 5, 2015. 
  162. "Why We Spend Coins Faster Than Bills". NPR. May 12, 2009. Retrieved 7 April 2020. 
  163. "Denomination effect". nlpnotes.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  164. "What is the Ikea Effect?". bloomreach.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  165. "Marketers Need To Be Aware Of Cognitive Bias". thecustomer.net. Retrieved 12 March 2020. 
  166. Tom Chivers (2011-12-13). "An unconfirmed sighting of the elusive Higgs boson". Daily Telegraph. 
  167. "When a statistically significant observation should be overlooked.". thedecisionlab.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  168. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Citation/CS1/Suggestions' not found.
  169. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Citation/CS1/Suggestions' not found.
  170. "Today's term from psychology is Subadditivity Effect.". steemit.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  171. Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Module:Citation/CS1/Suggestions' not found.
  172. "Why You Won't Be the Person You Expect to Be". nytimes.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 


Cite error: <ref> tags exist for a group named "n", but no corresponding <references group="n"/> tag was found, or a closing </ref> is missing