Timeline of cognitive biases

From Timelines
Jump to: navigation, search

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 Concept 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 Scottish doctor James Lind conducts the first systematic clinical trial.[3]
1753 Anthropomorphism Anthropomorphism is first attested, originally in reference to the heresy of applying a human form to the Christian God.[4][5] Anthropomorphism is "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 Stereotype 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] Semmelweis effect "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." Bandwagon effect "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 Stereotype 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] Weber–Fechner 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] Pareidolia is "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] Cryptomnesia is "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 Mere-exposure effect German experimental psychologist Gustav Fechner conducts the earliest known research on the mere-exposure effect.[24] Mere-exposure effect "means that people prefer things that they are most familiar with".[25]
1882 Specious present "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 describes the robust finding that long-term learning is promoted when learning events are spaced out in time, rather than presented 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] Tip of the tongue describes "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 occurs in this year.[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 Fading Affect 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] The Fading Affect Bias "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] The social comparison theory refers to "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] Barnum effect is "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] Parkinson's law of triviality "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" Congruence bias is "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] "Risk compensation 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 Illusory correlation "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] An illusory correlation occurs when a person perceives a relationship between two variables that are not in fact correlated.[84]
1967 Social bias Fundamental attribution error Edward E. Jones and Victor Harris conduct a classic experiment[85] that would later give rise to the phrase Fundamental attribution error, coined by Lee Ross[86] "is the tendency for people to over-emphasize dispositional, or personality-based explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing situational explanations".[87]
1968 Conservatism bias The conservatism (belief revision) bias is discussed by Ward Edwards.[88] "Conservatism bias is a mental process in which people maintain their past views or predictions at the cost of recognizing new information."[89]
1968 Pygmalion Effect "The Pygmalion Effect (also called the Galatea effect) originates with researchers Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobsen in 1968."[90] Pygmalion Effect "refers to the phenomenon of people improving their performance when others have high expectations of them."[91]
1969 Ben Franklin effect Researchers confirm the Ben Franklin effect.[92] The Ben Franklin effect 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."[93]
1969 Suffix effect Crowder and Morton argue that the suffix effect is a reflection of the contribution of the auditory sensory memory or echoic memory to recall in the nonsuffix control condition.[94] "The suffix effect is the selective impairment in recall of the final items of a spoken list when the list is followed by a nominally irrelevant speech item, or suffix."[95]
1971 Preference reversal Lichtenstein and Slovic study and experiment on the preference reversal inconsistency.[96] Preference reversal "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".[97]
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.[98] The actor–observer asymmetry "states that people tend to explain their own behavior with situation causes and other people's behavior with person causes".[99]
1972 Levels of Processing model The Levels of Processing model is created by Fergus I. M. Craik and Robert S. Lockhart.[100]
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.[101]
1973 Illusion of validity The illusion of validity bias is first described by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman in their paper.[102] The illusion of validity 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".[103]
1974 Memory bias False memory Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer conduct a study to investigate the effects of language on the development of false memory.[104]
1974 Anchoring " 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)."[105]
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.[106]
1975 Social bias Self-serving 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.[107] Self-serving bias is the common habit of a person taking credit for positive events or outcomes, but blaming outside factors for negative events."[108]
1976 Behavioral bias Escalation of commitment 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.[109] Escalation of commitment "refers to the irrational behavior of investing additional resources in a failing project."[110]
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.[111] "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."[112]
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.[113] Misattribution of memory occurs "when a memory is distorted because of the source, context, or our imagination."[114]
1977 Illusory truth effect The illusory truth effect is first identified in a study at Villanova University and Temple University.[115][116] The illusory truth effect "occurs when repeating a statement increases the belief that it’s true even when the statement is actually false."[117]
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.[118] The false-consensus effect "refers to the tendency to overestimate consensus for one′s attitudes and behaviors."[119]
1978 Memory bias Misinformation effect Loftus, Miller, and Burns conduct the original misinformation effect study.[120] The misinformation effect "happens when a person's memory becomes less accurate due to information that happens after the event."[121]
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 Moral luck Thomas Nagel identifies four kinds of moral luck in his essay.[122] "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."[123]
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.[124]
1979 Planning fallacy The planning fallacy is first proposed by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky,[125][126] "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"[127]
1980 Social bias Egocentric bias The term "egocentric bias" is first coined by Anthony Greenwald, a psychologist at Ohio State University.[128] "The egocentric bias is a cognitive bias that causes people to rely too heavily on their own point of view when they examine events in their life or when they try to see things from other people’s perspective."[129]
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.[130]
1980 subjective validation The term subjective validation first appears in the book The Psychology of the Psychic by David F. Marks and Richard Kammann.[131]
1981 "The pseudocertainty effect was illustrated by Daniel Kahneman, who received the Nobel Prize in economics for his work on decision making and decision theory, in collaboration with Amos Tversky. The studies that they researched used real and hypothetical monetary gambles and were often used in undergraduate classrooms and laboratories.[132]
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.[133]
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."[134]
1983 Courtesy bias Jones reports the presence of courtesy bias in Asian cultures.[135]
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.[136] "The disposition effect refers to investors’ reluctance to sell assets that have lost value and greater likelihood of selling assets that have made gains."[137]
1985 Hot-hand fallacy The hot-hand fallacy is first described in a paper by Amos Tversky, Thomas Gilovich, and Robert Vallone. "The hot-hand fallacy effect refers to the tendency for people to expect streaks in sports performance to continue."[138]
1986 Bizarreness effect McDaniel and Einstein argue that bizarreness intrinsically does not enhance memory in their paper.[139] "The bizarreness effect holds that items associated with bizarre sentences or phrases are more readily recalled than those associated with common sentences or phrases."[140]
1988 Experiment Information bias In an experiment by Baron, Beattie and Hershey, subjects considered this diagnostic problem involving fictitious diseases.[141]
1988 Reactive devaluation The Reactive devaluation bias is proposed by Lee Ross and Constance Stillinger.[142]
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.[143]
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.[144]
1990 Emotional bias Endowment effect Kahneman, Knetsch and Thaler publish a paper containing the first experimental test of the Endowment Effect.[96] 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. Illusory superiority "indicates an individual who has a belief that they are somehow inherently superior to others".[145]
1991 Courtesy bias Marín and Marín report courtesy bias to be common in Hispanic cultures.[135]
1994 Women are wonderful effect 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.[146] "The women are wonderful effect is a phenomenon found in psychological research in which people associate more positive attributes with women as compared to men."[147]
1995 Implicit bias The implicit bias is first described in a publication by Tony Greenwald and Mahzarin Banaji.[148] "Research on implicit bias suggests that people can act on the basis of prejudice and stereotypes without intending to do so."[149]
1996 Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky argue that cognitive biases have efficient practical implications for areas including clinical judgment, entrepreneurship, finance, and management.[150][151]
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"[152]
1998 Implicit-association test The implicit-association test is introduced in the scientific literature by Anthony Greenwald, Debbie McGhee, and Jordan Schwartz.[153] The implicit-association test is "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."[154]
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.""[155] "The less-is-better effect is the tendency to prefer the smaller or the lesser alternative when choosing individually, but not when evaluating together."[156]
1999 Concept introduction Dunning–Kruger effect 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.[157]
1999 Spotlight effect The term "spotlight effect" is coined by Thomas Gilovich and Kenneth Savitsky.[132] The phenomenon first appears in the world of psychology in the journal Current Directions in Psychological Science.
1999 Social bias Naïve cynicism 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".[158] economics,[159] Naïve cynicism is "the tendency of laypeople to expect other people’s judgments will have a motivational basis and therefore will be biased in the direction of their self-interest."[160]
2002 Attribute substitution Daniel Kahneman and Shane Frederick propose the process of attribute substitution.[106] "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."[161]
2002 Research Bystander effect 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.[162] "The bystander effect occurs when the presence of others discourages an individual from intervening in an emergency situation."[163]
2003 Projection bias The term projection bias is first introduced in the paper Projection Bias in Predicting Future Utility by Loewenstein, O'Donoghue and Rabin.[164] "It refers to people’s assumption that their tastes or preferences will remain the same over time"[165]
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.[166]
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). "[105]
2004 Distinction bias 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. Distinction bias is "an explanation for why people evaluate objects differently when evaluating them jointly, as opposed to separately."[167]
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."[168]
2006 Behavioral bias Ostrich effect The Ostrich effect is coined by Galai & Sade.[169] "The ostrich effect bias is a tendency to ignore dangerous or negative information by ignoring it or burying one's head in the sand"[170]
2007 "The recency illusion is the belief or impression that a word or language usage is of recent origin when it is long-established. The term was coined by Arnold Zwicky, a linguist at Stanford University primarily interested in examples involving words, meanings, phrases, and grammatical constructions."[171]
2008 Social bias Cheerleader effect 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."[172] "The cheerleader effect refers to the increase in attractiveness that an individual face experiences when seen in a group of other faces."[173]
2009 Denomination effect 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.[174] Denomination effect relates "to currency, whereby people are less likely to spend larger bills than their equivalent value in smaller bills."[175]
2010 Naïve realism 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."[176] "Naïve realism describes people’s tendency to believe that they perceive the social world “as it is”—as objective reality—rather than as a subjective construction and interpretation of reality."[177]
2011 IKEA effect 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."[178]
2011 Google Effect The Google Effect, also known as “digital amnesia”, is first described by Betsy Sparrow from Columbia University and her colleagues. Their paper describes the results of several memory experiments involving technology.[179] The Google Effect "represents people’s tendency to forget information that they can find online, particularly by using search engines such as Google."[180]
2011 Look-elsewhere effect 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.[181] The look-elsewhere effect "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."[182]
2011 Google effect 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.[183] The "Google effect is a cognitive bias where a person tends to forget information that can easily be found using internet search".[184]
2012 Subadditivity effect 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).[185] The subadditivity effect is "the tendency to judge probability of the whole to be less than the probabilities of the parts".[186]
2013 "David Kahneman (and his associate Amos Tversky) originally coined the term loss aversion in 1979 in a landmark paper on subjective probability. Kahneman published “Thinking, Fast and Slow” in 2013."
2013 End-of-history illusion 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.[187] The end-of-history illusion occurs "when people tend to underestimate how much they will change in the future.”[188]

Meta information on the timeline

How the timeline was built

The initial version of the timeline was written by User:Sebastian.

Funding information for this timeline is available.

Feedback and comments

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


What the timeline is still missing

Timeline update strategy

See also

External links


  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.
  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."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. Anonymous (E. Robert Kelly, 1882) The Alternative: A Study in Psychology. London: Macmillan and Co. p. 168.
  28. 28.0 28.1 28.2 Andersen H, Grush R (2009). "A brief history of time-consciousness: historical precursors to James and Husserl" (PDF). Journal of the History of Philosophy. 47 (2): 277–307. doi:10.1353/hph.0.0118. 
  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. 
  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 Thorndike 1920
  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". 
  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. "Illusory Correlation". psychology.iresearchnet.com. Retrieved 17 July 2020. 
  85. 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. 
  86. 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. 
  87. "Fundamental Attribution Error". simplypsychology.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  88. 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. Original work published 1968.
  89. "Conservatism Bias". dwassetmgmt.com. Retrieved 8 May 2020. 
  90. "Statistics How To". statisticshowto.com. Retrieved 7 April 2020. 
  91. "Pygmalion Effect". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  92. "To Become Super-Likable, Practice "The Ben Franklin Effect"". medium.com. Retrieved 13 March 2020. 
  93. "Ben Franklin Effect". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  94. "The suffix effect: How many positions are involved?" (PDF). link.springer.com. Retrieved 5 May 2020. 
  95. "Two-component theory of the suffix effect: Contrary evidence". link.springer.com. Retrieved 16 July 2020. 
  96. 96.0 96.1 Atladóttir, Kristín. "The Endowment Effect and other biases in creative goods transactions" (PDF). ISSN 1670-8288. 
  97. "Preference reversal". behavioraleconomics.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  98. Malle, BF. "The actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: a (surprising) meta-analysis.". PMID 17073526. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.895. 
  99. "The actor-observer asymmetry in attribution: A (surprising) meta-analysis.". psycnet.apa.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  100. 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.
  101. Fischhoff, B (2007). "An early history of hindsight research". Social Cognition. 25: 10–13. doi:10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.10. 
  102. "Why are we overconfident in our predictions?". thedecisionlab.com. Retrieved 10 April 2020. 
  103. "Illusion Of Validity". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  104. 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. 
  105. 105.0 105.1 Ralph, Kelcie; Delbosc, Alexa. "I'm multimodal, aren't you? How ego-centric anchoring biases experts' perceptions of travel patterns". doi:10.1016/j.tra.2017.04.027. 
  106. 106.0 106.1 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. 
  107. 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. 
  108. "What Is a Self-Serving Bias and What Are Some Examples of It?". healthline.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  109. 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. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2. 
  110. "Escalation of Commitment: Definition, Causes & Examples". bizfluent.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  111. 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. 
  112. "APA Dictionary of Psychology". dictionary.apa.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  113. Brown, R., Kulik J. (1977). "Flashbulb memories". Cognition. 5: 73–99. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(77)90018-X. 
  114. "Misattribution Effect". sites.google.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  115. Hasher, Lynn; Goldstein, David; Toppino, Thomas (1977). "Frequency and the conference of referential validity" (PDF). Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 16 (1): 107–112. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80012-1. 
  116. 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. PMC 3935838Freely accessible. PMID 24586368. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0088671. 
  117. "Illusory Truth, Lies, and Political Propaganda: Part 1". psychologytoday.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  118. 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. 
  119. Alicke, Mark; Largo, Edward. "The Role of Self in the False Consensus Effect". doi:10.1006/jesp.1995.1002. 
  120. Zaragoza, Maria S.; Belli, Robert F.; Payment, Kristie E. "Misinformation Effectsand the Suggestibility of Eyewitness Memory". 
  121. "What Is Misinformation Effect?". growthramp.io. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  122. Rudy Hiller, Fernando. "How to (dis)solve Nagel's paradox about moral luck and responsibility". doi:10.1590/0100-6045.2016.V39N1.FRH. 
  123. "Moral Luck". philpapers.org. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  124. 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. 
  125. 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. 
  126. 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. 
  127. Buehler, Roger; Griffin, Dale; Peetz, Johanna. "Chapter One - The Planning Fallacy: Cognitive, Motivational, and Social Origins". doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(10)43001-4. 
  128. Goleman, Daniel (1984-06-12). "A bias puts self at center of everything". The New York Times. Retrieved 2016-12-09. 
  129. "The Egocentric Bias: Why It's Hard to See Things from a Different Perspective". effectiviology.com. Retrieved 16 July 2020. 
  130. Hamill, Ruth; Wilson, Timothy D.; Nisbett, Richard E. (1980). "Insensitivity to sample bias: Generalizing from atypical cases" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 39 (4): 578–589. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.39.4.578. 
  131. Frazier, Kendrick (1986). Science Confronts the Paranormal. Prometheus Books. p. 101. 
  132. 132.0 132.1 Tversky, A.; Kahneman, D. (1981-01-30). "The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice". Science. 211 (4481): 453–458. Bibcode:1981Sci...211..453T. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 7455683. doi:10.1126/science.7455683.  Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name ":0" defined multiple times with different content
  133. 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. 
  134. "Third-Person Effect". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  135. 135.0 135.1 Hakim, Catherine. Models of the Family in Modern Societies: Ideals and Realities: Ideals and Realities. 
  136. "Disposition Effect". Behavioural Finance. Retrieved 11 January 2017. 
  137. "Disposition effect". behavioraleconomics.com. Retrieved 16 July 2020. 
  138. "Hot Hand Effect". psychology.iresearchnet.com. Retrieved 16 July 2020. 
  139. 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. 
  140. "Bizarreness effect". britannica.com. Retrieved 16 July 2020. 
  141. 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. 
  142. Lee Ross, Constance A. Stillinger, "Psychological barriers to conflict resolution", Stanford Center on Conflict and Negotiation, Stanford University, 1988, p. 4
  143. Samuelson, W.; Zeckhauser, R. (1988). "Status quo bias in decision making". Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 1: 7–59. doi:10.1007/bf00055564. 
  144. "The Curse of Knowledge: What It Is and How to Account for It". effectiviology.com. Retrieved 6 May 2020. 
  145. "Illusory Superiority". alleydog.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  146. ""Women Are Wonderful" Effect". scribd.com. Retrieved 10 April 2020. 
  147. ""women are wonderful" effect". crazyfacts.com. Retrieved 18 July 2020. 
  148. "PROJECT IMPLICIT LECTURES AND WORKSHOPS". projectimplicit.net. Retrieved 12 March 2020. 
  149. "Implicit Bias". plato.stanford.edu. Retrieved 8 May 2020. 
  150. Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1996). "On the reality of cognitive illusions" (PDF). Psychological Review. 103 (3): 582–591. CiteSeerX accessible. PMID 8759048. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.582. 
  151. 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. 
  152. 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. 
  153. Greenwald, Anthony G.; McGhee, Debbie E.; Schwartz, Jordan L.K. (1998), "Measuring Individual Differences in Implicit Cognition: The Implicit Association Test", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (6): 1464–1480, PMID 9654756, doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464 
  154. 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. 
  155. 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. 
  156. "Why we prefer the smaller or the lesser alternative". thedecisionlab.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  157. Kruger, Justin; Dunning, David (1999). "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 77 (6): 1121–1134. PMID 10626367. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121. 
  158. Kruger, Justin; Gilovich, Thomas (1999). "'Naive cynicism' in everyday theories of responsibility assessment: On biased assumptions of bias.". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 76 (5): 743–753. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.5.743. 
  159. Heath, Joseph (2006). "Business ethics without stakeholders" (PDF). Business Ethics Quarterly. 16 (4): 533–557. doi:10.5840/beq200616448. 
  160. "Naive Cynicism". psychology.iresearchnet.com. Retrieved 16 July 2020. 
  161. "Attribute substitution- a quick guide". biasandbelief.wordpress.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  162. 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. 
  163. "Bystander Effect". psychologytoday.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  164. 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. 
  165. "Projection bias". behavioraleconomics.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  166. 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. 
  167. "Why we tend to view two options as more distinctive when evaluating them simultaneously then separately.". thedecisionlab.com. Retrieved 16 July 2020. 
  168. "Overcoming Bias". overcomingbias.com. Retrieved 13 March 2020. 
  169. "The "Ostrich Effect" and the Relationship between the Liquidity and the Yields of Financial Assets". The Journal of Business. doi:10.2139/ssrn.431180. 
  170. "Ostrich Effect". thinkingcollaborative.com. Retrieved 8 May 2020. 
  171. Rickford, John R.; Wasow, Thomas; Zwicky, Arnold (2007). "Intensive and quotative all: something new, something old". American Speech. 82 (1): 3–31. doi:10.1215/00031283-2007-001Freely accessible. 
  172. Hamblin, James (November 4, 2013). "Cheerleader Effect: Why People Are More Beautiful in Groups". The Atlantic. Retrieved December 5, 2015. 
  173. Carragher, Daniel J.; Thomas, Nicole A.; Gwinn, O. Scott; Nicholls, Mike E. R. "Limited evidence of hierarchical encoding in the cheerleader effect". 
  174. "Why We Spend Coins Faster Than Bills". NPR. May 12, 2009. Retrieved 7 April 2020. 
  175. "Denomination effect". nlpnotes.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  176. Ross, L.; Lepper, M.; Ward, A., 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). Handbook of Social Psychology. Vol.1. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. Template:DOI
  177. "Naive Realism". psychology.iresearchnet.com. Retrieved 17 July 2020. 
  178. "What is the Ikea Effect?". bloomreach.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  179. "Marketers Need To Be Aware Of Cognitive Bias". thecustomer.net. Retrieved 12 March 2020. 
  180. "The Google Effect and Digital Amnesia: How We Use Machines to Remember". effectiviology.com. Retrieved 16 July 2020. 
  181. Tom Chivers (2011-12-13). "An unconfirmed sighting of the elusive Higgs boson". Daily Telegraph. 
  182. "When a statistically significant observation should be overlooked.". thedecisionlab.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  183. "Study Finds That Memory Works Differently in the Age of Google". Columbia University. July 14, 2011. 
  184. "25 Interesting Phenomenons of a Human Mind". pinterest.com.mx. Retrieved 17 July 2020. 
  185. Hilbert, Martin (2012). "Toward a synthesis of cognitive biases: How noisy information processing can bias human decision making" (PDF). Psychological Bulletin. 138 (2): 211–237. PMID 22122235. doi:10.1037/a0025940. 
  186. "Today's term from psychology is Subadditivity Effect.". steemit.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020. 
  187. Quoidbach, Jordi; Gilbert, Daniel T.; Wilson, Timothy D. (2013-01-04). "The End of History Illusion" (PDF). Science. 339 (6115): 96–98. PMID 23288539. doi:10.1126/science.1229294. 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. 
  188. "Why You Won't Be the Person You Expect to Be". nytimes.com. Retrieved 7 May 2020.