just-world-hypothesis

Just-World Hypothesis

The Just-World Hypothesis is a belief that actions lead to fair consequences, providing a sense of control and coping with anxiety. However, it can result in victim-blaming, reduced empathy, and overlooking genuine unfairness, conflicting with real-world evidence. The Just-World Hypothesis can lead to a cognitive bias where individuals believe that people get what they deserve and actions lead to fair consequences. It often serves as a coping mechanism to manage anxiety in an uncertain world. However, it may lead to victim-blaming and reduced empathy for those facing misfortune.

Origins of the Just-World Hypothesis

The concept of a just world has ancient roots in philosophical and religious thought. Many belief systems, including Christianity, Buddhism, and Islam, incorporate notions of divine justice and moral accountability.

These ideas have shaped cultural and societal perspectives on fairness and the consequences of one’s actions.

Characteristics of the Just-World Hypothesis

  • Belief in a Just World: Individuals who adhere to the Just-World Hypothesis tend to believe that the world is inherently fair, with good actions rewarded and bad actions punished.
  • Blaming the Victim: When confronted with instances of suffering or misfortune, individuals with this bias may be inclined to blame the victims, assuming that they must have done something to deserve their plight.
  • Protecting One’s Beliefs: People often engage in cognitive processes to protect their belief in a just world, such as rationalization or distancing themselves from unfortunate events.
  • Emotional Comfort: The Just-World Hypothesis can provide emotional comfort by allowing individuals to make sense of a complex and sometimes chaotic world.

Psychological Mechanisms

Several psychological mechanisms underlie the Just-World Hypothesis:

  • Cognitive Dissonance: When individuals encounter evidence that challenges their belief in a just world, they may experience cognitive dissonance, a discomforting mental state. To alleviate this discomfort, they may reject or dismiss the evidence.
  • Attribution Theory: People often attribute the causes of events to internal factors (individual behavior) or external factors (situational factors). The Just-World Hypothesis leads to the tendency to attribute negative events to internal causes, reinforcing the belief that individuals are responsible for their outcomes.
  • System Justification: The need to maintain a belief in a just world can lead individuals to support and justify existing social and economic systems, even when these systems may be inherently unfair.

Real-World Implications

The Just-World Hypothesis has several real-world implications:

  • Victim Blaming: It can contribute to victim blaming in cases of illness, poverty, or other misfortunes. This can perpetuate stereotypes and stigmatize marginalized groups.
  • Inaction in the Face of Injustice: Belief in a just world can lead to complacency and inaction in the face of social injustices, as individuals may assume that those suffering must have brought their hardships upon themselves.
  • Policy and Social Attitudes: The Just-World Hypothesis can influence public policy and societal attitudes, impacting areas such as criminal justice, healthcare, and social welfare.
  • Moral Licensing: Individuals who believe in a just world may engage in moral licensing, wherein they feel entitled to act immorally or unfairly because they believe they have accumulated “good karma.”

Challenging the Just-World Hypothesis

Challenging the Just-World Hypothesis involves promoting empathy, critical thinking, and a deeper understanding of the complex factors that contribute to human experiences.

Recognizing that many aspects of life are influenced by systemic and situational factors can help individuals develop a more nuanced view of fairness and justice.

Examples

  • Blaming the Poor: Attributing poverty to laziness or lack of effort.
  • Victim-Blaming in Assault Cases: Blaming victims of assault for their clothing or behavior.
  • Moral Judgment in Legal Systems: Influencing legal judgments based on perceived deservingness.
  • Health and Illness: People may believe that those who are sick or facing health problems brought it upon themselves through poor lifestyle choices, ignoring the role of genetics or environmental factors.
  • Disasters and Accidents: After a natural disaster or an accident, individuals might attribute the suffering of victims to their actions or decisions, rather than recognizing the randomness of such events.
  • Job Loss: Some may think that individuals who lose their jobs deserved it due to incompetence or laziness, disregarding economic factors or company decisions.
  • Legal System: The belief in a just world can influence legal judgments. For example, jurors might be more likely to blame a crime victim if they believe the victim somehow contributed to the situation.
  • Social Class: People might assume that individuals from lower social classes are there because they didn’t work hard enough, ignoring systemic factors and inequalities.
  • Relationships: In personal relationships, individuals may believe that those experiencing difficulties are responsible for their own problems, rather than acknowledging the complexities of human interactions.
  • School Bullying: Some may attribute bullying to the behavior or characteristics of the victim, overlooking the role of bullies and the school environment.
  • Poverty and Homelessness: The Just-World Hypothesis can lead to the belief that homeless individuals are solely responsible for their predicament, ignoring systemic issues like housing affordability.

Conclusions

The Just-World Hypothesis is a cognitive bias deeply rooted in human psychology and influenced by cultural, religious, and societal factors.

While the desire to perceive the world as fair is natural, it can lead to victim blaming, inaction in the face of injustice, and the perpetuation of systemic inequalities.

Recognizing the existence of this bias and its impact on attitudes and behaviors is the first step toward fostering a more compassionate and just society, one that acknowledges the complexity of human experiences and actively works to address inequalities and injustices.

Just-World Hypothesis: Key Takeaways

  • Just-World Hypothesis: A belief that actions lead to fair consequences, providing a sense of control and coping with anxiety.
  • Characteristics:
    • Attribution of Blame: Blaming victims for their misfortune.
    • Coping Mechanism: A way to manage anxiety by believing in a just world.
    • Influence on Behavior: Impacting actions towards others based on perceived deservingness.
  • Use Cases:
    • Victim-Blaming: Blaming victims for crimes or disasters.
    • Social Judgment: Influencing judgments about others’ actions and outcomes.
    • Moral Attribution: Making moral judgments based on perceived deservingness.
  • Benefits:
    • Sense of Control: Providing a sense of control over life events.
    • Coping with Anxiety: Helping individuals manage anxiety through belief in fairness.
    • Order and Structure: Imposing order and structure in an unpredictable world.
  • Challenges:
    • Unfairness: Overlooking genuine unfairness and systemic inequalities.
    • Reduced Empathy: Diminished empathy for those in difficult situations.
    • Cognitive Dissonance: Conflicting with evidence of real-world injustices.
  • Examples:
    • Blaming the Poor: Attributing poverty to laziness or lack of effort.
    • Victim-Blaming in Assault Cases: Blaming victims of assault for their clothing or behavior.
    • Moral Judgment in Legal Systems: Influencing legal judgments based on perceived deservingness.

FrameworkDescriptionWhen to Apply
Attribution TheoryAttribution Theory: The Just-World Hypothesis influences attributions people make about others’ outcomes, leading to victim-blaming or attributions of deservedness. Understanding attribution theory helps individuals recognize and challenge unjust attributions, fostering empathy and understanding. Interventions may involve perspective-taking exercises, empathy training, and cognitive restructuring techniques to promote fair and accurate attributions and mitigate the impact of the just-world bias on interpersonal judgments and behavior.Challenging unjust attributions through perspective-taking exercises or empathy training, in interpersonal skills workshops or empathy-building activities where individuals confront the just-world bias, in implementing cognitive restructuring techniques that promote fair and accurate attributions, in adopting approaches that foster empathy and understanding through attribution theory principles.
Cognitive Dissonance TheoryCognitive Dissonance Theory: The Just-World Hypothesis contributes to cognitive dissonance when individuals encounter evidence contradicting their belief in a just world. Understanding cognitive dissonance helps individuals reconcile conflicting beliefs and attitudes, fostering cognitive flexibility and open-mindedness. Interventions may involve cognitive restructuring, belief-challenging exercises, and cognitive reappraisal techniques to reduce discomfort and promote acceptance of alternative perspectives, mitigating the impact of the just-world bias on cognitive processing and decision-making.Promoting acceptance of alternative perspectives through belief-challenging exercises or cognitive reappraisal techniques, in cognitive-behavioral therapy sessions or cognitive restructuring workshops where individuals confront cognitive dissonance, in implementing attitude change techniques that reduce discomfort and promote cognitive flexibility, in adopting approaches that foster open-mindedness and acceptance through cognitive dissonance theory principles.
Empathy DevelopmentEmpathy Development: The Just-World Hypothesis inhibits empathy by fostering beliefs that individuals get what they deserve. Understanding empathy development helps individuals cultivate compassion and empathy for others’ suffering, despite perceived deservingness. Interventions may involve perspective-taking exercises, empathy-building activities, and compassion training to promote empathic responses and reduce the influence of the just-world bias on interpersonal relationships and social judgments.Cultivating compassion and empathy through perspective-taking exercises or compassion training, in empathy workshops or empathy-building exercises where individuals confront the just-world bias, in implementing perspective broadening techniques that foster understanding of others’ experiences, in adopting approaches that foster empathy and compassion through empathy development principles.
Social Learning TheorySocial Learning Theory: The Just-World Hypothesis is perpetuated through social learning processes, where individuals observe and imitate others’ just-world beliefs and behaviors. Understanding social learning theory helps individuals recognize and challenge unjust social norms and attitudes, fostering critical thinking and social change. Interventions may involve media literacy education, role-modeling interventions, and social norm challenging activities to promote awareness and mitigate the impact of the just-world bias on societal attitudes and behaviors.Challenging unjust social norms through media literacy education or role-modeling interventions, in social justice workshops or social norm challenging activities where individuals confront the just-world bias, in implementing awareness-raising campaigns that promote critical evaluation of societal attitudes, in adopting approaches that foster social change and advocacy through social learning theory principles.
Interpersonal Conflict ResolutionInterpersonal Conflict Resolution: The Just-World Hypothesis exacerbates interpersonal conflicts by attributing negative outcomes to the perceived deservingness of individuals involved. Understanding conflict resolution strategies helps individuals navigate conflicts more constructively by addressing underlying biases and promoting empathy and understanding. Interventions may involve conflict resolution training, communication skills workshops, and mediation techniques to foster collaborative problem-solving and reduce the influence of the just-world bias on conflict dynamics and resolution outcomes.Navigating conflicts constructively through conflict resolution training or mediation techniques, in interpersonal skills workshops or communication training where individuals confront biases, in implementing collaborative problem-solving approaches that promote empathy and understanding, in adopting approaches that foster constructive conflict resolution through conflict resolution theory principles.
Fairness PerceptionFairness Perception: The Just-World Hypothesis shapes individuals’ perceptions of fairness, leading to biased judgments about the distribution of resources or outcomes. Understanding fairness perception helps individuals recognize and address biases in decision-making processes, fostering equity and justice. Interventions may involve fairness training, equity awareness workshops, and diversity education to promote awareness and mitigate the impact of the just-world bias on organizational policies and practices.Addressing biases in decision-making processes through fairness training or equity awareness workshops, in organizational diversity programs or equity training where individuals confront biases, in implementing policies that promote fairness and equity, in adopting approaches that foster organizational justice through fairness perception principles.
Ethical Decision-MakingEthical Decision-Making: The Just-World Hypothesis influences ethical decision-making by shaping individuals’ judgments about moral responsibility and deservingness. Understanding ethical decision-making helps individuals navigate moral dilemmas and uphold ethical principles despite biases in perceptions of deservingness. Interventions may involve ethics training, moral reasoning exercises, and values clarification activities to promote ethical awareness and mitigate the impact of the just-world bias on moral judgments and behaviors.Upholding ethical principles through ethics training or moral reasoning exercises, in professional ethics workshops or values clarification activities where individuals confront biases, in implementing ethical decision-making frameworks that promote awareness of moral responsibilities, in adopting approaches that foster ethical awareness and integrity through ethical decision-making principles.
Systemic Bias AwarenessSystemic Bias Awareness: The Just-World Hypothesis contributes to systemic biases by perpetuating unjust social structures and attitudes. Understanding systemic bias helps individuals recognize and challenge systemic injustices, fostering advocacy and social change. Interventions may involve diversity training, systemic bias awareness workshops, and inclusive policy development to promote equity and mitigate the impact of the just-world bias on institutional practices and societal norms.Challenging systemic injustices through diversity training or inclusive policy development, in equity and inclusion workshops or systemic bias awareness activities where individuals confront biases, in implementing inclusive practices that promote equity and diversity, in adopting approaches that foster advocacy and social change through systemic bias awareness principles.
Victim AdvocacyVictim Advocacy: The Just-World Hypothesis undermines support for victims by attributing their suffering to personal failings or deservedness. Understanding victim advocacy helps individuals provide empathic and supportive responses to victims of injustice, despite biases in perceptions of deservingness. Interventions may involve victim empathy training, trauma-informed care workshops, and victim support initiatives to promote compassion and reduce the impact of the just-world bias on victim-blaming attitudes and behaviors.Providing empathic support to victims through victim empathy training or trauma-informed care workshops, in victim support groups or advocacy initiatives where individuals confront biases, in implementing policies that prioritize victim needs and rights, in adopting approaches that foster empathy and solidarity through victim advocacy principles.
Critical Social Justice EducationCritical Social Justice Education: The Just-World Hypothesis perpetuates injustices through systemic biases and social norms that reinforce beliefs about deservingness and meritocracy. Understanding critical social justice principles helps individuals challenge oppressive structures and advocate for equity and inclusivity. Interventions may involve critical consciousness-raising, allyship training, and social justice activism to promote awareness and mitigate the impact of the just-world bias on social inequalities and institutional discrimination.Advocating for equity and inclusivity through critical consciousness-raising or allyship training, in social justice workshops or activism initiatives where individuals confront biases, in implementing inclusive policies and practices that promote equity and diversity, in adopting approaches that foster solidarity and collective action through critical social justice education principles.

Connected Thinking Frameworks

Convergent vs. Divergent Thinking

convergent-vs-divergent-thinking
Convergent thinking occurs when the solution to a problem can be found by applying established rules and logical reasoning. Whereas divergent thinking is an unstructured problem-solving method where participants are encouraged to develop many innovative ideas or solutions to a given problem. Where convergent thinking might work for larger, mature organizations where divergent thinking is more suited for startups and innovative companies.

Critical Thinking

critical-thinking
Critical thinking involves analyzing observations, facts, evidence, and arguments to form a judgment about what someone reads, hears, says, or writes.

Biases

biases
The concept of cognitive biases was introduced and popularized by the work of Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman in 1972. Biases are seen as systematic errors and flaws that make humans deviate from the standards of rationality, thus making us inept at making good decisions under uncertainty.

Second-Order Thinking

second-order-thinking
Second-order thinking is a means of assessing the implications of our decisions by considering future consequences. Second-order thinking is a mental model that considers all future possibilities. It encourages individuals to think outside of the box so that they can prepare for every and eventuality. It also discourages the tendency for individuals to default to the most obvious choice.

Lateral Thinking

lateral-thinking
Lateral thinking is a business strategy that involves approaching a problem from a different direction. The strategy attempts to remove traditionally formulaic and routine approaches to problem-solving by advocating creative thinking, therefore finding unconventional ways to solve a known problem. This sort of non-linear approach to problem-solving, can at times, create a big impact.

Bounded Rationality

bounded-rationality
Bounded rationality is a concept attributed to Herbert Simon, an economist and political scientist interested in decision-making and how we make decisions in the real world. In fact, he believed that rather than optimizing (which was the mainstream view in the past decades) humans follow what he called satisficing.

Dunning-Kruger Effect

dunning-kruger-effect
The Dunning-Kruger effect describes a cognitive bias where people with low ability in a task overestimate their ability to perform that task well. Consumers or businesses that do not possess the requisite knowledge make bad decisions. What’s more, knowledge gaps prevent the person or business from seeing their mistakes.

Occam’s Razor

occams-razor
Occam’s Razor states that one should not increase (beyond reason) the number of entities required to explain anything. All things being equal, the simplest solution is often the best one. The principle is attributed to 14th-century English theologian William of Ockham.

Lindy Effect

lindy-effect
The Lindy Effect is a theory about the ageing of non-perishable things, like technology or ideas. Popularized by author Nicholas Nassim Taleb, the Lindy Effect states that non-perishable things like technology age – linearly – in reverse. Therefore, the older an idea or a technology, the same will be its life expectancy.

Antifragility

antifragility
Antifragility was first coined as a term by author, and options trader Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Antifragility is a characteristic of systems that thrive as a result of stressors, volatility, and randomness. Therefore, Antifragile is the opposite of fragile. Where a fragile thing breaks up to volatility; a robust thing resists volatility. An antifragile thing gets stronger from volatility (provided the level of stressors and randomness doesn’t pass a certain threshold).

Systems Thinking

systems-thinking
Systems thinking is a holistic means of investigating the factors and interactions that could contribute to a potential outcome. It is about thinking non-linearly, and understanding the second-order consequences of actions and input into the system.

Vertical Thinking

vertical-thinking
Vertical thinking, on the other hand, is a problem-solving approach that favors a selective, analytical, structured, and sequential mindset. The focus of vertical thinking is to arrive at a reasoned, defined solution.

Maslow’s Hammer

einstellung-effect
Maslow’s Hammer, otherwise known as the law of the instrument or the Einstellung effect, is a cognitive bias causing an over-reliance on a familiar tool. This can be expressed as the tendency to overuse a known tool (perhaps a hammer) to solve issues that might require a different tool. This problem is persistent in the business world where perhaps known tools or frameworks might be used in the wrong context (like business plans used as planning tools instead of only investors’ pitches).

Peter Principle

peter-principle
The Peter Principle was first described by Canadian sociologist Lawrence J. Peter in his 1969 book The Peter Principle. The Peter Principle states that people are continually promoted within an organization until they reach their level of incompetence.

Straw Man Fallacy

straw-man-fallacy
The straw man fallacy describes an argument that misrepresents an opponent’s stance to make rebuttal more convenient. The straw man fallacy is a type of informal logical fallacy, defined as a flaw in the structure of an argument that renders it invalid.

Streisand Effect

streisand-effect
The Streisand Effect is a paradoxical phenomenon where the act of suppressing information to reduce visibility causes it to become more visible. In 2003, Streisand attempted to suppress aerial photographs of her Californian home by suing photographer Kenneth Adelman for an invasion of privacy. Adelman, who Streisand assumed was paparazzi, was instead taking photographs to document and study coastal erosion. In her quest for more privacy, Streisand’s efforts had the opposite effect.

Heuristic

heuristic
As highlighted by German psychologist Gerd Gigerenzer in the paper “Heuristic Decision Making,” the term heuristic is of Greek origin, meaning “serving to find out or discover.” More precisely, a heuristic is a fast and accurate way to make decisions in the real world, which is driven by uncertainty.

Recognition Heuristic

recognition-heuristic
The recognition heuristic is a psychological model of judgment and decision making. It is part of a suite of simple and economical heuristics proposed by psychologists Daniel Goldstein and Gerd Gigerenzer. The recognition heuristic argues that inferences are made about an object based on whether it is recognized or not.

Representativeness Heuristic

representativeness-heuristic
The representativeness heuristic was first described by psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. The representativeness heuristic judges the probability of an event according to the degree to which that event resembles a broader class. When queried, most will choose the first option because the description of John matches the stereotype we may hold for an archaeologist.

Take-The-Best Heuristic

take-the-best-heuristic
The take-the-best heuristic is a decision-making shortcut that helps an individual choose between several alternatives. The take-the-best (TTB) heuristic decides between two or more alternatives based on a single good attribute, otherwise known as a cue. In the process, less desirable attributes are ignored.

Bundling Bias

bundling-bias
The bundling bias is a cognitive bias in e-commerce where a consumer tends not to use all of the products bought as a group, or bundle. Bundling occurs when individual products or services are sold together as a bundle. Common examples are tickets and experiences. The bundling bias dictates that consumers are less likely to use each item in the bundle. This means that the value of the bundle and indeed the value of each item in the bundle is decreased.

Barnum Effect

barnum-effect
The Barnum Effect is a cognitive bias where individuals believe that generic information – which applies to most people – is specifically tailored for themselves.

First-Principles Thinking

first-principles-thinking
First-principles thinking – sometimes called reasoning from first principles – is used to reverse-engineer complex problems and encourage creativity. It involves breaking down problems into basic elements and reassembling them from the ground up. Elon Musk is among the strongest proponents of this way of thinking.

Ladder Of Inference

ladder-of-inference
The ladder of inference is a conscious or subconscious thinking process where an individual moves from a fact to a decision or action. The ladder of inference was created by academic Chris Argyris to illustrate how people form and then use mental models to make decisions.

Goodhart’s Law

goodharts-law
Goodhart’s Law is named after British monetary policy theorist and economist Charles Goodhart. Speaking at a conference in Sydney in 1975, Goodhart said that “any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes.” Goodhart’s Law states that when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.

Six Thinking Hats Model

six-thinking-hats-model
The Six Thinking Hats model was created by psychologist Edward de Bono in 1986, who noted that personality type was a key driver of how people approached problem-solving. For example, optimists view situations differently from pessimists. Analytical individuals may generate ideas that a more emotional person would not, and vice versa.

Mandela Effect

mandela-effect
The Mandela effect is a phenomenon where a large group of people remembers an event differently from how it occurred. The Mandela effect was first described in relation to Fiona Broome, who believed that former South African President Nelson Mandela died in prison during the 1980s. While Mandela was released from prison in 1990 and died 23 years later, Broome remembered news coverage of his death in prison and even a speech from his widow. Of course, neither event occurred in reality. But Broome was later to discover that she was not the only one with the same recollection of events.

Crowding-Out Effect

crowding-out-effect
The crowding-out effect occurs when public sector spending reduces spending in the private sector.

Bandwagon Effect

bandwagon-effect
The bandwagon effect tells us that the more a belief or idea has been adopted by more people within a group, the more the individual adoption of that idea might increase within the same group. This is the psychological effect that leads to herd mentality. What in marketing can be associated with social proof.

Moore’s Law

moores-law
Moore’s law states that the number of transistors on a microchip doubles approximately every two years. This observation was made by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore in 1965 and it become a guiding principle for the semiconductor industry and has had far-reaching implications for technology as a whole.

Disruptive Innovation

disruptive-innovation
Disruptive innovation as a term was first described by Clayton M. Christensen, an American academic and business consultant whom The Economist called “the most influential management thinker of his time.” Disruptive innovation describes the process by which a product or service takes hold at the bottom of a market and eventually displaces established competitors, products, firms, or alliances.

Value Migration

value-migration
Value migration was first described by author Adrian Slywotzky in his 1996 book Value Migration – How to Think Several Moves Ahead of the Competition. Value migration is the transferal of value-creating forces from outdated business models to something better able to satisfy consumer demands.

Bye-Now Effect

bye-now-effect
The bye-now effect describes the tendency for consumers to think of the word “buy” when they read the word “bye”. In a study that tracked diners at a name-your-own-price restaurant, each diner was asked to read one of two phrases before ordering their meal. The first phrase, “so long”, resulted in diners paying an average of $32 per meal. But when diners recited the phrase “bye bye” before ordering, the average price per meal rose to $45.

Groupthink

groupthink
Groupthink occurs when well-intentioned individuals make non-optimal or irrational decisions based on a belief that dissent is impossible or on a motivation to conform. Groupthink occurs when members of a group reach a consensus without critical reasoning or evaluation of the alternatives and their consequences.

Stereotyping

stereotyping
A stereotype is a fixed and over-generalized belief about a particular group or class of people. These beliefs are based on the false assumption that certain characteristics are common to every individual residing in that group. Many stereotypes have a long and sometimes controversial history and are a direct consequence of various political, social, or economic events. Stereotyping is the process of making assumptions about a person or group of people based on various attributes, including gender, race, religion, or physical traits.

Murphy’s Law

murphys-law
Murphy’s Law states that if anything can go wrong, it will go wrong. Murphy’s Law was named after aerospace engineer Edward A. Murphy. During his time working at Edwards Air Force Base in 1949, Murphy cursed a technician who had improperly wired an electrical component and said, “If there is any way to do it wrong, he’ll find it.”

Law of Unintended Consequences

law-of-unintended-consequences
The law of unintended consequences was first mentioned by British philosopher John Locke when writing to parliament about the unintended effects of interest rate rises. However, it was popularized in 1936 by American sociologist Robert K. Merton who looked at unexpected, unanticipated, and unintended consequences and their impact on society.

Fundamental Attribution Error

fundamental-attribution-error
Fundamental attribution error is a bias people display when judging the behavior of others. The tendency is to over-emphasize personal characteristics and under-emphasize environmental and situational factors.

Outcome Bias

outcome-bias
Outcome bias describes a tendency to evaluate a decision based on its outcome and not on the process by which the decision was reached. In other words, the quality of a decision is only determined once the outcome is known. Outcome bias occurs when a decision is based on the outcome of previous events without regard for how those events developed.

Hindsight Bias

hindsight-bias
Hindsight bias is the tendency for people to perceive past events as more predictable than they actually were. The result of a presidential election, for example, seems more obvious when the winner is announced. The same can also be said for the avid sports fan who predicted the correct outcome of a match regardless of whether their team won or lost. Hindsight bias, therefore, is the tendency for an individual to convince themselves that they accurately predicted an event before it happened.

Read Next: BiasesBounded RationalityMandela EffectDunning-Kruger EffectLindy EffectCrowding Out EffectBandwagon Effect.

Main Guides:

Discover more from FourWeekMBA

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top
FourWeekMBA