actor-observer-bias

Actor-Observer Bias

The Actor-Observer Bias reflects how individuals explain their own actions based on external factors while interpreting others’ actions as personality traits. Characteristics include situational and dispositional attributions, resulting from different perspectives. Understanding this bias aids in conflict resolution, communication improvement, and empathy development, though subjectivity and attribution errors present challenges. Real-life instances include accident attribution and workplace assessments.

Characteristics

The Fundamental Attribution Error (FAE) is characterized by specific attributes and cognitive tendencies that influence how individuals perceive and interpret behavior, both their own and that of others.

  • Situational Attribution (Self): In the context of the FAE, individuals tend to explain their own behavior based on external factors or situational influences. They attribute their actions to circumstances, constraints, or context when evaluating their own actions.
  • Dispositional Attribution (Others): Conversely, the FAE involves explaining others’ behavior based on internal factors or traits. When observing others, individuals often attribute their actions to inherent qualities or personality traits rather than considering external circumstances.
  • Perspective Differences: The FAE arises due to differences in perspective between actors (those engaging in the behavior) and observers (those perceiving and interpreting the behavior). Actors are more likely to consider situational factors when explaining their actions, while observers tend to emphasize dispositional factors when assessing others’ actions.

Use Cases

The concept of the Fundamental Attribution Error has practical implications in various domains where understanding and addressing attribution biases is essential.

  • Interpersonal Relationships: The FAE is relevant in understanding misinterpretations and conflicts that arise within relationships. Recognizing how individuals attribute behavior differently can aid in resolving misunderstandings.
  • Performance Evaluations: In professional settings, the FAE can impact how individuals assess their own actions compared to the actions of their colleagues or subordinates. Awareness of this bias can lead to fairer and more accurate performance evaluations.
  • Conflict Resolution: The FAE can play a role in conflicts where attribution biases contribute to disputes. Addressing these biases can lead to more effective conflict resolution by promoting empathy and perspective-taking.

Benefits

Recognizing and addressing the Fundamental Attribution Error offers several advantages in interpersonal dynamics and decision-making.

  • Self-Reflection: Awareness of the FAE encourages individuals to reflect on their attribution tendencies and consider situational factors when evaluating their own behavior. This self-reflection can lead to more accurate self-assessments.
  • Improved Communication: Acknowledging the FAE enhances communication skills by helping individuals recognize bias in interpreting behavior. This recognition allows for more empathetic and accurate communication with others.
  • Conflict Resolution: Understanding and addressing the FAE can facilitate conflict resolution by promoting empathy and perspective-taking. It helps individuals recognize that others’ actions may be influenced by external circumstances.

Challenges

Despite its benefits, addressing the Fundamental Attribution Error presents certain challenges and considerations.

  • Subjectivity: Attribution is inherently subjective, and biases may persist even when individuals are aware of them. Overcoming these biases requires ongoing effort and self-awareness.
  • Empathy: Developing empathy to understand others’ perspectives accurately can be challenging, especially when dispositional attributions are deeply ingrained. Empathy is crucial for mitigating the FAE.
  • Attribution Errors: Avoiding attribution errors that can impact judgment and decision-making requires constant vigilance. Individuals must actively work to apply a more balanced approach to attribution in their interactions and assessments.

Examples

Examples of the Fundamental Attribution Error illustrate how this bias can manifest in various situations.

  • Accident Attribution: Imagine a scenario where an individual accidentally spills coffee on their colleague’s desk. The person who spilled the coffee (the actor) may attribute the incident to external factors, such as a crowded workspace or a slippery cup. However, a colleague observing the incident (the observer) may attribute it to the actor’s clumsiness or carelessness, demonstrating the FAE.
  • Relationship Disagreements: In a romantic relationship, one partner may attribute their own forgetfulness to a busy work schedule or external stressors, while attributing their partner’s forgetfulness to a lack of consideration or responsibility. These differing attributions can lead to misunderstandings and conflicts.
  • Workplace Assessments: In a professional setting, an employee may rate their own performance more favorably, attributing their achievements to their hard work and dedication. However, when assessing their colleagues, they may attribute their achievements to luck or favorable circumstances, showing the FAE in the context of performance evaluations.

Actor-Observer Bias: Key Highlights

  • Explanation Bias: The Actor-Observer Bias refers to the tendency to attribute our own actions to external factors while attributing others’ actions to their personality traits.
  • Attribution Types:
    • Situational Attribution (Self): Explaining our behavior by referring to situational factors.
    • Dispositional Attribution (Others): Explaining others’ behavior based on their internal traits.
  • Perspective Differences: The bias arises due to the differing perspectives of the actor (ourselves) and the observer (others).
  • Use Cases:
    • Interpersonal Relationships: Recognizing misinterpretations in behavior attribution within relationships.
    • Performance Evaluations: Understanding how individuals assess their own actions versus others’ in professional settings.
    • Conflict Resolution: Addressing misunderstandings in conflicts caused by attribution differences.
  • Benefits:
    • Encourages Self-Reflection: Promotes self-awareness of our attribution tendencies.
    • Enhances Communication: Improves communication by acknowledging bias in behavior interpretation.
    • Facilitates Conflict Resolution: Helps resolve conflicts by understanding attribution variations.
  • Challenges:
    • Subjectivity: Attributions are subjective and can be influenced by biases.
    • Empathy Development: Requires empathy to accurately understand others’ perspectives.
    • Attribution Errors: Avoiding errors in attribution that can impact judgment and relationships.
  • Examples:
    • Accident Attribution: We attribute our own accidents to external factors but see others’ accidents as their fault.
    • Relationship Disagreements: Misunderstandings due to differing attributions for behavior in relationships.
    • Workplace Assessments: Rating our own performance more favorably compared to others’ performance.

Related Frameworks, Models, or ConceptsDescriptionWhen to Apply
Actor-Observer Bias– The Actor-Observer Bias is a cognitive bias that leads individuals to attribute their own behavior to external situational factors (as an observer) while attributing others’ behavior to internal dispositional factors (as an actor). In other words, when explaining their own actions, individuals tend to focus on the influence of external circumstances or situational constraints, whereas when explaining others’ actions, they tend to emphasize personal traits or characteristics. The Actor-Observer Bias can lead to misunderstandings, miscommunication, and conflicts in interpersonal interactions, as individuals may perceive others’ behavior differently from how they perceive their own. Understanding the Actor-Observer Bias is essential for improving empathy, perspective-taking, and communication skills.– When analyzing attributions, explanations, or interpretations of behavior in interpersonal interactions, conflicts, or organizational settings. – Applicable in fields such as social psychology, communication studies, and conflict resolution to understand and mitigate biases that affect interpersonal perception and judgment.
Fundamental Attribution Error– The Fundamental Attribution Error is a related cognitive bias that refers to the tendency to attribute others’ behavior to dispositional factors (e.g., personality traits, intentions) while underestimating the influence of situational factors. Unlike the Actor-Observer Bias, which focuses on attributions made by actors and observers regarding the same behavior, the Fundamental Attribution Error pertains specifically to observers’ tendency to overemphasize internal causes when explaining others’ behavior. Both biases reflect the complexity of social perception and the challenges inherent in understanding the motives and intentions of others.– When studying social perception, attributions, or judgmental processes in various contexts, such as interpersonal interactions, organizational behavior, or legal decision-making. – Applicable in fields such as social psychology, criminology, and negotiation to explore biases in the interpretation of others’ behavior and decision-making processes.
Self-Serving Bias– The Self-Serving Bias is a cognitive bias that leads individuals to attribute their successes to internal factors (e.g., ability, effort) and their failures to external factors (e.g., luck, situational constraints). Unlike the Actor-Observer Bias, which involves attributions made by both actors and observers regarding the same behavior, the Self-Serving Bias pertains specifically to individuals’ explanations for their own outcomes. The Self-Serving Bias serves to protect self-esteem, maintain a positive self-image, and preserve feelings of competence and control. However, it can also lead to distortions in self-perception and interpersonal relations, as individuals may overlook their role in negative outcomes or take undue credit for positive outcomes.– When analyzing attributions, explanations, or interpretations of personal successes and failures in various domains, such as academic achievement, performance evaluation, or competitive contexts. – Applicable in fields such as education, performance management, and self-development to understand and address biases in self-perception and attributional processes.
Attribution TheoryAttribution Theory is a theoretical framework that explores how individuals interpret and explain the causes of behavior, events, and outcomes. According to attribution theory, people engage in causal attribution processes to make sense of the world and predict future events. Attributions can be classified along dimensions such as internal vs. external (attributing behavior to personal traits or situational factors) and stable vs. unstable (attributing behavior to enduring traits or temporary circumstances). Attribution theory helps explain phenomena such as the Actor-Observer Bias by elucidating the cognitive processes underlying attributions made by actors and observers.– When studying causal explanations, judgmental processes, or interpersonal perceptions in diverse social contexts, such as interpersonal relationships, organizational behavior, or legal decision-making. – Applicable in fields such as social psychology, counseling, and conflict resolution to understand how individuals make sense of their experiences and interactions with others.
Self-Perception TheorySelf-Perception Theory posits that individuals infer their own attitudes, beliefs, and emotions by observing their own behavior and the situational context in which it occurs. According to self-perception theory, people rely on their own behavior as a source of information about their internal states and motivations, especially when internal cues are ambiguous or inconsistent. Self-perception processes can contribute to the Actor-Observer Bias by shaping individuals’ attributions for their own behavior versus others’ behavior. When explaining their own actions, individuals may draw on situational cues and external factors, whereas when explaining others’ actions, they may rely more on dispositional attributions.– When studying self-awareness, self-concept formation, or attitude formation processes in various contexts, such as self-reflection, social comparison, or impression management. – Applicable in fields such as social psychology, consumer behavior, and organizational behavior to understand how individuals interpret and attribute meaning to their own behavior and experiences.
Social Comparison TheorySocial Comparison Theory proposes that individuals evaluate themselves by comparing their abilities, opinions, or attributes with those of others, particularly in situations where objective standards are unclear or unavailable. Social comparison processes influence self-perception, self-esteem, and behavior by providing a basis for self-evaluation and identification with reference groups. When making attributions for their own behavior versus others’ behavior, individuals may engage in social comparison processes to assess their relative competence, morality, or effectiveness. Social comparison theory helps explain how individuals’ perceptions of themselves and others shape attributions, judgments, and interpersonal relations.– When studying self-evaluation processes, social influence, or identity formation in various contexts, such as social media use, performance evaluation, or group dynamics. – Applicable in fields such as social psychology, marketing, and organizational behavior to understand how individuals use social comparisons to interpret and evaluate themselves and others.
Interpersonal PerceptionInterpersonal Perception refers to the process by which individuals form impressions, make attributions, and interpret the behavior of others in social interactions. Interpersonal perception involves decoding verbal and nonverbal cues, inferring others’ intentions and motives, and making judgments about their personality, character, or attitudes. When explaining their own behavior versus others’ behavior, individuals may rely on interpersonal perception processes to assess the intentions, motives, and dispositional traits of themselves and others. Interpersonal perception is influenced by factors such as social context, cultural norms, and individual differences in cognitive and affective processing.– When analyzing social interactions, communication dynamics, or conflict resolution strategies in interpersonal relationships, group settings, or organizational contexts. – Applicable in fields such as social psychology, communication studies, and negotiation to understand how individuals perceive and interpret others’ behavior in social interactions.
Judgment and Decision-MakingJudgment and Decision-Making refer to the cognitive processes involved in evaluating alternatives, making choices, and reaching conclusions in uncertain or ambiguous situations. Attributional biases such as the Actor-Observer Bias can influence judgment and decision-making by shaping individuals’ interpretations of causality, responsibility, and accountability. When making decisions, individuals may weigh internal and external factors differently depending on whether they are the actor or the observer in a given situation. Understanding the role of attributional biases in judgment and decision-making helps identify strategies to improve decisional accuracy, fairness, and effectiveness.– When studying decision-making processes, biases, or heuristics in various domains, such as consumer behavior, risk assessment, or organizational leadership. – Applicable in fields such as behavioral economics, management science, and public policy to understand and address biases that affect individuals’ choices and judgments.
Emotion RegulationEmotion Regulation refers to the process of monitoring, evaluating, and modifying one’s emotional responses to achieve desired goals, adapt to situational demands, and maintain psychological well-being. Attributional biases such as the Actor-Observer Bias can influence emotion regulation by shaping individuals’ interpretations of events, appraisals of responsibility, and expectations for future outcomes. When explaining their own behavior versus others’ behavior, individuals may experience different emotional reactions based on their attributions and perceptions of control. Emotion regulation strategies can help individuals manage the emotional consequences of attributional biases and foster adaptive coping mechanisms.– When studying emotion regulation strategies, coping mechanisms, or stress management techniques in various contexts, such as interpersonal conflicts, organizational stressors, or traumatic events. – Applicable in fields such as clinical psychology, occupational health, and resilience training to understand and promote effective emotion regulation strategies in response to attributional biases and other stressors.
Cross-Cultural PerspectivesCross-Cultural Perspectives explore how attributional biases and interpersonal perceptions vary across different cultural contexts, norms, and values. Cultural factors such as individualism-collectivism, power distance, and uncertainty avoidance can shape the way individuals attribute causes to behavior and interpret others’ actions. The Actor-Observer Bias may manifest differently in cultures that prioritize individual agency and autonomy versus those that emphasize social harmony and interdependence. By examining cross-cultural differences in attributional processes, researchers can gain insights into the universality and cultural specificity of cognitive biases and social judgments.– When conducting cross-cultural research, comparative analyses, or cultural sensitivity training in diverse cultural settings or multicultural environments. – Applicable in fields such as cross-cultural psychology, international business, and global leadership development to understand and navigate cultural differences in attributional biases and interpersonal perceptions.

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:

Scroll to Top

Discover more from FourWeekMBA

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

Continue reading

FourWeekMBA