Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Logical Fallacies and Biases > Cognitive Biases > Flashcards

Cognitive Biases Flashcards

1
Q

The tendency to rely too heavily, or “anchor”, on one trait or piece of information when making decisions (usually the first piece of information that we acquire on that subject

A

anchoring effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

a person looking to buy a used car - they may focus excessively on the odometer reading and the year of the car, and use those criteria as a basis for evaluating the value of the car, rather than considering how well the engine or the transmission is maintained.

A

anchoring effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

MSRP for a new Lexus is $39,465. You negotiated a price for $35,250. You feel terrific. You believe you got a great deal.

A

anchoring effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What’s an acceptable curfew for a 16-year-old? If you had to be home by 11 p.m. on a weekend evening, a 1 a.m. curfew won’t feel right, even if “all the kids are doing it.”

A

anchoring effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

If a husband is doing ten times more housework than his dad ever did, he may feel entitled to a “best husband of the year” award from his wife. Imagine his surprise then, when his wife berates him for not doing enough.

A

anchoring effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

The tendency of our perception to be affected by our recurring thoughts

A

attentional bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

The tendency to excessively depend on automated systems which can lead to erroneous automated information overriding correct decisions.

A

automation bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

The tendency to overestimate the likelihood of events with greater “availability” in memory, which can be influenced by how recent the memories are or how unusual or emotionally charged they may be

A

availability heuristic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

A self-reinforcing process in which a collective belief gains more and more plausibility through its increasing repetition in public discourse (or “repeat something long enough and it will become true”)

A

availability cascade

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

When people react to disconfirming evidence by strengthening their beliefs.

A

backfire effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

The tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same

A

bandwagon effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

The tendency to ignore base rate information (generic, general information) and focus on specific information (information only pertaining to a certain case)

A

base rate fallacy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

An effect where someone’s evaluation of the logical strength of an argument is biased by the believability of the conclusion

A

belief bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

The tendency to see oneself as less biased than other people, or to be able to identify more cognitive biases in others than in oneself

A

bias blindspot

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

The tendency for people to appear more attractive in a group than in isolation

A

cheerleader effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

The tendency to remember one’s choices as better than they actually were

A

choice-supportive bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

The tendency to overestimate the importance of small runs, streaks, or clusters in large samples of random data (that is, seeing phantom patterns)

A

clustering illusion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a way that confirms one’s preconceptions

A

confirmation bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

The tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, instead of testing possible alternative hypotheses

A

congruence bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

The tendency to assume that specific conditions are more probable than general ones

A

conjunctive fallacy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

A certain state of mind wherein high values and high likelihoods are overestimated while low values and low likelihoods are underestimated

A

regressive bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

The tendency to revise one’s belief insufficiently when presented with new evidence

A

Conservatism bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

The enhancement or reduction of a certain perception’s stimuli when compared with a recently observed, contrasting object

A

contrast effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

When better-informed people find it extremely difficult to think about problems from the perspective of lesser-informed people

A

curse of knowledge

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Preferences for either option A or B changes in favor of option B when option C is presented, which is similar to option B but in no way better.

A

decoy effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

The tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts (e.g. coins) rather than large amounts (e.g. bills).

A

denomination effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

The tendency to sell an asset that has accumulated in value and resist selling an asset that has declined in value.

A

disposition effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

The tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them simultaneously than when evaluating them separately

A

distinction bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

The tendency for unskilled individuals to overestimate their own ability and the tendency for experts to underestimate their own ability

A

Dunning-Kruger effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

The neglect of the duration of an episode in determining its value

A

duration neglect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

The tendency to underestimate the influence or strength of feelings, in either oneself or others.

A

empathy gap

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

when one is angry, it is difficult to understand what it is like for one to be happy, and vice versa; when one is blindly in love with someone, it is difficult to understand what it is like for one not to be, (or to imagine the possibility of not being blindly in love in the future).

A

empathy gap

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

The tendency for people to demand much more to give up an object than they would be willing to pay to acquire it

A

endowment effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Categorizing people and things according to their essential nature, in spite of variations

A

essentialism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Based on the estimates, real-world evidence turns out to be less extreme than our expectations (conditionally inverse of the conservatism bias)

A

exaggerated expectation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

The tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations

A

expectation bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

The tendency to place too much importance on one aspect of an event

A

focusing effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

The observation that individuals will give high accuracy ratings to descriptions of their personality that supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people. This effect can provide a partial explanation for the widespread acceptance of some beliefs and practices, such as astrology, fortune telling, graphology, and some types of personality tests.

A

forer effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

Drawing different conclusions from the same information, depending on how that information is presented

A

framing effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

The illusion in which a word, a name, or other thing that has recently come to one’s attention suddenly seems to appear with improbable frequency shortly afterwards

A

frequency illusion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

Limits a person to using an object only in the way it is traditionally used.

A

functional fixedness

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

Based on a specific level of task difficulty, the confidence in judgments is too conservative and not extreme enough

A

hard-easy effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

The “hot-hand fallacy” (also known as the “hot hand phenomenon” or “hot hand”) is the fallacious belief that a person who has experienced success has a greater chance of further success in additional attempts.

A

hot-hand fallacy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

Discounting is the tendency for people to have a stronger preference for more immediate payoffs relative to later payoffs. Hyperbolic discounting leads to choices that are inconsistent over time – people make choices today that their future selves would prefer not to have made, despite using the same reasoning.

A

hyperbolic discounting

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

The tendency to respond more strongly to a single identified person at risk than to a large group of people at risk

A

identifiable victim effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

The tendency for people to place a disproportionately high value on objects that they partially assembled themselves, such as furniture from IKEA, regardless of the quality of the end result.

A

IKEA effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

The tendency to overestimate one’s degree of influence over other external events

A

illusion of control

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

Belief that furtherly acquired information generates additional relevant data for predictions, even when it evidently does not

A

illusion of vailidity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

The tendency to overestimate the length or the intensity of the impact of future feeling states

A

impact bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

The tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect action.

A

information bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

The tendency to under-expect variation in small samples

A

Insensitivity to sample size

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

The phenomenon where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong.

A

sunk cost fallacy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

The tendency to prefer a smaller set to a larger set judged separately, but not jointly

A

less is better effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

seven ounces of ice cream overflowing in a small cup was preferred over eight ounces of ice cream in a much larger cup

A

less is better effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

a dinnerware set with 24 intact pieces was preferred over a dinnerware set of 31 pieces with a few broken pieces

A

less is better effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

“the disutility of giving up an object is greater than the utility associated with acquiring it”

A

loss aversion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

The tendency to express undue liking for things merely because of familiarity with them.

A

mere exposure effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

The tendency to concentrate on the nominal value (face value) of money rather than its value in terms of purchasing power

A

money illusion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

The tendency of a track record of non-prejudice to increase subsequent prejudice.

A

moral credential effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

individuals who had the opportunity to recruit a woman or African American in one setting were more likely to say later, in a different setting, that a job would be better suited for a man or a Caucasian.

A

moral credential effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q

The tendency of people, when evaluating the causes of the behaviors of a person they dislike, to attribute their positive behaviors to the environment and their negative behaviors to the person’s inherent nature.

A

negativity effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

Psychological phenomenon by which humans have a greater recall of unpleasant memories compared with positive memories

A

negativity bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

The tendency to completely disregard probability when making a decision under uncertainty

A

neglect of probability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q

The refusal to plan for, or react to, a disaster which has never happened before.

A

normalcy bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

Aversion to contact with or use of products, research, standards, or knowledge developed outside a group

A

not invented here

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

When a researcher expects a given result and therefore unconsciously manipulates an experiment or misinterprets data in order to find it

A

observer-expectancy effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

The tendency to judge harmful actions as worse, or less moral, than equally harmful omissions (inactions)

A

omission bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

The tendency to be over-optimistic, overestimating favorable and pleasing outcomes

A

optimism bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

Ignoring an obvious (negative) situation.

A

ostrich effect

70
Q

The tendency to judge a decision by its eventual outcome instead of based on the quality of the decision at the time it was made.

A

outcome bias

71
Q

Excessive confidence in one’s own answers to questions

A

overconfidence effect

72
Q

or certain types of questions, answers that people rate as “99% certain” turn out to be wrong 40% of the time.

A

overconfidence effect

73
Q

A vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) is perceived as significant, e.g., seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon, and hearing non-existent hidden messages on records played in reverse.

A

Pareidolia

74
Q

The tendency to give disproportionate weight to trivial issues. Also known as bikeshedding, this bias explains why an organization may avoid specialized or complex subjects, such as the design of a nuclear reactor, and instead focus on something easy to grasp or rewarding to the average participant, such as the design of an adjacent bike shed

A

Parkinson’s Law of Triviality

75
Q

The tendency to underestimate task-completion times

A

planning fallacy

76
Q

The tendency to persuade oneself through rational argument that a purchase was a good value.

A

post purchase rationalization

77
Q

The tendency to have an excessive optimism towards an invention or innovation’s usefulness throughout society, while often failing to identify its limitations and weaknesses

A

pro innovation bias

78
Q

The tendency to make risk-averse choices if the expected outcome is positive, but make risk-seeking choices to avoid negative outcomes

A

Pseudocertainty effect

79
Q

The urge to do the opposite of what someone wants you to do out of a need to resist a perceived attempt to constrain your freedom of choice

A

reactance

80
Q

Devaluing proposals only because they purportedly originated with an adversary.

A

reactive devaluation

81
Q

The illusion that a word or language usage is a recent innovation when it is in fact long-established

A

recency illusion

82
Q

The tendency to overestimate one’s ability to show restraint in the face of temptation.

A

restraint bias

83
Q

Rhyming statements are perceived as more truthful

A

rhyme as reason effect

84
Q

The tendency to take greater risks when perceived safety increases.

A

risk compensation

85
Q

The tendency for expectations to affect perception.

A

selective perception

86
Q

The tendency to reject new evidence that contradicts a paradigm

A

Semmelweis reflex

87
Q

The tendency, when making hiring decisions, to favour potential candidates who don’t compete with one’s own particular strengths

A

social comparison bias

88
Q

The tendency to over-report socially desirable characteristics or behaviours in one self and under-report socially undesirable characteristics or behaviours

A

social desirability bias

89
Q

The tendency to like things to stay relatively the same

A

status quo bias

90
Q

Expecting a member of a group to have certain characteristics without having actual information about that individual.

A

stereotyping

91
Q

The tendency to judge probability of the whole to be less than the probabilities of the parts

A

Subadditivity effect

92
Q

Perception that something is true if a subject’s belief demands it to be true. Also assigns perceived connections between coincidences.

A

Subjective validation

93
Q

Underestimations of the time that could be saved (or lost) when increasing (or decreasing) from a relatively low speed and overestimations of the time that could be saved (or lost) when increasing (or decreasing) from a relatively high speed.

A

time-saving bias

94
Q

The tendency to want to finish a given unit of a task or an item. Strong effects on the consumption of food in particular

A

unit bias

95
Q

Difficulty in comparing small differences in large quantities.

A

Weber–Fechner law

96
Q

Underestimation of the duration taken to traverse oft-traveled routes and overestimation of the duration taken to traverse less familiar routes.

A

well traveled road effect

97
Q

Preference for reducing a small risk to zero over a greater reduction in a larger risk.

A

Zero-risk bias

98
Q

Intuitively judging a situation to be zero-sum

A

zero-sum bias

99
Q

The tendency for explanations of other individuals’ behaviors to overemphasize the influence of their personality and underemphasize the influence of their situation (see also Fundamental attribution error), and for explanations of one’s own behaviors to do the opposite (that is, to overemphasize the influence of our situation and underemphasize the influence of our own personality).

A

actor-observer bias

100
Q

Attributing more blame to a harm-doer as the outcome becomes more severe or as personal or situational similarity to the victim increases.

A

Defensive attribution hypothesis

101
Q

Occurs when people claim more responsibility for themselves for the results of a joint action than an outside observer would credit them with.

A

egocentric bias

102
Q

An exception to the fundamental attribution error, when people view others as having (situational) extrinsic motivations and (dispositional) intrinsic motivations for oneself

A

extrinsic incentives bias

103
Q

The tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with them

A

false consensus effect

104
Q

The tendency for people to over-emphasize personality-based explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing the role and power of situational influences on the same behavior

A

fundamental attribution error

105
Q

The biased belief that the characteristics of an individual group member are reflective of the group as a whole or the tendency to assume that group decision outcomes reflect the preferences of group members, even when information is available that clearly suggests otherwise.

A

group attribution error

106
Q

The tendency for a person’s positive or negative traits to “spill over” from one personality area to another in others’ perceptions of them

A

halo effect

107
Q

People perceive their knowledge of their peers to surpass their peers’ knowledge of them

A

Illusion of asymmetric insight

108
Q

When people view self-generated preferences as instead being caused by insightful, effective and benevolent agents

A

Illusion of external agency

109
Q

People overestimate others’ ability to know them, and they also overestimate their ability to know others.

A

illusion of transparency

110
Q

Overestimating one’s desirable qualities, and underestimating undesirable qualities, relative to other people.

A

illusory superiority

111
Q

The tendency for people to give preferential treatment to others they perceive to be members of their own groups.

A

ingroup bias

112
Q

The tendency for people to want to believe that the world is fundamentally just, causing them to rationalize an otherwise inexplicable injustice as deserved by the victim(s).

A

just world hypothesis

113
Q

The tendency for people to ascribe greater or lesser moral standing based on the outcome of an event

A

moral luck

114
Q

Expecting more egocentric bias in others than in oneself

A

naive cynicism

115
Q

The belief that we see reality as it really is – objectively and without bias; that the facts are plain for all to see; that rational people will agree with us; and that those who don’t are either uninformed, lazy, irrational, or biased.

A

naive realism

116
Q

Individuals see members of their own group as being relatively more varied than members of other groups

A

Outgroup homogeneity bias

117
Q

The tendency to unconsciously assume that others (or one’s future selves) share one’s current emotional states, thoughts and values

A

projection bias

118
Q

The tendency to claim more responsibility for successes than failures. It may also manifest itself as a tendency for people to evaluate ambiguous information in a way beneficial to their interests

A

self-serving bias

119
Q

Known as the tendency for group members to spend more time and energy discussing information that all members are already familiar with (i.e., shared information), and less time and energy discussing information that only some members are aware of (i.e., unshared information).

A

shared info bias

120
Q

The tendency to defend and bolster the status quo. Existing social, economic, and political arrangements tend to be preferred, and alternatives disparaged, sometimes even at the expense of individual and collective self-interest.

A

system justification

121
Q

The tendency for people to view themselves as relatively variable in terms of personality, behavior, and mood while viewing others as much more predictable.

A

trait ascription bias

122
Q

Similar to the fundamental attribution error, in this error a person is likely to make an internal attribution to an entire group instead of the individuals within the group.

A

ultimate attribution error

123
Q

A tendency to believe ourselves to be worse than others at tasks which are difficult

A

worse-than-average effect

124
Q

Bizarre material is better remembered than common material.

A

Bizarreness effect

125
Q

In a self-justifying manner retroactively ascribing one’s choices to be more informed than they were when they were made.

A

Choice-supportive bias

126
Q

After an investment of effort in producing change, remembering one’s past performance as more difficult than it actually was

A

change bias

127
Q

Tendency to remember high values and high likelihoods/probabilities/frequencies as lower than they actually were and low ones as higher than they actually were. Based on the evidence, memories are not extreme enough

A

regressive bias

128
Q

Incorrectly remembering one’s past attitudes and behaviour as resembling present attitudes and behaviour

A

consistency bias

129
Q

That cognition and memory are dependent on context, such that out-of-context memories are more difficult to retrieve than in-context memories (e.g., recall time and accuracy for a work-related memory will be lower at home, and vice versa)

A

context effect

130
Q

The tendency for people of one race to have difficulty identifying members of a race other than their own.

A

cross-race effect

131
Q

A form of misattribution where a memory is mistaken for imagination, because there is no subjective experience of it being a memory

A

Cryptomnesia

132
Q

Recalling the past in a self-serving manner, e.g., remembering one’s exam grades as being better than they were, or remembering a caught fish as bigger than it really was.

A

egocentric memory bias

133
Q

A bias in which the emotion associated with unpleasant memories fades more quickly than the emotion associated with positive events.

A

fading effect bias

134
Q

A form of misattribution where imagination is mistaken for a memory.

A

false memory

135
Q

That self-generated information is remembered best. For instance, people are better able to recall memories of statements that they have generated than similar statements generated by others

A

generation effect

136
Q

The tendency to forget information that can be found readily online by using Internet search engines.

A

google effect

137
Q

The inclination to see past events as being more predictable than they actually were;

A

hindsight bias

138
Q

That humorous items are more easily remembered than non-humorous ones, which might be explained by the distinctiveness of humor, the increased cognitive processing time to understand the humor, or the emotional arousal caused by the humor

A

humor effect

139
Q

That people are more likely to identify as true statements those they have previously heard (even if they cannot consciously remember having heard them), regardless of the actual validity of the statement. In other words, a person is more likely to believe a familiar statement than an unfamiliar one.

A

illusion of truth effect

140
Q

Inaccurately remembering a relationship between two events

A

illusory correlation

141
Q

Memory distortions introduced by the loss of details in a recollection over time, often concurrent with sharpening or selective recollection of certain details that take on exaggerated significance in relation to the details or aspects of the experience lost through leveling. Both biases may be reinforced over time, and by repeated recollection or re-telling of a memory

A

Leveling and Sharpening

142
Q

That different methods of encoding information into memory have different levels of effectiveness

A

Levels-of-processing effect

143
Q

A smaller percentage of items are remembered in a longer list, but as the length of the list increases, the absolute number of items remembered increases as well

A

list-length effect

144
Q

Memory becoming less accurate because of interference from post-event informatio

A

misinformation effect

145
Q

That memory recall is higher for the last items of a list when the list items were received via speech than when they were received through writing.

A

modality effect

146
Q

The improved recall of information congruent with one’s current mood.

A

Mood-congruent memory bias

147
Q

That a person in a group has diminished recall for the words of others who spoke immediately before himself, if they take turns speaking

A

next in line effect

148
Q

That being shown some items from a list and later retrieving one item causes it to become harder to retrieve the other items

A

Part-list cueing effect

149
Q

That people seem to perceive not the sum of an experience but the average of how it was at its peak (e.g. pleasant or unpleasant) and how it ended.

A

Peak–end rule

150
Q

The unwanted recurrence of memories of a traumatic event

A

persistence

151
Q

The notion that concepts that are learned by viewing pictures are more easily and frequently recalled than are concepts that are learned by viewing their written word form counterparts

A

Picture superiority effect

152
Q

That older adults favor positive over negative information in their memories.

A

Positivity effect

153
Q

That items near the end of a sequence are the easiest to recall, followed by the items at the beginning of a sequence; items in the middle are the least likely to be remembered

A

primacy effect

154
Q

That information that takes longer to read and is thought about more (processed with more difficulty) is more easily remembered

A

Processing difficulty effect

155
Q

The recalling of more personal events from adolescence and early adulthood than personal events from other lifetime periods

A

Reminiscence bump

156
Q

The remembering of the past as having been better than it really was.

A

Rosy retrospection

157
Q

That memories relating to the self are better recalled than similar information relating to others.

A

Self-relevance effect

158
Q

Confusing episodic memories with other information, creating distorted memories.

A

source confusion

159
Q

That information is better recalled if exposure to it is repeated over a long span of time rather than a short one.

A

spacing effect

160
Q

The tendency to overestimate the amount that other people notice your appearance or behavior.

A

spotlight effect

161
Q

Memory distorted towards stereotypes (e.g., racial or gender), e.g., “black-sounding” names being misremembered as names of criminals

A

stereotypical bias

162
Q

Diminishment of the recency effect because a sound item is appended to the list that the subject is not required to recall

A

suffix effect

163
Q

A form of misattribution where ideas suggested by a questioner are mistaken for memory.

A

suggestibility

164
Q

The tendency to displace recent events backward in time and remote events forward in time, so that recent events appear more remote, and remote events, more recent.

A

telescoping effect

165
Q

The fact that you more easily remember information you have read by rewriting it instead of rereading it

A

testing effect

166
Q

When a subject is able to recall parts of an item, or related information, but is frustratingly unable to recall the whole item. This is thought an instance of “blocking” where multiple similar memories are being recalled and interfere with each other

A

tip of tongue

167
Q

Overestimating the significance of the present

A

travis syndrome

168
Q

That the “gist” of what someone has said is better remembered than the verbatim wording.[108] This is because memories are representations, not exact copies.

A

verbatim effect

169
Q

That an item that sticks out is more likely to be remembered than other items

A

Von Restorff effect

170
Q

That uncompleted or interrupted tasks are remembered better than completed ones.

A

Zeigarnik effect

Logical Fallacies and Biases (2 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions