The Measurement of Individual Differences in Cognitive Biases: A Review and Improvement

Overview

Journal Front Psychol

Date 2021 Mar 8

PMID 33679554

Citations 8

Authors

Vincent Berthet

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Individual differences have been neglected in decision-making research on heuristics and cognitive biases. Addressing that issue requires having reliable measures. The author first reviewed the research on the measurement of individual differences in cognitive biases. While reliable measures of a dozen biases are currently available, our review revealed that some measures require improvement and measures of other key biases are still lacking (e.g., confirmation bias). We then conducted empirical work showing that adjustments produced a significant improvement of some measures and that confirmation bias can be reliably measured. Overall, our review and findings highlight that the measurement of individual differences in cognitive biases is still in its infancy. In particular, we suggest that contextualized (in addition to generic) measures need to be improved or developed.

Citing Articles

A common factor underlying individual differences in confirmation bias.

Berthet V, Teovanovic P, de Gardelle V Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):27795.

PMID: 39537676 PMC: 11561113. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-78053-7.

Changing Decisions: The Interaction between Framing and Decoy Effects.

Di Crosta A, Marin A, Palumbo R, Ceccato I, La Malva P, Gatti M Behav Sci (Basel). 2023; 13(9).

PMID: 37754033 PMC: 10525293. DOI: 10.3390/bs13090755.

Computational meaningfulness as the source of beneficial cognitive biases.

Suomala J, Kauttonen J Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1189704.

PMID: 37205079 PMC: 10187636. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1189704.

Assessment of cognitive biases in Augmented Reality: Beyond eye tracking.

Slowinski P, Grindley B, Muncie H, Harris D, Vine S, Wilson M J Eye Mov Res. 2023; 15(3).

PMID: 37179771 PMC: 10171922. DOI: 10.16910/jemr.15.3.4.

The heuristics-and-biases inventory: An open-source tool to explore individual differences in rationality.

Berthet V, de Gardelle V Front Psychol. 2023; 14:1145246.

PMID: 37077850 PMC: 10106569. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1145246.

References

Blumenthal-Barby J, Krieger H . Cognitive biases and heuristics in medical decision making: a critical review using a systematic search strategy. Med Decis Making. 2014; 35(4):539-57. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14547740. View

Stanovich K, West R . On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008; 94(4):672-95. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.672. View

Stanovich K, WEST R . Individual differences in reasoning: implications for the rationality debate?. Behav Brain Sci. 2001; 23(5):645-65; discussion 665-726. DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x00003435. View

Fischhoff B . Hindsight not equal to foresight: the effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. 1975. Qual Saf Health Care. 2003; 12(4):304-11; discussion 311-2. PMC: 1743746. DOI: 10.1136/qhc.12.4.304. View

Hershberger P, Part H, Markert R, Cohen S, Finger W . Development of a test of cognitive bias in medical decision making. Acad Med. 1994; 69(10):839-42. DOI: 10.1097/00001888-199410000-00014. View

Aczel B, Bago B, Szollosi A, Foldes A, Lukacs B . Measuring Individual Differences in Decision Biases: Methodological Considerations. Front Psychol. 2015; 6:1770. PMC: 4652008. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01770. View

Tversky A, Kahneman D . Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science. 1974; 185(4157):1124-31. DOI: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124. View

Evans J, Barston J, Pollard P . On the conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning. Mem Cognit. 1983; 11(3):295-306. DOI: 10.3758/bf03196976. View

Toplak M, West R, Stanovich K . The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks. Mem Cognit. 2011; 39(7):1275-89. DOI: 10.3758/s13421-011-0104-1. View

10.

Missier F, Galfano G, Venerus E, Ferrara D, Bruine de Bruin W, Penolazzi B . Decision-making competence in schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 2019; 215:457-459. DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2019.09.009. View

11.

Sladek R, Phillips P, Bond M . Measurement properties of the Inventory of Cognitive Bias in Medicine (ICBM). BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2008; 8:20. PMC: 2432053. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-8-20. View

12.

Missier F, Hansson P, Parker A, Bruine de Bruin W, Mantyla T . Decision-making competence in older adults: A rosy view from a longitudinal investigation. Psychol Aging. 2020; 35(4):553-564. DOI: 10.1037/pag0000443. View

13.

Baron J, Hershey J . Outcome bias in decision evaluation. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988; 54(4):569-79. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.4.569. View

14.

Lilienfeld S, Ammirati R, Landfield K . Giving Debiasing Away: Can Psychological Research on Correcting Cognitive Errors Promote Human Welfare?. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2015; 4(4):390-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01144.x. View

15.

Bruine de Bruin W, Parker A, Fischhoff B . Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007; 92(5):938-956. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.938. View

16.

De Neys W, Glumicic T . Conflict monitoring in dual process theories of thinking. Cognition. 2007; 106(3):1248-99. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.06.002. View

17.

Tversky A, Kahneman D . The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 1981; 211(4481):453-8. DOI: 10.1126/science.7455683. View