Hindsight Bias: Characteristics Of This Cognitive Bias
The past, the past is. And there is an irrefutable fact: we cannot change our decisions or our actions of the past. And what do we usually do about it? Modify our perception of what happened and remember our own decisions as better than they really were.
This psychological effect known as prejudice or hindsight bias It manifests itself when we look back in time and effectively believe that the events that occurred were more predictable than they actually were when a particular decision was made.
A cognitive bias is a deviation in ordinary cognitive processing that leads the individual to distort and misinterpret available information.
These types of irrational judgments, as with hindsight bias, arise as an evolutionary need from which our brains are capable of making instant judgments without the mediation of a more elaborate and, therefore, slower interpretation system. . Although they can lead us to make serious errors of interpretation, in certain contexts and situations they help us make more accurate and effective decisions.
The concept of cognitive bias was introduced by psychologists and researchers Daniel Kahneman and Tversky in 1972, following his experience researching patients who were unable to reason intuitively with large numbers. Both argued that most important human decisions are based on a limited number of heuristic principles – mental shortcuts we use to simplify reality and solve problems – and not on a formal analysis of facts. This theory directly contradicted the rational decision-making model that prevailed at that time.
Hindsight bias: what it is and how it influences us
It is common for prejudice or hindsight bias to act every time an economic or social crisis occurs. For example, after the global financial crisis of 2008, which was unleashed by the collapse of the housing bubble and subprime mortgage fraud in the US, we saw how many of the economists who failed to predict its devastating effects stated that posteriori that they were indeed predictable and that they knew that what finally happened would happen.
This bias also has a lot to do with the ability of human beings to remember certain events. Our memory system does not work like a computer: Memories fade over time and we reconstruct part of them by accumulating new experiences. Psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has researched so-called “false memories” for years, postulating the theory that the way someone is asked to remember something influences their subsequent description of the memory itself.
These processing errors that bias our memory, as occurs with the hindsight bias, which leads us to modify the memory of our beliefs prior to a certain event occurring in favor of the final conclusion, determine our view of ourselves and what surrounds us. Historians, biasing the outcome or development of a historical battle, or doctors, biasedly remembering the negative effects of a clinical trial, are two examples of professions affected by this bias.
What does the research say about it?
Although a bias such as hindsight seems, a priori, to be an easily explainable and identifiable error, the vast majority of studies carried out conclude that It is very difficult to make judgments about something that has happened, completely abstracting from the result, so it is also difficult to try to counteract its effect. Numerous studies have confirmed this bias and in recent years efforts have been made to determine whether judges succumb to it to a greater or lesser extent than, for example, members of a jury.
In this sense, in 2001 a study was carried out with 167 judges of the US Federal Courts and it was concluded that the judges were affected by hindsight bias to the same extent as the rest of the citizens. Another empirical study conducted by researchers WK Viscusi and R. Hastie in 2002 also concluded that the same effects derived from hindsight bias influenced the judge’s sentence, but to a lesser extent.
According to the study, although the jurors were correct in incorporating moral and social assessments into their verdict that allowed a harmful act or behavior to be classified as intentional (thus punishing the defendant and preventing similar conduct in the future), Errors and prejudices abounded, turning damning verdicts into an unpredictable lottery. On the other hand, professional judges erred to a lesser extent, a fact that calls into question the suitability of juries, despite being in their most democratic form.
How to combat this and other biases
There is no magic formula that guarantees us avoiding irrational judgments and biases such as hindsight, but there is We can take into account certain keys to minimize its effects. The first thing is to start by assuming and accepting an uncomfortable truth: that we are not smarter than anyone else and that all of us, without exception, are susceptible to suffering its effects, regardless of our studies or how rational we think we are.
Biases, as evolutionary mechanisms, are there and they are there for a reason: speed up decision-making and response to stimuli, problems or situations that, otherwise, we would not be able to face due to the inability of our cognitive system to process all the available information in the shortest possible time.
Once we have assumed our own vulnerability to the effects of the irrational, the next step is to know how to treat the information we receive from our context and from other people. It is important to weigh the data and demand evidence for statements that raise suspicions. Intuition without the support of reason does not lead to a successful outcome. We must contrast all opinions, our own and those of others, with facts and objective data. And be aware that making decisions based on a self-assessment of our capabilities can be misleading.
Finally, be careful not to always want to be right. Listen carefully and try to understand the real meaning of the information What our interlocutor provides us can be the best remedy against self-deception. Closing our eyes and ears to the evidence so as not to see our established beliefs in danger is the prelude to one of the greatest evils of our society: fanaticism. And paraphrasing the American psychologist Gordon Allport: “People who are aware of or ashamed of their prejudices are also those who are on the path to suppressing them.”
Other types of bias
There are many cognitive biases that lead us to make errors and make irrational judgments, but we can’t focus solely on hindsight bias. There are many others that we must take into account. Among the best known are the following:
1. Carryover bias
It consists of believing or doing something that many people do. This is, The probability of occurrence of a behavior would increase depending on the number of individuals who engage in it. This bias is partly responsible for how we perpetuate many of the myths and false beliefs (such as thinking that we only use 10% of our brain or believing that homeopathy works) so ingrained in our society today.
It is the tendency to “anchor” and use the first piece of information that comes to us to then make judgments or decisions.
The consequences of this bias are often used very effectively by all types of sellers and salespeople. A very obvious example can be found in car dealerships. The seller shows us a vehicle and tells us a specific price (for example, €5,000). That first information, in this case a figure, will mean that throughout the purchasing process we keep in mind the figure that the seller has offered us. In this way, he is the one who starts with the advantage of being able to negotiate on his own terms.
3. Fundamental attribution error bias
It is the tendency to attribute observable behavior exclusively to internal traits of an individual (such as personality or intelligence). Thus, we simplify reality by ruling out a priori any possible relationship between situational factors -more changing and less predictable- and the individual, who can serve as an explanation of his behavior.
4. Confirmation bias
It occurs by favoring, interpreting and remembering information that confirms our own expectations and previous beliefs, thus nullifying any other type of alternative explanation. We interpret reality selectively (as occurs with hindsight bias), ignoring facts and situations that do not support our preconceived ideas.
This error in reasoning has a very negative influence, for example, in political and organizational spheres where it is common to have to consider multiple options in order to make an accurate decision.
5. Availability bias
It is the tendency to estimate the probability of an event based on the availability or frequency with which that event appears in our mind through experience. For example, if the media continuously presents us with news of house robberies in the summer every day, our tendency will be to think that these events occur constantly and more regularly than they actually do. since they will be more present in our memory than other events that are objectively more frequent.
