Heuristics, the shortcuts of the mind

For a long time, human beings have been considered a rational animal that judges their environment exhaustively and accurately. But, In the words of SE Taylor, we are “cognitively destitute.”. A metaphor to represent the human being as a maximum optimizer of mental processes. The cognitive strategy to achieve this is heuristics.

We can find several types of heuristics in the cognitive processes that we carry out on a daily basis. But In this article we are going to talk about those that we use most often. These are the representativeness heuristic, the availability heuristic, the anchor and adjustment heuristic, and the simulation heuristic.

What are heuristics

They are mental shortcuts that we use to simplify the solution of complex cognitive problems.. In a 1974 article published in Sciencee, Tversky and Kahneman maintain that these mental operations are used for judgment under uncertainty.

They are unconscious rules to reformulate problems and transform them into simpler and almost automatic operations. Thanks to them, we do not have to do deep reasoning every time a problem arises. Of course, these shortcuts are not entirely precise and sometimes lead us into error.

Although heuristics are very inexpensive, Tversky and Kahneman state can lead a person to make systematic errors. By increasing the speed with which decisions are made, they predispose the mind to commit different cognitive biases.

History of heuristics

According to an article in the Encyclopedia Britannica, the concept of heuristics has its roots in the Greek word heuriskeinwhich translates as ‘discover’.

For its part, Herbert Simon was one of the first personalities to delve into the study of heuristics.. His contribution was so significant that in 1978 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics for his research.

Simon introduced the concept of “satisficer” to refer to the tendency of people to opt for solutions that, although not perfect, are satisfactory. Furthermore, he highlighted the idea that the human mind operates under “bounded rationality.”

During the second half of the 20th century, heuristics received considerable attention thanks to the efforts of Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. Together, explored the mental mechanisms that people use when making decisions unconsciously.

Their work not only left a mark on psychology, but also influenced economics, law, and political science. His focus on heuristics and bounded rationality presented a challenge to the traditional view that viewed human beings as rational entities who make decisions based on well-informed evaluations.

On the other hand, in 1990, Gerd Gigerenzer launched a strong criticism of the research of Kahneman and Tversky. He argued that the “adaptive toolbox” of “fast and frugal” heuristics can produce “ecologically rational” decisions.

With his concept of “ecological rationality” he argued that The effectiveness of a heuristic should be judged based on how it performs in the real environment in which it is usedrather than comparing it to some ideal standard of rationality.

Types of mental shortcuts

There are different types of heuristics, which affect our decisions in various ways. Below, we will examine the most common ones along with the biases that are often associated with them.

1. Representativeness heuristics

This mental shortcut consists of make inferences about the probability that a stimulus (person, event, object…) belongs to a given category.

Through the superficial characteristics and with the help of our previous schemes, we make this categorization. However, the fact that the available information fits these previous schemes does not mean that it is true.

An example of a representativeness heuristic can be given in the following situation: imagine that you are introduced to three new people and they had previously told you that one of them was a kindergarten teacher. After a little conversation, two of them mentioned that she doesn’t like children and the other said yes. If you use the representativeness heuristic, you will think that the person who has stated that he likes children is a teacher.

According to the article Judgment under Uncertaintysome biases associated with this type of mental shortcuts are the following:

Insensitivity to prior probabilities

It consists of considering the information representative of an event, without considering the prior probabilities to this. For example, in a town 0.2% of people practice mountaineering. Suppose you meet someone who by his appearance (coat, boots, athletic appearance) looks like a mountaineer. Most likely, taking that information into account, you will assume that it is, although probability says that it is not so possible, since only 0.2% of the people in that town are.

Insensitivity to sample size

It is the tendency to make conclusions about a large population from a very small sample and unrepresentative. The sample size is not considered when making an inference. For example, concluding that 20% of the world’s population has hearing problems when the study that “confirms” it was only conducted on 1,000 people.

Misconceptions about chance

It is the tendency to look for patterns in random situations.. A perfect example of this bias is the gambler’s fallacy: if a coin is tossed and lands tails three times in a row, we will believe that the next toss will come up heads.

Insensitivity to predictability

It refers to not considering predictability when evaluating uncertainty. That is to say, predictions do not fit the available information. For example, we might think that two students will get high scores on a test, even though one has been a high performer all year and the other has been a low performer. Predictability would say that the one with the best average will get a higher score.

Illusion of validity

It is the propensity to relying excessively on one’s own beliefsintrusions and judgments, even when there is no evidence in their favor or the judgments are incorrect.

2. Availability heuristics

This heuristic is used to estimate the probability of an event, the frequency of a category or the association between two phenomena.. This estimate is made through the availability or frequency of the cases that come to our mind through experience. It would be equivalent to an intuitive statistical inference, using the memories of our experience as a sample.

An example of this can occur when we are asked questions like: are there more male or female psychologists? To answer this, we can use this heuristic and see which of the two cases is more available. Thus, if more female psychologists than male psychologists come to mind, we will respond that there are more female psychologists.

Let’s look at some associated biases according to Tversky and Kahneman (1974).

Biases due to the recoverability of instances.

If we evaluate the size of a group according to the number of items we can remember, we are likely to assume that that group is larger compared to another group of which we only remember a few items.

For example, if in classroom A we know 10 people, while in classroom B we only know 3, we are more likely to conclude that there are more students in classroom A than in classroom B.

Biases due to the effectiveness of a search set

They refer to how perceptions and judgments are influenced by the ease with which we can search for and recall examples or information in memory.

Imageability bias

Sometimes it is not possible to remember elements of an event to make conclusions about it. In these cases, the imagination is appealed to; That is, we evaluate the frequency or probability according to the ease with which we can imagine the elements of an event.

For example, if we are planning to take a trip, but we do not know how likely it is that we will suffer an accident, we can imagine different risks and from them we conclude whether or not it is possible for it to occur.

illusory correlation

It is the perception of a relationship between two or events that are not linked. For example, thinking that traffic is slower when we are late for work.

3. Anchoring and adjustment heuristics

When we find ourselves in a situation of uncertainty and we do not have experiential knowledge about the event, we can take a point of reference. If we do this, we will be using the anchor and adjustment heuristic. In this, the reference point would be the anchor from which to start and, through some intuitive adjustments, solve this situation of uncertainty.

For example, let’s imagine that we are asked if the Nile River is longer than 700 kilometers. That number will act as an anchor. Then, if we are asked to estimate the exact length, our answer is likely to be around that value, even though it is nowhere near the actual extent.

The false consensus

An error that derives from this heuristic is the effect of false consensus, a cognitive bias by which We overestimate the degree of agreement that others have with us. We infer their beliefs, opinions and thoughts consistent with ours and create that false consensus. In this case, our opinion acts as an anchor to infer the thoughts of others.

Anchor bias

It is the tendency we have to base our decisions or estimates on initial information.. Even if we obtain additional information later, decisions are often influenced by this initial value.

For example, in a negotiation, if a seller starts with a high price, any price that is negotiated below that initial value will seem like a good deal to us, even if it is still high.

Sunk cost bias

It is the inclination we have to consider past investments, whether of time, money or effort, when making a decision. For example, when we have been watching a movie for more than half an hour, but we do not stop watching it even though we have noticed that its plot is not as good as we expected. The time investment we have made affects the decision to give up the film.

Confirmation bias

It occurs when we remember or interpret information in such a way that it confirms our beliefs. or hypothesis. In this case, what we already know or believe functions as an anchor around which the rest of the data fits.

4. Simulation heuristics

It is the tendency to estimate the probability of an event based on the ease with which we can imagine it.. The easier it is to produce a mental image of it, the more likely it is to assume that that event is possible.

This heuristic is associated with counterfactual thinking, a way of thinking from which we look for alternatives to past and present facts or circumstances with the aim of mitigating…