Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic01:25

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the $2,000...
Unusual Results01:16

Unusual Results

Unusual results are those that have a very low chance of occurring. Unusual results can be identified using probabilities and the range rule of thumb. In problems involving probability, unusual results can be observed in 2 instances – an unusually high number of successes or an unusually low number of successes.
According to the range rule of thumb, any value above or below two standard deviations, 2σ  from the mean, μ  is considered unusual.
Maximum unusual value = μ + 2σ
Minimum unusual value...
Hindsight Biases01:12

Hindsight Biases

Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now?
First Derivative Test: Problem Solving01:25

First Derivative Test: Problem Solving

Imagine an asset price that crashes to a low point, rebounds sharply as bargain-hunters step in, and then gradually declines. Such behavior can be modeled with a smooth function whose turning points represent locally overvalued and undervalued regions. A convenient example that captures rebound followed by decay is:The high and low points of this curve are identified using the first derivative test, which determines where the function changes from increasing to decreasing or vice versa. To...
Regression Toward the Mean01:52

Regression Toward the Mean

Regression toward the mean (“RTM”) is a phenomenon in which extremely high or low values—for example, and individual’s blood pressure at a particular moment—appear closer to a group’s average upon remeasuring. Although this statistical peculiarity is the result of random error and chance, it has been problematic across various medical, scientific, financial and psychological applications. In particular, RTM, if not taken into account, can interfere when researchers try to extrapolate results...
Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?01:17

Hypothesis: Accept or Fail to Reject?

The outcome of any hypothesis testing leads to rejecting or not rejecting the null hypothesis. This decision is taken based on the analysis of the data, an appropriate test statistic, an appropriate confidence level, the critical values, and P-values. However, when the evidence suggests that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected, is it right to say, 'Accept' the null hypothesis?
There are two ways to indicate that the null hypothesis is not rejected. 'Accept' the null hypothesis and 'fail to...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Virtual urgent care is here to stay: driving toward safe, equitable, and sustainable integration within emergency medicine.

CJEM·2024
Same author

A qualitative study of the feasibility and acceptability of a smoking cessation program for people living with HIV and emotional dysregulation.

AIDS care·2018
Same author

Maximal genetic potential for adult stature: is this aim desirable? (Nutr Rev 1994;52:208-10)

Nutrition reviews·1994
Same author

Maladjustment in statistical minorities within ethnically unbalanced classrooms.

American journal of community psychology·1990
Same author

Snacks and caries.

Nutrition reviews·1988
Same author

Critique of HFI study.

Journal of the American Dental Association (1939)·1981

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 4, 2026

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task
07:47

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task

Published on: January 9, 2016

When discounting fails: An unexpected finding.

D Rosenfield1, W G Stephan

  • 1Department of Psychology, Southern Methodist University, 75275, Dallas, Texas.

Memory & Cognition
|February 19, 2011
PubMed
Summary

Prior information influences behavior attribution. When people receive information about only one cause, they discount or augment attributions accordingly. However, information about multiple causes can lock attributions, preventing these effects.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Social Psychology

Background:

  • Understanding how individuals attribute causality to behaviors is fundamental in psychology.
  • Prior information significantly shapes subsequent judgments and attributions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of prior causal information on attribution processes.
  • To examine the occurrence of discounting and augmenting effects based on expectancy strength.

Main Methods:

  • Experiment 1: Participants received information about both internal and external causes for a behavior.
  • Experiment 2: Participants received information about only a single cause for a behavior.

Main Results:

  • Experiment 1 showed that stronger expectancies led to attributions aligned with the expectancy, but discounting and augmenting predictions were not supported.

More Related Videos

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 4, 2026

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task
07:47

Measuring Delay Discounting in Humans Using an Adjusting Amount Task

Published on: January 9, 2016

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
07:07

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice

Published on: June 5, 2016

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies
08:24

The Joint Effect of Social Comparison and Social Distance on Evaluation of Intertemporal Choice Outcomes in Event-related Potential Studies

Published on: August 25, 2023

  • Experiment 2 indicated that discounting and augmenting effects were observed when information was provided about only one cause.

    • Conclusions:

    • The presence of information about multiple plausible causes may inhibit discounting and augmenting effects.
    • Discounting and augmenting in attributions appear to be contingent on the availability of information regarding potential causes.