Jove
Visualize
联系我们
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
关于 JoVE
概览领导团队博客JoVE 帮助中心
作者
出版流程编辑委员会范围与政策同行评审常见问题投稿
图书馆员
用户评价订阅访问资源图书馆顾问委员会常见问题
研究
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments存档
教育
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab Manual教师资源中心教师网站
使用条款与条件
隐私政策
政策

相关概念视频

Hindsight Biases01:12

Hindsight Biases

3.4K
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? 
3.4K
Bias01:22

Bias

3.9K
Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
3.9K
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

180
Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:  
180
Naturalistic Observations02:30

Naturalistic Observations

15.4K
If you want to understand how behavior occurs, one of the best ways to gain information is to simply observe the behavior in its natural context. However, people might change their behavior in unexpected ways if they know they are being observed. How do researchers obtain accurate information when people tend to hide their natural behavior? As an example, imagine that your professor asks everyone in your class to raise their hand if they always wash their hands after using the restroom. Chances...
15.4K
Cause and Effect01:53

Cause and Effect

10.9K
While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?
10.9K
The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic01:25

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

7.2K
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...
7.2K

您也可能阅读

相关文章

通过共同作者、期刊和引用图与本文相关的文章。

排序
Same author

Gray swan neglect: Do forecasters account for low(ish) probability events?

Journal of experimental psychology. Applied·2026
Same author

Understanding and Neutralizing the Expense Prediction Bias: The Role of Accessibility, Typicality, and Skewness.

JMR, Journal of marketing research·2026
Same author

Imagining and building wise machines: the centrality of AI metacognition.

Trends in cognitive sciences·2026
Same author

Asymmetric Anticipatory Emotions and Economic Preferences: Dread, Savoring, Risk, and Time.

Cognitive science·2026
Same author

Naïve epistemics: A theory of rational and error-prone mental state reasoning.

Cognition·2026
Same author

Quantifying uncert-AI-nty: Testing the accuracy of LLMs' confidence judgments.

Memory & cognition·2025

相关实验视频

Updated: Jun 14, 2025

An Emerging Target Paradigm to Evoke Fast Visuomotor Responses on Human Upper Limb Muscles
09:27

An Emerging Target Paradigm to Evoke Fast Visuomotor Responses on Human Upper Limb Muscles

Published on: August 25, 2020

4.2K

隐藏的范围偏差:强大且可复制.

Sangeet Khemlani1, Samuel G B Johnson2, Daniel M Oppenheimer3

  • 1Navy Center of Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence, US Naval Research Laboratory, United States.

Cognition
|August 29, 2024
PubMed
概括

人们更喜欢更简单的解释,尽量减少未观察到的因素,这种模式称为潜伏范围偏差. 这种偏见是强大的,可以在许多研究和任务中复制,包括自发反应.

关键词:
这是一个偏见的偏见.原因与结果的关系解释性理由 解释性理由导导证据 导导证据 导导证据 导导证据隐藏的范围 隐藏的范围

更多相关视频

Using SCOPE to Identify Potential Regulatory Motifs in Coregulated Genes
07:55

Using SCOPE to Identify Potential Regulatory Motifs in Coregulated Genes

Published on: May 31, 2011

10.4K
Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal
06:45

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Published on: April 18, 2017

6.2K

相关实验视频

Last Updated: Jun 14, 2025

An Emerging Target Paradigm to Evoke Fast Visuomotor Responses on Human Upper Limb Muscles
09:27

An Emerging Target Paradigm to Evoke Fast Visuomotor Responses on Human Upper Limb Muscles

Published on: August 25, 2020

4.2K
Using SCOPE to Identify Potential Regulatory Motifs in Coregulated Genes
07:55

Using SCOPE to Identify Potential Regulatory Motifs in Coregulated Genes

Published on: May 31, 2011

10.4K
Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal
06:45

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Published on: April 18, 2017

6.2K

科学领域:

  • 认知心理学 认知心理学
  • 解释性推理 解释性推理

背景情况:

  • 人们倾向于更喜欢尽量减少未观察到效应的解释,这种现象被称为潜在范围偏差.
  • 最近的研究表明,这种偏见可能只发生在特定的,狭窄的条件和任务下.

研究的目的:

  • 为了评估潜伏范围偏差的稳定性和可复制性.
  • 在强迫选择场景之外,使用更一般的诱导任务来调查偏见.

主要方法:

  • 一个全面的综述,将最近的发现与现有文献进行权衡.
  • 两项新的实证研究采用自发的书面反应来评估潜在范围偏差.

主要成果:

  • 在之前的35项研究和斯蒂芬的7项研究 (2023) 中,绝大多数研究表明,他们更喜欢狭窄的潜伏范围解释.
  • 这两项新研究还表明,人们对更狭窄的解释有着一致的偏好,这支持了偏见的普遍性.

结论:

  • 解释性推理中的潜在范围偏差是强大的,可以在广泛的研究和任务中复制.
  • 这些发现促进了对人类解释性推理的理解,证实了偏见的概括性.