As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
[Statistics & Neuroscience] Error Interval(s) and Cognitive Bias
Zilla360
21st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered User regular
21st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered User regular
What is the Error Interval on the number of different kinds of Cognitive Bias that a person can contain simultaneously? I guess I might also be thinking of the Confidence interval?
I suspect the answers to this question might get very philosophical, rather quickly... :tell_me_more:
I suspect the answers to this question might get very philosophical, rather quickly... :tell_me_more:
|Ko-Fi Me! ☕😎| Steam. | PSN | ♾ (C.H.I) Ltd. |🏳️⚧️♥️
Zilla360 on
0
Posts
I do not think an "error interval" is even a relevant concept here.
In any case, the idea of people "containing" cognitive biases is not very illuminating. A cognitive bias is a process of reasoning, and it's not clear what it would mean to "contain" a process. Processes are things which are carried out. Perhaps we would want to speak of someone being disposed to, or liable to, engage in certain processes, or of someone currently engaging in certain processes, or of someone having engaged in certain processes over a period of time. But the "containment" idea does not strike me as a fruitful direction of inquiry.
For each process, thermal bias exists.
As @Burnage has pointed out, it is not clear you are thinking about these things in precise enough terms for what you have in your head to actually mean anything. Among the various cognitive biases that people are typically afflicted with, one of the most persistent is that we can convince ourselves that one of our cherished ideas makes sense long before it in fact makes sense, because we come up with our cherished ideas in the privacy of our own head, informed by our own understanding of things, without necessarily checking whether our understanding of things matches up with how things actually are.
I suspect in this case you have many, many deep misconceptions about many, many topics, and on the basis of these misconceptions you've arrived at whatever idea you are trying to ask about here.
Unfortunately I think in fact there isn't an idea here: there are so many misconceptions built into your approach here that, once we go through and clear up all the issues, this will destroy the foundations for what you're getting at here and you won't have anything like the question you currently have.
Mods can lock this thread now, if they want to.