THE ULTIMATE GUIDE TO TOK THEORIES

 LIST OF COGNITIVE BIASES

 THE ULTIMATE LIST OF COGNITIVE BIASES: WHY

HUMANS MAKE IRRATIONAL DECISIONS

 OVERVIEW OF THE 6 MAJOR THEORIES OF

EMOTION

 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ETHICS AND MORALS

 ETHICS AND ITS THEORIES

Page 1 of 36
 List of cognitive biases
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Decision-making, belief, and behavioral biases

Many of these biases affect belief formation, business and economic decisions, and human behavior in
general.

Name Description
The tendency to avoid options for which the probability of a favorable outcome
Ambiguity effect
is unknown.[10]
The tendency to rely too heavily, or "anchor", on one trait or piece of
Anchoring or focalism information when making decisions (usually the first piece of information
acquired on that subject).[11][12]
The tendency to use human analogies as a basis for reasoning about other, less
Anthropocentric thinking
familiar, biological phenomena.[13]
Anthropomorphism or The tendency to characterize animals, objects, and abstract concepts as
personification possessing human-like traits, emotions, and intentions.[14]
Attentional bias The tendency of perception to be affected by recurring thoughts.[15]
The tendency to depend excessively on automated systems which can lead to
Automation bias
erroneous automated information overriding correct decisions.[16]
The tendency to overestimate the likelihood of events with greater "availability"
Availability heuristic in memory, which can be influenced by how recent the memories are or how
unusual or emotionally charged they may be.[17]
A self-reinforcing process in which a collective belief gains more and more
Availability cascade plausibility through its increasing repetition in public discourse (or "repeat
something long enough and it will become true").[18]
The reaction to disconfirming evidence by strengthening one's previous
Backfire effect
beliefs.[19] cf. Continued influence effect.
The tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe)
Bandwagon effect
the same. Related to groupthink and herd behavior.[20]
Base rate fallacy or Base The tendency to ignore base rate information (generic, general information) and
rate neglect focus on specific information (information only pertaining to a certain case).[21]
An effect where someone's evaluation of the logical strength of an argument is
Belief bias
biased by the believability of the conclusion.[22]
A person who has performed a favor for someone is more likely to do another
Ben Franklin effect favor for that person than they would be if they had received a favor from that
person.[23]
The tendency to misinterpret statistical experiments involving conditional
Berkson's paradox
probabilities.[24]
The tendency to see oneself as less biased than other people, or to be able to
Bias blind spot
identify more cognitive biases in others than in oneself.[25]
Choice-supportive bias The tendency to remember one's choices as better than they actually were.[26]
The tendency to overestimate the importance of small runs, streaks, or clusters in
Clustering illusion
large samples of random data (that is, seeing phantom patterns).[12]
The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a
Confirmation bias
way that confirms one's preconceptions.[27]
Page 2 of 36
 The tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, instead of
Congruence bias
testing possible alternative hypotheses.[12]
The tendency to assume that specific conditions are more probable than general
Conjunction fallacy
ones.[28]
Conservatism (belief The tendency to revise one's belief insufficiently when presented with new
revision) evidence.[5][29][30]
The tendency to believe previously learned misinformation even after it has been
Continued influence effect corrected. Misinformation can still influence inferences one generates after a
correction has occurred.[31] cf. Backfire effect
The enhancement or reduction of a certain stimulus' perception when compared
Contrast effect
with a recently observed, contrasting object.[32]
The tendency to give an opinion that is more socially correct than one's true
Courtesy bias
opinion, so as to avoid offending anyone.[33]
When better-informed people find it extremely difficult to think about problems
Curse of knowledge
from the perspective of lesser-informed people.[34]
The predisposition to view the past favorably (rosy retrospection) and future
Declinism
negatively.[35]
Preferences for either option A or B change in favor of option B when option C
Decoy effect is presented, which is completely dominated by option B (inferior in all respects)
and partially dominated by option A.[36]
When given a choice between several options, the tendency to favor the default
Default effect
one.[37]
The tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts
Denomination effect
(e.g., coins) rather than large amounts (e.g., bills).[38]
The tendency to sell an asset that has accumulated in value and resist selling an
Disposition effect
asset that has declined in value.
The tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them
Distinction bias
simultaneously than when evaluating them separately.[39]
Just as losses yield double the emotional impact of gains, dread yields double the
Dread aversion
emotional impact of savouring.[40]
The tendency for unskilled individuals to overestimate their own ability and the
Dunning–Kruger effect
tendency for experts to underestimate their own ability.[41]
Duration neglect The neglect of the duration of an episode in determining its value.[42]
The tendency to underestimate the influence or strength of feelings, in either
Empathy gap
oneself or others.[43]
The tendency for people to demand much more to give up an object than they
Endowment effect
would be willing to pay to acquire it.[44]
The tendency to expect or predict more extreme outcomes than those outcomes
Exaggerated expectation
that actually happen.[5]
The tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree
Experimenter's or with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve,
expectation bias discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to
conflict with those expectations.[45]
Focusing effect The tendency to place too much importance on one aspect of an event.[46]
The observation that individuals will give high accuracy ratings to descriptions
Forer effect or Barnum
of their personality that supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in
effect
fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people. This effect can
Page 3 of 36
 provide a partial explanation for the widespread acceptance of some beliefs and
practices, such as astrology, fortune telling, graphology, and some types of
personality tests.[47]
In human–robot interaction, the tendency of people to make systematic errors
Form function attribution when interacting with a robot. People may base their expectations and
bias perceptions of a robot on its appearance (form) and attribute functions which do
not necessarily mirror the true functions of the robot.[48]
Drawing different conclusions from the same information, depending on how
Framing effect
that information is presented.
The illusion in which a word, a name, or other thing that has recently come to
Frequency illusion or one's attention suddenly seems to appear with improbable frequency shortly
Baader–Meinhof effect afterwards (not to be confused with the recency illusion or selection bias).[49]
This illusion is sometimes referred to as the Baader–Meinhof phenomenon.[50]
Functional fixedness Limits a person to using an object only in the way it is traditionally used.[51]
The tendency to think that future probabilities are altered by past events, when in
reality they are unchanged. The fallacy arises from an erroneous
Gambler's fallacy conceptualization of the law of large numbers. For example, "I've flipped heads
with this coin five times consecutively, so the chance of tails coming out on the
sixth flip is much greater than heads."[52]
The psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which
the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or
dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize
Groupthink
conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative
viewpoints by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating
themselves from outside influences.
Based on a specific level of task difficulty, the confidence in judgments is too
Hard–easy effect
conservative and not extreme enough.[5][53][54][55]
Sometimes called the "I-knew-it-all-along" effect, the tendency to see past events
Hindsight bias
as being predictable[56] at the time those events happened.
The "hostile attribution bias" is the tendency to interpret others' behaviors as
Hostile attribution bias
having hostile intent, even when the behavior is ambiguous or benign.[57]
The "hot-hand fallacy" (also known as the "hot hand phenomenon" or "hot
Hot-hand fallacy hand") is the belief that a person who has experienced success with a random
event has a greater chance of further success in additional attempts.
Discounting is the tendency for people to have a stronger preference for more
immediate payoffs relative to later payoffs. Hyperbolic discounting leads to
choices that are inconsistent over time – people make choices today that their
future selves would prefer not to have made, despite using the same
Hyperbolic discounting
reasoning.[58] Also known as current moment bias, present-bias, and related to
Dynamic inconsistency. A good example of this: a study showed that when
making food choices for the coming week, 74% of participants chose fruit,
whereas when the food choice was for the current day, 70% chose chocolate.
The tendency to respond more strongly to a single identified person at risk than
Identifiable victim effect
to a large group of people at risk.[59]
The tendency for people to place a disproportionately high value on objects that
IKEA effect they partially assembled themselves, such as furniture from IKEA, regardless of
the quality of the end result.[60]
Occurs when a term in the distributive (referring to every member of a class) and
Illicit transference
collective (referring to the class itself as a whole) sense are treated as equivalent.
Page 4 of 36
 The two variants of this fallacy are the fallacy of composition and the fallacy of
division.
The tendency to overestimate one's degree of influence over other external
Illusion of control
events.[61]
Belief that our judgments are accurate, especially when available information is
Illusion of validity
consistent or inter-correlated.[62]
Illusory correlation Inaccurately perceiving a relationship between two unrelated events.[63][64]
A tendency to believe that a statement is true if it is easier to process, or if it has
Illusory truth effect been stated multiple times, regardless of its actual veracity. These are specific
cases of truthiness.
The tendency to overestimate the length or the intensity of the impact of future
Impact bias
feeling states.[65]
The speed with which people can match words depends on how closely they are
associated. This has generated some controversy when some people are able to
Implicit association match pairings like "White" and "pleasant" faster than "Black" and "pleasant",
with debate over whether this indicates a form of unconscious prejudice that
could result in discrimination.
Information bias The tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect action.[66]
Insensitivity to sample
The tendency to under-expect variation in small samples.
size
The tendency for sensory input from the body to be taken as evidence of external
Interoceptive bias reality. (As for example, in parole judges who are more lenient when fed and
rested.) [67][68][69][70]
The phenomenon where people justify increased investment in a decision, based
Irrational escalation on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the
decision was probably wrong. Also known as the sunk cost fallacy.
An over-reliance on a familiar tool or methods, ignoring or under-valuing
Law of the instrument alternative approaches. "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a
nail."
The tendency to prefer a smaller set to a larger set judged separately, but not
Less-is-better effect
jointly.
An apparently statistically significant observation may have actually arisen by
Look-elsewhere effect
chance because of the size of the parameter space to be searched.
The disutility of giving up an object is greater than the utility associated with
Loss aversion
acquiring it.[71] (see also Sunk cost effects and endowment effect).
The tendency to express undue liking for things merely because of familiarity
Mere exposure effect
with them.[72]
The tendency to concentrate on the nominal value (face value) of money rather
Money illusion
than its value in terms of purchasing power.[73]
The tendency of a track record of non-prejudice to increase subsequent
Moral credential effect
prejudice.
Psychological phenomenon by which humans have a greater recall of unpleasant
Negativity bias or
memories compared with positive memories.[74][75] (see also actor-observer bias,
Negativity effect
group attribution error, positivity effect, and negativity effect).[76]
The tendency to completely disregard probability when making a decision under
Neglect of probability
uncertainty.[77]
Normalcy bias The refusal to plan for, or react to, a disaster which has never happened before.

Page 5 of 36
 Aversion to contact with or use of products, research, standards, or knowledge
Not invented here
developed outside a group. Related to IKEA effect.
When a researcher expects a given result and therefore unconsciously
Observer-expectancy
manipulates an experiment or misinterprets data in order to find it (see also
effect
subject-expectancy effect).
The tendency to judge harmful actions (commissions) as worse, or less moral,
Omission bias
than equally harmful inactions (omissions).[78]
The tendency to be over-optimistic, overestimating favorable and pleasing
Optimism bias
outcomes (see also wishful thinking, valence effect, positive outcome bias).[79][80]
Ostrich effect Ignoring an obvious (negative) situation.
The tendency to judge a decision by its eventual outcome instead of based on the
Outcome bias
quality of the decision at the time it was made.
Excessive confidence in one's own answers to questions. For example, for
Overconfidence effect certain types of questions, answers that people rate as "99% certain" turn out to
be wrong 40% of the time.[5][81][82][83]
A vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) is perceived as
Pareidolia significant, e.g., seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the
moon, and hearing non-existent hidden messages on records played in reverse.
The phenomenon whereby others' expectations of a target person affect the target
Pygmalion effect
person's performance.
The tendency for some people, especially those suffering from depression, to
Pessimism bias
overestimate the likelihood of negative things happening to them.
Planning fallacy The tendency to underestimate task-completion times.[65]
Post-purchase The tendency to persuade oneself through rational argument that a purchase was
rationalization good value.
The tendency of people to give stronger weight to payoffs that are closer to the
Present bias
present time when considering trade-offs between two future moments.[84]
The tendency to have an excessive optimism towards an invention or
Pro-innovation bias innovation's usefulness throughout society, while often failing to identify its
limitations and weaknesses.
The tendency to overestimate how much our future selves share one's current
Projection bias
preferences, thoughts and values, thus leading to sub-optimal choices.[85][86][75]
The tendency to make risk-averse choices if the expected outcome is positive,
Pseudocertainty effect
but make risk-seeking choices to avoid negative outcomes.[87]
The urge to do the opposite of what someone wants you to do out of a need to
Reactance resist a perceived attempt to constrain your freedom of choice (see also Reverse
psychology).
Reactive devaluation Devaluing proposals only because they purportedly originated with an adversary.
The illusion that a phenomenon one has noticed only recently is itself recent.
Often used to refer to linguistic phenomena; the illusion that a word or language
Recency illusion
usage that one has noticed only recently is an innovation when it is in fact long-
established (see also frequency illusion).
A certain state of mind wherein high values and high likelihoods are
Regressive bias overestimated while low values and low likelihoods are
underestimated.[5][88][89][unreliable source?]
The tendency to overestimate one's ability to show restraint in the face of
Restraint bias
temptation.

Page 6 of 36
 Rhyming statements are perceived as more truthful. A famous example being
Rhyme as reason effect used in the O.J Simpson trial with the defense's use of the phrase "If the gloves
don't fit, then you must acquit."
Risk compensation /
The tendency to take greater risks when perceived safety increases.
Peltzman effect
The tendency to focus on items that are more prominent or emotionally striking
Salience bias and ignore those that are unremarkable, even though this difference is often
irrelevant by objective standards.
The tendency to notice something more when something causes us to be more
aware of it, such as when we buy a car, we tend to notice similar cars more often
Selection bias
than we did before. They are not suddenly more common – we just are noticing
them more. Also called the Observational Selection Bias.
Selective perception The tendency for expectations to affect perception.
Semmelweis reflex The tendency to reject new evidence that contradicts a paradigm.[30]
Sexual overperception
bias / sexual The tendency to over-/underestimate sexual interest of another person in oneself.
underperception bias
The tendency, when making decisions, to favour potential candidates who don't
Social comparison bias
compete with one's own particular strengths.[90]
The tendency to over-report socially desirable characteristics or behaviours in
Social desirability bias
oneself and under-report socially undesirable characteristics or behaviours.[91]
The tendency to like things to stay relatively the same (see also loss aversion,
Status quo bias
endowment effect, and system justification).[92][93]
Expecting a member of a group to have certain characteristics without having
Stereotyping
actual information about that individual.
The tendency to judge probability of the whole to be less than the probabilities of
Subadditivity effect
the parts.[94]
Perception that something is true if a subject's belief demands it to be true. Also
Subjective validation
assigns perceived connections between coincidences.
Losing sight of the strategic construct that a measure is intended to represent,
Surrogation
and subsequently acting as though the measure is the construct of interest.
Concentrating on the people or things that "survived" some process and
Survivorship bias
inadvertently overlooking those that didn't because of their lack of visibility.
Underestimations of the time that could be saved (or lost) when increasing (or
decreasing) from a relatively low speed and overestimations of the time that
Time-saving bias
could be saved (or lost) when increasing (or decreasing) from a relatively high
speed.
Belief that mass communicated media messages have a greater effect on others
Third-person effect
than on themselves.
The tendency to give disproportionate weight to trivial issues. Also known as
bikeshedding, this bias explains why an organization may avoid specialized or
Parkinson's law of
complex subjects, such as the design of a nuclear reactor, and instead focus on
triviality
something easy to grasp or rewarding to the average participant, such as the
design of an adjacent bike shed.[95]
The standard suggested amount of consumption (e.g., food serving size) is
Unit bias perceived to be appropriate, and a person would consume it all even if it is too
much for this particular person.[96]
Weber–Fechner law Difficulty in comparing small differences in large quantities.
Page 7 of 36
 Underestimation of the duration taken to traverse oft-traveled routes and
Well travelled road effect
overestimation of the duration taken to traverse less familiar routes.
Women are wonderful
A tendency to associate more positive attributes with women than with men.
effect
Preference for reducing a small risk to zero over a greater reduction in a larger
Zero-risk bias
risk.
A bias whereby a situation is incorrectly perceived to be like a zero-sum game
Zero-sum bias
(i.e., one person gains at the expense of another).

Social biases
Most of these biases are labeled as attributional biases.

Name Description
The tendency for explanations of other individuals' behaviors to overemphasize
the influence of their personality and underemphasize the influence of their
Actor-observer bias situation (see also Fundamental attribution error), and for explanations of one's
own behaviors to do the opposite (that is, to overemphasize the influence of our
situation and underemphasize the influence of our own personality).
The tendency to attribute greater accuracy to the opinion of an authority figure
Authority bias
(unrelated to its content) and be more influenced by that opinion.[97]
Cheerleader effect The tendency for people to appear more attractive in a group than in isolation.[98]
Defensive attribution Attributing more blame to a harm-doer as the outcome becomes more severe or
hypothesis as personal or situational similarity to the victim increases.
Occurs when people claim more responsibility for themselves for the results of a
Egocentric bias
joint action than an outside observer would credit them with.
An exception to the fundamental attribution error, when people view others as
Extrinsic incentives bias having (situational) extrinsic motivations and (dispositional) intrinsic
motivations for oneself
The tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with
False consensus effect
them.[99]
The tendency of people to see their projects and themselves as more singular
False uniqueness bias
than they actually are.[100]
The tendency for people to over-emphasize personality-based explanations for
Fundamental attribution behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing the role and power of
error situational influences on the same behavior[75] (see also actor-observer bias,
group attribution error, positivity effect, and negativity effect).[76]
The biased belief that the characteristics of an individual group member are
reflective of the group as a whole or the tendency to assume that group decision
Group attribution error
outcomes reflect the preferences of group members, even when information is
available that clearly suggests otherwise.
The tendency for a person's positive or negative traits to "spill over" from one
Halo effect personality area to another in others' perceptions of them (see also physical
attractiveness stereotype).[101]
Illusion of asymmetric People perceive their knowledge of their peers to surpass their peers' knowledge
insight of them.[102]

Page 8 of 36
 When people view self-generated preferences as instead being caused by
Illusion of external agency
insightful, effective and benevolent agents.
People overestimate others' ability to know themselves, and they also
Illusion of transparency
overestimate their ability to know others.
Overestimating one's desirable qualities, and underestimating undesirable
Illusory superiority qualities, relative to other people. (Also known as "Lake Wobegon effect",
"better-than-average effect", or "superiority bias".)[103]
The tendency for people to give preferential treatment to others they perceive to
Ingroup bias
be members of their own groups.
The tendency for people to want to believe that the world is fundamentally just,
Just-world hypothesis causing them to rationalize an otherwise inexplicable injustice as deserved by the
victim(s).
The tendency for people to ascribe greater or lesser moral standing based on the
Moral luck
outcome of an event.
Naïve cynicism Expecting more egocentric bias in others than in oneself.
The belief that we see reality as it really is – objectively and without bias; that
Naïve realism the facts are plain for all to see; that rational people will agree with us; and that
those who don't are either uninformed, lazy, irrational, or biased.
Outgroup homogeneity Individuals see members of their own group as being relatively more varied than
bias members of other groups.[104]
The tendency to claim more responsibility for successes than failures. It may
Self-serving bias also manifest itself as a tendency for people to evaluate ambiguous information
in a way beneficial to their interests (see also group-serving bias).[105]
Known as the tendency for group members to spend more time and energy
discussing information that all members are already familiar with (i.e., shared
Shared information bias
information), and less time and energy discussing information that only some
members are aware of (i.e., unshared information).[106]
The tendency to defend and bolster the status quo. Existing social, economic,
and political arrangements tend to be preferred, and alternatives disparaged,
System justification
sometimes even at the expense of individual and collective self-interest. (See
also status quo bias.)
The tendency for people to view themselves as relatively variable in terms of
Trait ascription bias
personality, behavior, and mood while viewing others as much more predictable.
Similar to the fundamental attribution error, in this error a person is likely to
Ultimate attribution error make an internal attribution to an entire group instead of the individuals within
the group.
A tendency to believe ourselves to be worse than others at tasks which are
Worse-than-average effect
difficult.[107]

Page 9 of 36
Memory errors and biases
Main article: List of memory biases

In psychology and cognitive science, a memory bias is a cognitive bias that either enhances or impairs the
recall of a memory (either the chances that the memory will be recalled at all, or the amount of time it takes
for it to be recalled, or both), or that alters the content of a reported memory. There are many types of
memory bias, including:

Name Description
Bizarreness effect Bizarre material is better remembered than common material.
Tendency to remember high values and high
Conservatism or likelihoods/probabilities/frequencies as lower than they actually were and low
Regressive bias ones as higher than they actually were. Based on the evidence, memories are not
extreme enough.[88][89]
Incorrectly remembering one's past attitudes and behaviour as resembling
Consistency bias
present attitudes and behaviour.[108]
That cognition and memory are dependent on context, such that out-of-context
memories are more difficult to retrieve than in-context memories (e.g., recall
Context effect
time and accuracy for a work-related memory will be lower at home, and vice
versa).
The tendency for people of one race to have difficulty identifying members of a
Cross-race effect
race other than their own.
A form of misattribution where a memory is mistaken for imagination, because
Cryptomnesia
there is no subjective experience of it being a memory.[109]
Recalling the past in a self-serving manner, e.g., remembering one's exam grades
Egocentric bias as being better than they were, or remembering a caught fish as bigger than it
really was.
A bias in which the emotion associated with unpleasant memories fades more
Fading affect bias
quickly than the emotion associated with positive events.[110]
False memory A form of misattribution where imagination is mistaken for a memory.
That self-generated information is remembered best. For instance, people are
Generation effect (Self-
better able to recall memories of statements that they have generated than similar
generation effect)
statements generated by others.
The tendency to forget information that can be found readily online by using
Google effect
Internet search engines.
That humorous items are more easily remembered than non-humorous ones,
which might be explained by the distinctiveness of humor, the increased
Humor effect
cognitive processing time to understand the humor, or the emotional arousal
caused by the humor.[111]
The phenomenon whereby learning is greater when studying is spread out over
Lag effect time, as opposed to studying the same amount of time in a single session. See
also spacing effect.
Memory distortions introduced by the loss of details in a recollection over time,
often concurrent with sharpening or selective recollection of certain details that
Leveling and sharpening take on exaggerated significance in relation to the details or aspects of the
experience lost through leveling. Both biases may be reinforced over time, and
by repeated recollection or re-telling of a memory.[112]
Levels-of-processing That different methods of encoding information into memory have different

Page 10 of 36
effect levels of effectiveness.[113]
A smaller percentage of items are remembered in a longer list, but as the length
of the list increases, the absolute number of items remembered increases as well.
For example, consider a list of 30 items ("L30") and a list of 100 items ("L100").
List-length effect An individual may remember 15 items from L30, or 50%, whereas the individual
may remember 40 items from L100, or 40%. Although the percent of L30 items
remembered (50%) is greater than the percent of L100 (40%), more L100 items
(40) are remembered than L30 items (15).[114][further explanation needed]
Memory becoming less accurate because of interference from post-event
Misinformation effect
information.[115]
That memory recall is higher for the last items of a list when the list items were
Modality effect
received via speech than when they were received through writing.
Mood-congruent memory
The improved recall of information congruent with one's current mood.
bias
When taking turns speaking in a group using a predetermined order (e.g. going
Next-in-line effect clockwise around a room, taking numbers, etc) people tend to have diminished
recall for the words of the person who spoke immediately before them.[116]
That being shown some items from a list and later retrieving one item causes it
Part-list cueing effect
to become harder to retrieve the other items.[117]
That people seem to perceive not the sum of an experience but the average of
Peak-end rule
how it was at its peak (e.g., pleasant or unpleasant) and how it ended.
The notion that concepts that are learned by viewing pictures are more easily and
Picture superiority effect frequently recalled than are concepts that are learned by viewing their written
word form counterparts.[118][119][120][121][122][123]
Positivity effect
(Socioemotional That older adults favor positive over negative information in their memories.
selectivity theory)
Primacy effect, recency That items near the end of a sequence are the easiest to recall, followed by the
effect & serial position items at the beginning of a sequence; items in the middle are the least likely to be
effect remembered.[124]
Processing difficulty That information that takes longer to read and is thought about more (processed
effect with more difficulty) is more easily remembered.[125]
The recalling of more personal events from adolescence and early adulthood
Reminiscence bump
than personal events from other lifetime periods.[126]
That memories relating to the self are better recalled than similar information
Self-relevance effect
relating to others.
Confusing episodic memories with other information, creating distorted
Source confusion
memories.[127]
That information is better recalled if exposure to it is repeated over a long span
Spacing effect
of time rather than a short one.
The tendency to overestimate the amount that other people notice your
Spotlight effect
appearance or behavior.
Stereotypical bias Memory distorted towards stereotypes (e.g., racial or gender).
Diminishment of the recency effect because a sound item is appended to the list
Suffix effect
that the subject is not required to recall.[128][129]
A form of misattribution where ideas suggested by a questioner are mistaken for
Suggestibility
memory.

Page 11 of 36
 When time perceived by the individual either lengthens, making events appear to
Tachypsychia
slow down, or contracts.[130]
The tendency to displace recent events backward in time and remote events
Telescoping effect forward in time, so that recent events appear more remote, and remote events,
more recent.
The fact that you more easily remember information you have read by rewriting
Testing effect
it instead of rereading it.[131]
When a subject is able to recall parts of an item, or related information, but is
Tip of the tongue frustratingly unable to recall the whole item. This is thought to be an instance of
phenomenon "blocking" where multiple similar memories are being recalled and interfere with
each other.[109]
Overestimating the significance of the present.[132] It is related to the
Travis Syndrome enlightenment Idea of Progress and chronological snobbery with possibly an
appeal to novelty logical fallacy being part of the bias.
That the "gist" of what someone has said is better remembered than the verbatim
Verbatim effect
wording.[133] This is because memories are representations, not exact copies.
von Restorff effect That an item that sticks out is more likely to be remembered than other items.[134]
That uncompleted or interrupted tasks are remembered better than completed
Zeigarnik effect
ones.

Page 12 of 36
 The Ultimate List of Cognitive Biases: Why Humans Make Irrational Decisions

On May 30, 2017 By Tomer Hochma In Uncategorized

Cognitive biases describe the irrational errors of human decision making and they are a crucial part of
understanding behavioral economics. These scientific human biases affect the way we shop, invest and
judge brands and people. The revolutionary study of cognitive biases led Daniel Kahneman to win the Nobel
Prize and opened the rapidly expanding field of behavioral economics. By understanding cognitive biases,
you will be able to read your customers’ minds better and design your product or marketing strategy
accordingly.

In this list of cognitive biases, I try to explain the basic idea behind every bias in a plain non-academic
language with simple examples.

Let’s begin…

What Are Cognitive Biases?

Cognitive biases describe the irrational errors in human decision making.

Our brain absorbs tremendous amounts of information during the day. Some of this information we
consciously think about. But as the conscious part of the brain can only be focus on one thing at a time, our
brain is looking for shortcuts to help us make decisions.

These mental unconscious shortcuts are called heuristics.

Unfortunately, these heuristics often fail to produce a correct judgment, and the result is cognitive biases.

The Ultimate list of Cognitive Biases

Affect Heuristic

A mental shortcut that allows people to make decisions quickly by bringing their emotional response into
play. They make decisions according to their gut feeling.

Researchers have found that when people have a pleasant feeling about something, they see the benefits as
high and the risks as low, and vice versa.

As such, the affect heuristic behaves as a first and fast response mechanism in decision-making.

For example, if someone has harmed you, you quickly arrive at the conclusion that this person is cold and
unfriendly. If fact, even if the person didn’t harm you on purpose, you may still about him or her the same.

Anchoring

A cognitive bias that describes the human tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information
offered (the “anchor”) when making decisions.

For example, an initial price offered for a used car sets the standard for the rest of the negotiation.
Page 13 of 36
Availability Heuristic

A mental shortcut that relies on immediate examples that come to a given person’s mind when evaluating a
specific topic, concept, method or decision.

People tend to heavily weigh their judgments toward more recent information, making new opinions biased
toward the latest news.

For example, which job is more dangerous – being a police officer or a logger? While high-profile police
shootings might lead you to think that cops have a more dangerous job, statistics actually show that loggers
are more likely to die on the job than cops.

This illustrates that availability heuristic helps people make fast, but sometimes incorrect assessment.

Bounded Rationality

The idea that in decision-making, people are limited by the information they have, the cognitive limitations
of their minds, and the finite time. As a result, they seek for a “good enough” decision and tend to make a
satisficing (rather than maximizing or optimizing) choice.

For example, during shopping when people buy something that they find acceptable, although that may not
necessarily be their optimal choice.

Certainty Effect

When people overweight outcomes that are considered certain relative to outcomes that are merely possible.

The certainty effect makes people prefer 100% as a reference point relative to other percentages, even
though 100% may be an illusion of certainty. Lower percentages or probabilities can be more beneficial in
the long run.

For example, people prefer a 100% discount on a cup of coffee every 10 days to other more frequent but
lower discount offer, even though the second option may save them more money in the long run.

Choice Overload

A cognitive process in which people have a difficult time making a decision when faced with many options.

Too many choices might cause people to delay making decisions or avoid making them altogether.

For example, a famous study found that consumers were 10 times more likely to purchase jam on display
when the number of jams available was reduced from 24 to 6.

Less choice, more sales. More choice, fewer sales.

Page 14 of 36
Cognitive Dissonance

A mental discomfort that occurs when people’s beliefs do not match up with their behaviors.

For example, when people smoke (behavior) and they know that smoking causes cancer (cognition).

Commitment

The tendency to be consistent with what we have already done or said we will do in the past, particularly if
this is public.

For example, researchers asked people if they would volunteer to help with the American Cancel Society. Of
those who received a cold call, 4% agreed. A second group was called a few days prior and asked if they
would hypothetically volunteer. When the actual request came later, 31% of them agreed.

Confirmation Bias

The tendency to search for or interpret information in the way that confirms one’s preexisting beliefs,
leading to statistical errors.

When people would like a certain idea to be true, they end up believing it to be true. They are motivated by
wishful thinking.

For example, a person with a low self-esteem is highly sensitive to being ignored by other people, and they
constantly monitor for signs that people might not like them.

Decision Fatigue

A lower quality of decisions made after a long session of decision making.

Repetitive decision-making tasks drain people’s mental resources, therefore they tend to take the easiest
choice – keeping the status quo.

For example, researchers studied parole decisions made by experienced judges and revealed that the chances
of a prisoner being granted parole depended on the time of the day that judges heard the case.
65% of cases were granted parole in the morning and fell dramatically (sometimes to zero) within each
decision session over the next few hours. The rate returned back to 65% after a lunch break and fell again.

Decoy Effect

People will tend to have a specific change in preferences between two options when also presented a third
option that is asymmetrically dominated.

Page 15 of 36
In simple words, when there are only two options, people will tend to make decisions according to their
personal preferences. But when they are offered another strategical decoy option, they will be more likely to
choose the more expensive of the two original options.

For example, when consumers were offered a small bucket of popcorn for $3 or a large one for $7, most of
them chose to buy the small bucket, due to their personal needs at that time.
But when another decoy option was added – a medium bucket for $6.5, most consumers chose the large
bucket.

Dunning-Kruger Effect

A cognitive bias in which people who are ignorant or unskilled in a given domain tend to believe they are
much more competent than they are.

In simple words, “people who are too stupid to know how stupid they are”.

For example, a nationwide survey found that 21% of Americans believe that it’s ‘very likely’ that they’ll
become millionaires within the next 10 years.

Time Discounting / Present Bias

The tendency of people to want things now rather than later, as the desired result in the future is perceived as
less valuable than one in the present.

When offered a choice of $100 today (SSR – smaller sooner reward) and $100 in one month, people will
most likely choose the $100 now.
However, if offered a choice of $100 today (SSR) and $1000 in one month (LLR – larger later reward),
people will most likely choose the $1000.

The challenge is to find the point where people value the SSR and the LLR as being equivalent.

For example, a research found that a $68 payment right now is just as attractive as a $100 payment in 12
months.

Diversification Bias

People seek more variety when they choose multiple items for future consumption than when they make
choices sequentially on an ‘in the moment’ basis.

For example, before people are going on vacation, they add classical, rock and pop music to their playlist
but eventually end up listening to their favorite rock music.

Page 16 of 36
Ego Depletion

People have a limited supply of willpower, and it decreases with overuse. Willpower draws down mental
energy – it’s a muscle that can be exercised to exhaustion.

For example, a research showed that people who initially resisted the temptation of chocolates were
subsequently less able to persist on a difficult and frustrating puzzle task. Additionally, when people gave a
speech that included beliefs contrary to their own, they were also less able to persist on the difficult puzzle.

Elimination-By-Aspects

A decision-making technique. When people face with multiple options, they first identify a single feature
that is most important to them. When an item fails to meet the criteria they have established, they cross the
item off their list of options. Different features are applied until a single ‘best’ option is left.

For example, a consumer may first compare cars on the basis of safety, then gas mileage, price, style, etc,
until only one option remains.

Hot-Cold Empathy Gap

We have trouble imagining how we would feel in other people’s shoes.

We are also not good at imaging how other people would respond to things because we assume they would
respond in the same way we would.

For example, people post videos of their kids or bragging about their latest business success on Facebook
assuming that their friends would appreciate it and be happy for them. Unfortunately, this often provokes
negative feelings and makes their facebook friends resentful, angry or sad.

Endowment Effect

Once people own something (or have a feeling of ownership) they irrationally overvalue it, regarding of its
objective value.

People feel the pain of loss twice as strongly as they feel pleasure at an equal gain, and they fall in love with
what they already have and prepare to pay more to retain it.

For example, scientists randomly divided participants into buyers and sellers and gave the sellers coffee
mugs as gifts. Then they asked the sellers for how much they would sell the mug and asked the buyers for
how much they would buy it.

Results showed that the sellers placed a significantly higher value on the mugs than the buyers did.

Page 17 of 36
Fear of Missing Out (FOMO)

An anxious feeling that can happen when you fear that other people might be having rewarding experiences
that you’re missing.

Many people have been preoccupied with the idea that someone, somewhere, is having a better time, making
more money, and leading a more exciting life.

According to science, FOMO is associated with lower mood, lower life satisfaction, and an increasing need
to check social media.

Framing Effect

A cognitive bias, in which people react to a particular choice in different ways depending on how it is
presented, as a loss or as a gain.

People tend to avoid risk when a positive frame is presented but seek risks when a negative frame is
presented.

For example, people are more likely to enjoy meat labeled 75% lean meat as opposed to 25% fat, or use
condoms advertised as being 95% effective as opposed to having a 5% risk of failure.

Gambler’s Fallacy (Monte Carlo Fallacy)

The mistaken belief that, if something happens more frequently than normal during a certain period, it will
happen less frequently in the future, or that, if something happens less frequently than normal during a
certain period, it will happen more frequently in the future.

For example, if you are playing roulette and the last four spins of the wheel have led to the ball’s landing on
black, you may think that the next ball is more likely than otherwise to land on red.

In 1913 at the Monte Carlo Casino, the ball fell on the black of the roulette wheel 26 times in a row and
gamblers lost millions betting against the black, thinking mistakenly that the next ball is more likely to land
on red, when in fact the odds are the same as they always were – 50:50.

Habit

A routine or behavior that is repeated and tends to occur subconsciously.

Habits are performed automatically because they have been performed frequently in the past.

Changing a habit is a process, not an event. According to science, it takes 66 days to form or change a new
habit (and not 21 days like the old myth).

Page 18 of 36
Halo Effect

A cognitive bias in which our overall impression of a person influences how we feel and think about his or
her character.

We assume that because people are good at doing A, they will be good at doing B and C too.

Your overall impression of a person (“She is nice!”) impacts your evaluation of that person’s specific traits
(“She is also smart!”).

Scientists also found that people tend to rate attractive individuals more favorably for their personality traits
or characteristics than those who are less attractive.

Hedonic Adaptation

People quickly return to their original level of happiness, despite major positive or negative events or life
changes.

When good things happen, we feel positive emotions but they don’t usually last. The excitement of
purchasing a new car or getting a promotion at work is temporary.

One study showed that despite initial euphoria, lottery winners were no happier than non-winners eighteen
months later.

Herd Behavior

The tendency for individuals to mimic the actions (rational or irrational) of a larger group. Individually,
however, most people would not necessarily make the same choice.

For example, in the late 1990s investors were investing huge amounts of money into Internet-related
companies, even though most of them did not have structured business models. Their driving force was the
reassurance they got from seeing so many others do the same.

Hindsight Bias (Knew-It-All-Along Effect)

The tendency of people to overestimate their ability to have predicted an outcome that could not possibly
have been predicted.

A psychological phenomenon is which people believe that an event was more predictable than it actually
was, and can result in an oversimplification in cause and effect.

For example, after the great recession of 2007, many analysts explained that all the signs of the financial
bubble were there. If the signs had been that obvious, how come almost no one saw it coming in real time?

Page 19 of 36
IKEA Effect

A cognitive bias in which people place a disproportionately high value on products they partially created.

For example, in one study, participants who built a simple IKEA storage box themselves were willing to pay
much more for the box than a group of participants who merely inspected a fully built box.

Less-Is-Better Effect

When low-value options are valued more highly than high-value options.

This effect occurs only when the options are evaluated separately. This way the evaluations of objects are
influenced by attributes which are easy to evaluate rather those which are important.

For example, a research revealed that:

 A person giving an expensive $45 scarf as a gift was perceived to be more generous than one giving
a $55 cheap coat.
 An overfilled ice cream serving in a small cup with 7 oz of ice cream was valued more than an
underfilled serving in a large cup with 8 oz of ice cream.

Licensing Effect

When people allow themselves to indulge after doing something positive first.

Drinking a diet coke with a cheeseburger can lead one to subconsciously discount the negative attributes of
the meal’s high caloric and cholesterol content.

Going to the gym can lead us to ride the elevator to the second floor.

A study showed that people who took multivitamin pills were more prone to subsequently engage in
unhealthy activities.

Loss Aversion

People’s tendency to prefer avoiding losses to acquiring equivalent gains. It’s better not to lose $5 than to
find $5.

The pain of losing is psychologically about twice as powerful as the pleasure of gaining.

For example, scientists randomly divided participants into buyers and sellers and gave the sellers coffee
mugs as a gift. They then asked the sellers for how much they would sell the mug and asked the buyers for
how much they would buy it.

Results showed that the sellers placed a significantly higher value on the mugs than the buyers did. Loss
aversion was the cause of that contradiction.

Page 20 of 36
Mental Accounting

The tendency of people to divide their money into separate accounts based on subjective criteria, like the
source of the money and the intent for each account.

For example, people often have a special fund set aside for a vacation, while carrying substantial credit card
debt, despite the fact that diverting funds from debt repayment increases interest payments and reduces net
worth.

Similarity, another study revealed that supermarket shoppers spent less money paying with cash than with
credit cards. Comparing the price of goods to a smaller mental account (cash) than to a larger mental
account (credit card) increased the pain of payment.

Naive Diversification

When people have to make several choices at once, they tend to diversify more than when making the same
time of decision sequentially.

For example, when people ask to choose now which of six snacks to consume in the next three weeks, they
pick more kinds of snacks than when they ask to choose once a week six snacks to consume that week for
three weeks.

As a result, investors tend to think that by simply investing in a number of unrelated assets, a portfolio will
acquire enough diversification to enjoy relative freedom from high risk and potential for profit.

Optimism Bias

A cognitive bias that causes people to believe that they are at a lesser risk of experiencing a negative event
compared to others.

When it comes to predicting what will happen to us tomorrow, next week, or fifty years from now, we
overestimate the likelihood of positive events.

For example, smokers tend to feel they are less likely than other individuals who smoke to be afflicted with
lung cancer. Similarity, motorists tend to feel they are less likely to be involved in a car accident than is the
average driver.

Research has also found that people show less optimistic bias when experiencing a negative mood, and vice
versa.

Overconfidence Effect

We systematically overestimate our knowledge and our ability to predict.

Overconfidence measures the difference between what people really know and what they think they know.
Page 21 of 36
It turns out the experts suffer even more from the overconfidence effect than laypeople do.

Studies have found that over 90% of US drivers rate themselves above average, 68% of professors consider
themselves in the top 25 percent for teaching ability, and 84% of Frenchmen believe they are above-average
lovers.

Overjustification Effect

The loss of motivation and interest as a result of receiving an excessive external reward (such as money and
prizes).

When being rewarded for doing something actually diminishes intrinsic motivation to perform that action.

For example, researchers gave children reward for doing activities they already enjoyed, like solving
puzzles. Then, the children were given an opportunity to engage in these same activities on their own, when
no rewards would be forthcoming. The results: children engaged in these activities less often than they did
before.

Pain of paying

Some purchases are more painful than others, and people try to avoid those types of purchases. Even if the
actual cost is the same, there is a difference in the pain of paying depending of the mode of payment.

Purchases are not just affected by the price, utility and opportunity cost, but by the pain of paying attached
to the transactions.

Studies show that people feel the pain of paying the most when they:

 Paying in cash (as opposed to credit card).

 Paying a separate fee/commission (as opposed to fee included in the total purchase price).
 Paying as they consume (as opposed to one-time payment).
 Paying frequently (as opposed to prepaid).
 Paying on their own (as opposed to receiving a gift from their partners).

Partitioning

When the rate of consumption decreased by physically partitioning resources into smaller units.

For example, cookies wrapped individually, a household budget divided into categories (e.g. rent, food,
utilities, transportation etc.).

When a resource is divided into smaller units, consumers encounter additional decision points – a
psychological hurdle encouraging them to stop and think.

Page 22 of 36
Peak-End Rule

People judge an experience largely based on how they felt at its peak (the most intense point) and its end,
rather than on the total sum or average of every moment of the experience.

The effect occurs regardless of whether the experience is pleasant or unpleasant and how long the
experience lasted.

In a research, participants engaged with two experiences: short and long trial.
In the short trial, they soaked their hands in water at 14 C for 60s.
In the long trial, the same participants soaked their hands in water at 14 C for 60s and kept their hands under
the water for extra 30s at 15 C.
When the researchers asked the participants to choose which trial to repeat, the majority chose the long trial.

Similarity, a study showed that in uncomfortable colonoscopy procedures, patients evaluated the discomfort
of the experience based on the pain at the worst peak and the final ending moments. This occurred
regardless of the procedure length or the pain intensity.

Priming

When people are exposed to one stimulus, it affects how they respond to another stimulus.

Their unconscious brain is affected by stimulus like colors, words or smells, which created an emotion that
will affect their next actions.

For example, one study revealed that when restaurants played French music, diners ordered more wine.

In a different study, when websites’ visitors were exposed to a green background with pennies on it, they
looked at the price information longer than other visitors.

Procrastination

The avoidance of doing a task that needs to be accomplished.

It is the practice of doing more pleasurable things in place of less pleasurable ones or carrying out less
urgent tasks instead of more urgent ones.

It is estimated that 90% of college students engage in procrastination, and 75% consider themselves
procrastinators.

Projection Bias

The tendency of people to overestimate the degree to which other people agree with them. People tend to
assume that others think, feel, believe, and behave much like they do.

This bias also influences people’s assumptions of their future selves. They tend to believe that they will
think, feel, and act the same in the future as they do now.
Page 23 of 36
For this reason, we sometimes make decisions that satisfy current desires, instead of pursuing things that
will serve our long-term goals.

For example, if people go to the supermarket when they are hungry – they tend to buy things they don’t
normally eat and spend more money as a result. This happens because at the time of shopping they
unconsciously anticipate that their future hunger will be great as it is now.

Ratio bias

People’s difficulties in dealing with proportions or ratios as opposed to absolute numbers.

In a study, participants rated cancer as riskier when it was described as killing 1,286 out of 10,000 people
than as killing 24.14 out of 100 people. The fact that 12.86% could be considered riskier than 24.14% is a
clear demonstration that the ratio bias can strongly influence the perception of risk.

In a similar study, participants rated the statement “36,500 people die from cancer every year” as riskier than
the statement “100 people die from cancer every day”.

Reciprocity

If someone does something for you, you’ll naturally want to do something for them.

When you offer something for free, people feel a sense of indebtedness towards you.

For example, researchers tested how reciprocity can increase restaurant tipping. Tips went up to 3% when
diners were given an after-dinner mint. Tips went up to 20% if, while delivering the mint, the waiter paused,
looked the customers in the eye, and then gave them a second mint while telling them the mint was
especially for them.

In another study, 11% of people were willing to donate an amount worth one day’s salary when they were
given a small gift of candy while being asked for a donation, compared to 5% of those that were just asked
for the donation.

Regret aversion

People anticipate regret if they made a wrong choice, and take this anticipation into consideration when
making new decisions. Fear of regret can play a large role in dissuading or motivating someone to do
something.

For example, an investor decides to buy a stock based on a friend’s recommendation. After a while, the
stock falls by 50% and the investor sells the stock at lost.
To avoid this regret in the future, the investor will research any stocks that his friend recommends.

On the other hand, if the investor didn’t take his friend recommendation and the price increased by 50%,
next time the investor would be less risk averse and would buy any stocks his friend recommends.

Page 24 of 36
Representativeness heuristic

People tend to judge the probability of an event by finding a ‘comparable known’ event and assuming that
the probabilities will be similar.

When people rely on representativeness to make judgments, they are likely to judge wrongly because the
fact that something is more representative does not actually make it more likely.

For example, in series of 10 coin tosses, most people judge the series HTHTTTHHTH to be more likely than
the series HHHHHHHHHH.

In business, if a customer meets a salesman from a certain company that is aggressive, the customer might
assume that the company has an aggressive culture.

In finance, investors might prefer to buy a stock based on the company’s positive characteristics (e.g. high-
quality products) as an indicator for a good investment.

Scarcity

The more difficult it is to acquire an item the more value that item has.

When there is only a limited number of items available. The rarer the opportunity, the more valuable it is.

People assume that things that are difficult to obtain are usually better than those that are easily available.
They link availability to quality.

On “Black Friday”, more than getting a bargain on a hot item, shoppers thrive on the competition itself, in
obtaining the scarce product.

In a famous study, one group of participants were given a jar with ten cookies, a second group was given
two cookies, and a third group was initially given ten cookies, which were then reduced to two cookies.
when asked the participants to rate their cookies, the third group rated their cookies the highest.

Social proof

A psychological phenomenon where people reference the behavior of others to guide their own behavior.

Studies show that over 70% of Americans say they look at product reviews before making a purchase
and 83% of consumers say they trust recommendations over any other form of advertising.

There are five types of social proof for your product or service:

1. Experts social proof – an approval from credible industry leaders.

If people buy something that they’re unfamiliar with, they tend to rely on expert’s opinion.
2. Celebrity social proof – an approval or an endorsement from celebrities.
Celebrities are walking advertisements, so any product or service that they recommend or are seen
using are bound to get a lot more attention.
3. User social proof – an approval from current customers/users of a product or service.
This includes customer testimonials, case studies, and product/service reviews.
Page 25 of 36
 4. Wisdom of the crowd – an approval from a large group of people.
When lots of people are using or buying a product, others want to follow.
5. Wisdom of friends – an approval from friends and people you know.
92% of consumers trust recommendations from people they know and pay 2X more attention to
recommendations from friends.

Sunk Cost Fallacy

The tendency of people to irrationally follow through on an activity that is not meeting their expectations
because of the time and/or money they have already spent on it.

The logic form:

X has already been invested in project Y.
Z more investment would be needed to complete project Y, otherwise X will be lost.
Therefore, Z is justified.

The sunk cost fallacy explains why people finish movies they aren’t enjoying, finish meals in restaurants
even though they are full, hold on to investments that are underperforming and keep clothes in their closet
that they’ve never worn.

Zero Price Effect

When any item priced at exactly zero will not only be perceived to have a lower cost but will also be
attributed greater perceived value.

When people are offered something for free, they have an extremely positive reaction that clouds their
judgment.

In an experiment, one group of participants were given three choices: Buy a “low-value product” (a
Hershey’s Kiss) for one cent, buy a “high-value product” (a Lindt truffle) for 14 cents, or buy nothing. The
second group faced a slightly different choice, in which the cost of each chocolate was lowered by a single
cent. The Lindt truffle was now 13 cents, while the Hershey’s Kiss was free.

The results showed that when both chocolates are not free, the majority preferred the higher value product.
But when the lower value product was offered free, the majority of people preferred it.

Page 26 of 36
 Overview of the 6 Major Theories of Emotion

Emotions exert an incredibly powerful force on human behavior. Strong emotions can cause you to take
actions you might not normally perform or to avoid situations you enjoy. Why exactly do we have
emotions? What causes us to have these feelings? Researchers, philosophers, and psychologists have
proposed different theories to explain the how and why behind human emotions.

What Is Emotion?

In psychology, emotion is often defined as a complex state of feeling that results in physical and
psychological changes that influence thought and behavior. Emotionality is associated with a range of
psychological phenomena, including temperament, personality, mood, and motivation. According to author
David G. Meyers, human emotion involves "...physiological arousal, expressive behaviors, and conscious
experience."

Theories of Emotion

The major theories of motivation can be grouped into three main categories: physiological, neurological, and
cognitive. Physiological theories suggest that responses within the body are responsible for emotions.
Neurological theories propose that activity within the brain leads to emotional responses. Finally, cognitive
theories argue that thoughts and other mental activity play an essential role in forming emotions.

Evolutionary Theory of Emotion

It was naturalist Charles Darwin who proposed that emotions evolved because they were adaptive and
allowed humans and animals to survive and reproduce. Feelings of love and affection lead people to seek
mates and reproduce. Feelings of fear compel people to either fight or flee the source of danger.

According to the evolutionary theory of emotion, our emotions exist because they serve an adaptive role.
Emotions motivate people to respond quickly to stimuli in the environment, which helps improve the
chances of success and survival.

Understanding the emotions of other people and animals also plays a crucial role in safety and survival. If
you encounter a hissing, spitting, and clawing animal, chances are you will quickly realize that the animal is
frightened or defensive and leave it alone. By being able to interpret correctly the emotional displays of
other people and animals, you can respond correctly and avoid danger.

The James-Lange Theory of Emotion

The James-Lange theory is one of the best-known examples of a physiological theory of emotion.
Independently proposed by psychologist William James and physiologist Carl Lange, the James-Lange
theory of emotion suggests that emotions occur as a result of physiological reactions to events.

This theory suggests that when you see an external stimulus that leads to a physiological reaction. Your
emotional reaction is dependent upon how you interpret those physical reactions. For example, suppose you
are walking in the woods and you see a grizzly bear. You begin to tremble, and your heart begins to race.
The James-Lange theory proposes that you will interpret your physical reactions and conclude that you are
frightened ("I am trembling. Therefore, I am afraid"). According to this theory of emotion, you are not
trembling because you are frightened. Instead, you feel frightened because you are trembling.

James-Lange Theory of Emotion

Page 27 of 36
The Cannon-Bard Theory of Emotion

Another well-known physiological theory is the Cannon-Bard theory of emotion. Walter Cannon disagreed
with the James-Lange theory of emotion on several different grounds. First, he suggested, people can
experience physiological reactions linked to emotions without actually feeling those emotions. For example,
your heart might race because you have been exercising and not because you are afraid.

Cannon also suggested that emotional responses occur much too quickly for them to be simply products of
physical states. When you encounter a danger in the environment, you will often feel afraid before you start
to experience the physical symptoms associated with fear such as shaking hands, rapid breathing, and a
racing heart.

Cannon first proposed his theory in the 1920s and his work was later expanded on by physiologist Philip
Bard during the 1930s. According to the Cannon-Bard theory of emotion, we feel emotions and experience
physiological reactions such as sweating, trembling, and muscle tension simultaneously.

More specifically, it is suggested that emotions result when the thalamus sends a message to the brain in
response to a stimulus, resulting in a physiological reaction. At the same time, the brain also receives signals
triggering the emotional experience. Cannon and Bard’s theory suggests that the physical and psychological
experience of emotion happen at the same time and that one does not cause the other.

Cannon-Bard Theory of Emotion

Schachter-Singer Theory

Also known as the two-factor theory of emotion, the Schachter-Singer Theory is an example of a cognitive
theory of emotion. This theory suggests that the physiological arousal occurs first, and then the individual
must identify the reason for this arousal to experience and label it as an emotion. A stimulus leads to a
physiological response that is then cognitively interpreted and labeled which results in an emotion.

Schachter and Singer’s theory draws on both the James-Lange theory and the Cannon-Bard theory of
emotion. Like the James-Lange theory, the Schachter-Singer theory proposes that people do infer emotions
based on physiological responses. The critical factor is the situation and the cognitive interpretation that
people use to label that emotion.

Like the Cannon-Bard theory, the Schachter-Singer theory also suggests that similar physiological responses
can produce varying emotions. For example, if you experience a racing heart and sweating palms during an
important math exam, you will probably identify the emotion as anxiety. If you experience the same
physical responses on a date with your significant other, you might interpret those responses as love,
affection, or arousal.

The Two-Factor Theory of Emotion

Cognitive Appraisal Theory

According to appraisal theories of emotion, thinking must occur first before experiencing emotion. Richard
Lazarus was a pioneer in this area of emotion, and this theory is often referred to as the Lazarus theory of
emotion.

According to this theory, the sequence of events first involves a stimulus, followed by thought which then
leads to the simultaneous experience of a physiological response and the emotion. For example, if you
encounter a bear in the woods, you might immediately begin to think that you are in great danger. This then

Page 28 of 36
leads to the emotional experience of fear and the physical reactions associated with the fight-or-flight
response.

Facial-Feedback Theory of Emotion

The facial-feedback theory of emotions suggests that facial expressions are connected to experiencing
emotions. Charles Darwin and William James both noted early on that sometimes physiological responses
often had a direct impact on emotion, rather than simply being a consequence of the emotion. Supporters of
this theory suggest that emotions are directly tied to changes in facial muscles. For example, people who are
forced to smile pleasantly at a social function will have a better time at the event than they would if they had
frowned or carried a more neutral facial expression.

Page 29 of 36
 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ETHICS AND MORALS

Ethics and morals relate to “right” and “wrong” conduct. While they are sometimes used interchangeably,
they are different: ethics refer to rules provided by an external source, e.g., codes of conduct in workplaces
or principles in religions. Morals refer to an individual’s own principles regarding right and wrong.

 Comparison chart
Ethics versus Morals comparison chart

Ethics Morals

Principles or habits with respect to right

The rules of conduct recognized in respect to a or wrong conduct. While morals also
What are they? particular class of human actions or a particular prescribe dos and don'ts, morality is
group or culture. ultimately a personal compass of right
and wrong.

Where do they
Social system - External Individual - Internal
come from?

Because we believe in something being

Why we do it? Because society says it is the right thing to do.
right or wrong.

Ethics are dependent on others for definition.

Usually consistent, although can change if
Flexibility They tend to be consistent within a certain
an individual’s beliefs change.
context, but can vary between contexts.

A person strictly following Ethical Principles

A Moral Person although perhaps bound
may not have any Morals at all. Likewise, one
by a higher covenant, may choose to
The "Gray" could violate Ethical Principles within a given
follow a code of ethics as it would apply
system of rules in order to maintain Moral
to a system. "Make it fit"
integrity.

Origin Greek word "ethos" meaning "character" Latin word "mos" meaning "custom"

Ethics are governed by professional and legal

Acceptability Morality transcends cultural norms
guidelines within a particular time and place

Page 30 of 36
We greatly encounter moral and ethical issues, in our day to day life. Perhaps, these two defines a
personality, attitude, and behavior of a person. The word Morals is derived from a Greek word “Mos”
which means custom. On the other hand, if we talk about Ethics, it is also derived from a Greek word
“Ethikos” which means character. Put simply, morals are the customs established by group of individuals
whereas ethics defines the character of an individual.

Comparison Chart
Basis for
Morals Ethics
Comparison

Morals are the beliefs of the Ethics are the guiding principles which help the
Meaning individual or group as to what is right individual or group to decide what is good or
or wrong. bad.

What is it? General principles set by group Response to a specific situation

Root word Mos which means custom Ethikos which means character

Governed By Social and cultural norms Individual or Legal and Professional norms

Deals with Principles of right and wrong Right and wrong conduct

Applicability in
No Yes
Business

Morals may differ from society to

Consistency Ethics are generally uniform.
society and culture to culture.

Morals are expressed in the form of

Expression Ethics are abstract.
general rules and statements.

Freedom to think
No Yes
and choose

Definition of Morals

Morals are the social, cultural and religious beliefs or values of an individual or group which tells us what is
right or wrong. They are the rules and standards made by the society or culture which is to be followed by us
while deciding what is right. Some moral principles are:

 Do not cheat
 Be loyal
 Be patient
 Always tell the truth
 Be generous

Morals refer to the beliefs what is not objectively right, but what is considered right for any situation, so it
can be said that what is morally correct may not be objectively correct.

Page 31 of 36
Definition of Ethics

Ethics is a branch of philosophy that deals with the principles of conduct of an individual or group. It works
as a guiding principle as to decide what is good or bad. They are the standards which govern the life of a
person. Ethics is also known as moral philosophy. Some ethical principles are:

 Truthfulness
 Honesty
 Loyalty
 Respect
 Fairness
 Integrity

Key Differences Between Morals and Ethics

The major differences between Morals and Ethics are as under:

1. Morals deal with what is ‘right or wrong’. Ethics deals with what is ‘good or evil’.
2. Morals are general guidelines framed by the society E.g. We should speak truth. Conversely, ethics
are a response to a particular situation, E.g. Is it ethical to state the truth in a particular situation?
3. The term morals is derived from a Greek word ‘mos’ which refers to custom and the customs are
determined by group of individuals or some authority. On the other hand, ethics is originated from
Greek word ‘ethikos’ which refers to character and character is an attribute.
4. Morals are dictated by society, culture or religion while Ethics are chosen by the person himself
which governs his life.
5. Morals are concerned with principles of right and wrong. On the contrary, ethics stresses on right
and wrong conduct.
6. As morals are framed and designed by the group, there is no option to think and choose; the
individual can either accept or reject. Conversely, the people are free to think and choose the
principles of his life in ethics.
7. Morals may vary from society to society and culture to culture. As opposed to Ethics, which remains
same regardless of any culture, religion or society.
8. Morals do not have any applicability to business, whereas Ethics is widely applicable in the business
known as business ethics.
9. Morals are expressed in the form of statements, but Ethics are not expressed in the form of
statements.

Examples

 If the son of a big politician has committed a crime and he uses his powers to free his son from legal
consequences. Then this act is immoral because the politician is trying to save a culprit.
 A very close friend or relative of an interviewer comes for an interview and without asking a single
question, he selects him. This act is unethical because the selection process must be transparent and
unbiased.
 A grocer sells adulterated products to his customers to earn more profit. This act is neither moral nor
ethical because he is cheating his customers and profession at the same time.

Conclusion

Every single individual has some principles which help him throughout his life to cope up with any adverse
situation; they are known as ethics. On the other hand, Morals are not the hard and fast rules or very rigid,
but they are the rules which a majority of people considered as right. That is why the people widely accept
them. This is all for differentiating Morals from Ethics.
Page 32 of 36
 ETHICS AND ITS THEORIES

Introduction

Ethics (or Moral Philosophy) is concerned with questions of how people ought to act, and the search for a
definition of right conduct (identified as the one causing the greatest good) and the good life (in the sense of
a life worth living or a life that is satisfying or happy).

The word "ethics" is derived from the Greek "ethos" (meaning "custom" or "habit"). Ethics differs from
morals and morality in that ethics denotes the theory of right action and the greater good, while morals
indicate their practice. Ethics is not limited to specific acts and defined moral codes, but encompasses the
whole of moral ideals and behaviors, a person's philosophy of life (or Weltanschauung).

It asks questions like "How should people act?" (Normative or Prescriptive Ethics), "What do people think is
right?" (Descriptive Ethics), "How do we take moral knowledge and put it into practice?" (Applied Ethics),
and "What does 'right' even mean?" (Meta-Ethics). See below for more discussion of these categories.

Ancient Greek Ethics

Socrates, as recorded in Plato's dialogues, is customarily regarded as the father of Western ethics. He
asserted that people will naturally do what is good provided that they know what is right, and that evil or bad
actions are purely the result of ignorance: "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance". He
equated knowledge and wisdom with self-awareness (meaning to be aware of every fact relevant to a
person's existence) and virtue and happiness. So, in essence, he considered self-knowledge and self-
awareness to be the essential good, because the truly wise (i.e. self-aware) person will know what is right, do
what is good, and therefore be happy.

According to Aristotle, "Nature does nothing in vain", so it is only when a person acts in accordance with
their nature and thereby realizes their full potential, that they will do good and therefore be content in life.
He held that self-realization (the awareness of one's nature and the development of one's talents) is the surest
path to happiness, which is the ultimate goal, all other things (such as civic life or wealth) being merely
means to an end. He encouraged moderation in all things, the extremes being degraded and immoral, (e.g.
courage is the moderate virtue between the extremes of cowardice and recklessness), and held that Man
should not simply live, but live well with conduct governed by moderate virtue. Virtue, for Aristotle,
denotes doing the right thing to the right person at the right time to the proper extent in the correct fashion
and for the right reason - something of a tall order.

Cynicism is an ancient doctrine best exemplified by the Greek philosopher Diogenes of Sinope, who lived
in a tub on the streets of Athens. He taught that a life lived according to Nature was better than one that
conformed to convention, and that a simple life is essential to virtue and happiness. As a moral teacher,
Diogenes emphasized detachment from many of those things conventionally considered "good".

Hedonism posits that the principal ethic is maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. This may range from
those advocating self-gratification regardless of the pain and expense to others and with no thought for the
future (Cyrenaic Hedonism), to those who believe that the most ethical pursuit maximizes pleasure and
happiness for the most people. Somewhere in the middle of this continuum, Epicureanism observed that
indiscriminate indulgence sometimes results in negative consequences, such as pain and fear, which are to
be avoided.

Page 33 of 36
The Stoic philosopher Epictetus posited that the greatest good was contentment, serenity and peace of mind,
which can be achieved by self-mastery over one's desires and emotions, and freedom from material
attachments. In particular, sex and sexual desire are to be avoided as the greatest threat to the integrity and
equilibrium of a man's mind. According to Epictetus, difficult problems in life should not be avoided, but
rather embraced as spiritual exercises needed for the health of the spirit.

Pyrrho, the founding figure of Pyrrhonian Skepticism, taught that one cannot rationally decide between what
is good and what is bad although, generally speaking, self-interest is the primary motive of human behavior,
and he was disinclined to rely upon sincerity, virtue or Altruism as motivations.

Humanism, with its emphasis on the dignity and worth of all people and their ability to determine right and
wrong purely by appeal to universal human qualities (especially rationality), can be traced back to Thales,
Xenophanes of Colophon (570 - 480 B.C.), Anaxagoras, Pericles (c. 495 - 429 B.C.), Protagoras,
Democritus and the historian Thucydides (c. 460 - 375 B.C.). These early Greek thinkers were all
instrumental in the move away from a spiritual morality based on the supernatural, and the development of a
more humanistic freethought (the view that beliefs should be formed on the basis of science and logic, and
not be influenced by emotion, authority, tradition or dogma).

Normative Ethics

Normative Ethics (or Prescriptive Ethics) is the branch of ethics concerned with establishing how things
should or ought to be, how to value them, which things are good or bad, and which actions are right or
wrong. It attempts to develop a set of rules governing human conduct, or a set of norms for action.

Normative ethical theories are usually split into three main categories: Consequentialism, Deontology and
Virtue Ethics:

Consequentialism (or Teleological Ethics) argues that the morality of an action is contingent on the action's
outcome or result. Thus, a morally right action is one that produces a good outcome or consequence.
Consequentialist theories must consider questions like "What sort of consequences count as good
consequences?", "Who is the primary beneficiary of moral action?", "How are the consequences judged and
who judges them?"

Some consequentialist theories include:

Utilitarianism, which holds that an action is right if it leads to the most happiness for the greatest
number of people ("happiness" here is defined as the maximization of pleasure and the minimization of
pain). The origins of Utilitarianism can be traced back as far as the Greek philosopher Epicurus, but its
full formulation is usually credited to Jeremy Bentham, with John Stuart Mill as its foremost proponent.

Hedonism, which is the philosophy that pleasure is the most important pursuit of mankind, and that
individuals should strive to maximize their own total pleasure (net of any pain or suffering).
Epicureanism is a more moderate approach (which still seeks to maximize happiness, but which defines
happiness more as a state of tranquillity than pleasure).

Egoism, which holds that an action is right if it maximizes good for the self. Thus, Egoism may license
actions which are good for the individual, but detrimental to the general welfare. Individual Egoism
holds that all people should do whatever benefits him or her self. Personal Egoism holds that each

Page 34 of 36
 person should act in his own self-interest, but makes no claims about what anyone else ought to do.
Universal Egoism holds that everyone should act in ways that are in their own interest.

Asceticism, which is, in some ways, the opposite of Egoism in that it describes a life characterized by
abstinence from egoistic pleasures especially to achieve a spiritual goal.

Altruism, which prescribes that an individual take actions that have the best consequences for
everyone except for himself, according to Auguste Comte's dictum, "Live for others". Thus, individuals
have a moral obligation to help, serve or benefit others, if necessary at the sacrifice of self-interest.

Rule Consequentialism, which is a theory (sometimes seen as an attempt to reconcile

Consequentialism and Deontology), that moral behavior involves following certain rules, but that those
rules should be chosen based on the consequences that the selection of those rules have.

Negative Consequentialism, which focuses on minimizing bad consequences rather than promoting
good consequences. This may actually require active intervention (to prevent harm from being done),
or may only require passive avoidance of bad outcomes.

Deontology is an approach to ethics that focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as
opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those actions. It argues that decisions should
be made considering the factors of one's duties and other's rights (the Greek 'deon' means 'obligation' or
'duty').

Some deontological theories include:

Divine Command Theory: a form of deontological theory which states that an action is right if God
has decreed that it is right, and that an act is obligatory if and only if (and because) it is commanded by
God. Thus, moral obligations arise from God's commands, and the rightness of any action depends
upon that action being performed because it is a duty, not because of any good consequences arising
from that action. William of Ockham, René Descartes and the 18th Century Calvinists all accepted
versions of this moral theory.

Natural Rights Theory (such as that espoused by Thomas Hobbes and John Locke), which holds that
humans have absolute, natural rights (in the sense of universal rights that are inherent in the nature of
ethics, and not contingent on human actions or beliefs). This eventually developed into what we today
call human rights.

Immanuel Kant's Categorical Imperative, which roots morality in humanity's rational capacity and
asserts certain inviolable moral laws. Kant's formulation is deontological in that he argues that to act in
the morally right way, people must act according to duty, and that it is the motives of the person who
carries out the action that make them right or wrong, not the consequences of the actions. Simply
stated, the Categorical Imperative states that one should only act in such a way that one could want the
maxim (or motivating principle) of one's action to become a universal law, and that one should always
treat people as an end as well as a means to an end.

Pluralistic Deontology is a description of the deontological ethics propounded by W.D. Ross (1877 -
1971). He argues that there are seven prima facie duties which need to be taken into consideration when
deciding which duty should be acted upon: beneficence (to help other people to increase their pleasure,
improve their character, etc); non-maleficence (to avoid harming other people); justice (to ensure
people get what they deserve); self-improvement (to improve ourselves); reparation (to recompense

Page 35 of 36
 someone if you have acted wrongly towards them); gratitude (to benefit people who have benefited us);
promise-keeping (to act according to explicit and implicit promises, including the implicit promise to
tell the truth). In some circumstances, there may be clashes or conflicts between these duties and a
decision must be made whereby one duty may "trump" another, although there are no hard and fast
rules and no fixed order of significance.

Contractarian Ethics (or the Moral Theory of Contractarianism) claims that moral norms derive their
normative force from the idea of contract or mutual agreement. It holds that moral acts are those that
we would all agree to if we were unbiased, and that moral rules themselves are a sort of a contract, and
therefore only people who understand and agree to the terms of the contract are bound by it. The theory
stems initially from political Contractarianism and the principle of social contract developed by
Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and John Locke, which essentially holds that people give up
some rights to a government and/or other authority in order to receive, or jointly preserve, social order.
Contractualism is a variation on Contractarianism, although based more on the Kantian ideas that ethics
is an essentially interpersonal matter, and that right and wrong are a matter of whether we can justify
the action to other people.

Virtue Ethics, focuses on the inherent character of a person rather than on the nature or consequences of
specific actions performed. The system identifies virtues (those habits and behaviors that will allow a person
to achieve "eudaimonia", or well being or a good life), counsels practical wisdom to resolve any conflicts
between virtues, and claims that a lifetime of practicing these virtues leads to, or in effect constitutes,
happiness and the good life.

Eudaimonism is a philosophy originated by Aristotle that defines right action as that which leads to
"well being", and which can be achieved by a lifetime of practicing the virtues in one's everyday
activities, subject to the exercise of practical wisdom. It was first advocated by Plato and is particularly
associated with Aristotle, and became the prevailing approach to ethical thinking in the Ancient and
Medieval periods. It fell out of favor in the Early Modern period, but has recently undergone a modern
resurgence.

Agent-Based Theories give an account of virtue based on our common-sense intuitions about which
character traits are admirable (e.g. benevolence, kindness, compassion, etc), which we can identify by
looking at the people we admire, our moral exemplars.

Ethics of Care was developed mainly by Feminist writers, and calls for a change in how we view
morality and the virtues, shifting towards the more marginalized virtues exemplified by women, such as
taking care of others, patience, the ability to nurture, self-sacrifice, etc.

Page 36 of 36