Hindsight bias: characteristics of this cognitive bias

The past, the past is. And there is an irrefutable fact: we cannot change our decisions or our past actions. And what do we usually do about it? Modify our perception of what happened and remember our own decisions as better than they really were.

This psychological effect known as bias or hindsight bias manifests itself when we look back in time and effectively believe that events that occurred were more predictable than they actually were when a decision was made particular.

• Related article: "Cognitive biases: discovering an interesting psychological effect"

What is a cognitive bias?

A cognitive bias is a deviation in ordinary cognitive processing that leads the individual to distort and misinterpret available information.

This type of irrational judgments, as occurs with the hindsight bias, arise as an evolutionary necessity from which our brains are capable of making instantaneous judgments without the mediation of a more elaborate interpretation system and, therefore, slower. Although they can lead us to make serious misinterpretations, in certain contexts and situations they help us make more accurate and effective decisions.

The concept of cognitive bias was introduced by psychologists and researchers Daniel Kahneman and Tversky in 1972, as a result of his experience investigating patients who were unable to reason intuitively with large figures. Both held that most important human decisions are based on a limited number of heuristic principles. - mental shortcuts that we use to simplify reality and solve problems - and not in a formal analysis of the facts. This theory was in direct contradiction to the rational decision-making model that prevailed at that time.

Hindsight bias: what it is and how it influences us

It is common for the prejudice or hindsight bias to act every time there is an economic or social crisis. For example, after the global financial crisis of 2008, which was triggered by the collapse of the housing bubble and subprime mortgage fraud in the US, we could see how Many of the economists who did not know how to predict its devastating effects affirmed a posteriori that they were predictable and that they knew what would eventually happen. step.

This bias also has a lot to do with the ability of human beings to remember certain events. Our memory system does not work like a computer: memories fade over time and we rebuild part of them based on accumulating new experiences. The psychologist Elizabeth loftus has investigated for years the so-called "false memories", postulating the theory that the way in which someone is asked to remember something influences their subsequent description of the memory itself.

These processing errors that skew our memory, as occurs with the hindsight bias, which leads us to modify the memory of our beliefs prior to occur a certain event in favor of the final conclusion, determine our view of ourselves and what we surrounds. Historians, skewing the outcome or development of a historical battle, or physicians, by recalling biased negative effects of a clinical trial, are two examples of professions affected by this bias.

What does the research say about it?

Despite the fact that a bias such as hindsight seems, a priori, an easily explained and identifiable error, the vast majority of studies carried out conclude that it is very difficult to make judgments about something that has happened by completely abstracting from the result, so it is also difficult to try to counteract its effect. Numerous studies have confirmed this bias and in recent years an attempt has been made to determine whether judges succumb to it to a greater or lesser extent than, for example, members of a jury.

In this sense, in 2001 a study was carried out with 167 magistrates of the US Federal Courts. and it was concluded that the judges were affected by the hindsight bias to the same extent as the rest of the citizens. Another empirical study by researchers W.K. Viscusi and R. Hastie in 2002 also concluded that the same effects derived from hindsight bias influenced the judge's sentence, but to a lesser extent.

According to the study, despite the fact that the jurors were right to incorporate moral and social evaluations into their verdict that allowed to classify a harmful act or behavior as malicious (thus punishing the defendant and preventing similar conduct in the future), errors and prejudices abounded that turned convictions into an unpredictable lottery. In contrast, professional judges erred to a lesser extent, a fact that calls into question the suitability of juries, despite being in their most democratic form.

How to combat this and other biases

There is no magic formula that guarantees us to avoid irrational judgments and biases such as hindsight, but yes we can take into account certain keys to minimize their effects. The first thing is to start by assuming and accepting an uncomfortable truth: that we are not smarter than anyone and that everyone, without As an exception, we are susceptible to its effects, regardless of the studies we have or how rational we are. we create.

Biases, as evolutionary mechanisms that they are, are there and are there for a reason: speed up decision-making and response to stimuli, problems or situations that we could not otherwise cope with the inability of our cognitive system to process all the information available in the shortest time possible.

Once we have assumed our own vulnerability to the effects of the irrational, the next step is to know how to treat the information we receive from our context and from other people. It is important to weigh the data and demand evidence against statements that generate suspicion. Intuition without the support of reason does not lead to a successful conclusion. We must contrast with facts and objective data all opinions, our own and those of others. And be aware that making decisions based on a self-assessment of our capabilities can be misleading.

Finally, beware of always wanting to be right. Listen carefully and try to understand the real meaning of the information provided by our interlocutor may be the best remedy against self-deception. Closing our eyes and ears to the evidence in order not to see our established beliefs endanger is the prelude to one of the greatest evils in our society: fanaticism. And to paraphrase the American psychologist Gordon Allport: "The people who are aware or are ashamed of their prejudices are also those who are on the way to suppress them."

Other types of biases

There are many cognitive biases that lead us to make mistakes and make irrational judgmentsBut we cannot focus solely on hindsight bias. There are many others that we must take into account. Among the best known are the following:

1. Carry-over bias

It consists of believing or doing something that many people do. This is, the probability of a behavior occurring would increase as a function of the number of individuals who sustain it. This bias is partly responsible for how we perpetuate many of the myths and false beliefs (like thinking that only we use 10% of our brain or believe that homeopathy works) so ingrained in our society today.

• You may be interested: "Asch's conformity experiment: when social pressure can"

2. Anchor bias

It is the tendency to "anchor" and use the first piece of information that comes to us and then make judgments or make decisions.

The consequences of this bias are often used very effectively by all types of salespeople and commercials. A very obvious example can be found in car dealerships. The seller shows us a vehicle and gives us a specific price (for example, € 5,000). That first information, in this case a figure, will make us keep in mind the figure that the seller has offered us throughout the purchase process. In this way, it is he who leaves with the advantage of being able to negotiate on his own terms.

3. Fundamental attribution error bias

It is the tendency to attribute his observable behavior exclusively to internal traits of an individual (such as personality or intelligence). In this way, we simplify reality by ruling out a priori any possible relationship between situational factors -more changeable and less predictable- and the individual, who can serve as an explanation of her behavior.

4. Confirmation bias

It is produced by favoring, interpreting and remembering information that confirms our own previous expectations and beliefs, thus nullifying any other type of alternative explanation. We interpret reality selectively (as with hindsight bias), ignoring facts and situations that do not support our preconceptions.

This reasoning error has a very negative influence, for example, in political and organizational spheres., where it is common to have to shuffle multiple options in order to make an accurate decision.

5. Availability bias

It is the tendency to estimate the probability of an event based on the availability or frequency with which that event appears in our minds through experience. For example, if the media present us in the news every day and continuously news of house robberies in summer, our tendency will be to think that said events occur constantly and more regularly than they actually do, since they will be more present in our memory than other events that are objectively more frequent.

Bibliographic references:

• Bunge, M. and Ardila, R. (2002). Philosophy of psychology. Mexico: XXI century.
• Myers, David G. (2005). Psychology. Mexico: Pan-American Medical.