Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 145 posts

Re: People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors

#11

Post by medstrom »

IanSanders wrote: post #5
willvarfar wrote: post #2

The article opens with a couple of examples of people allegedly not doing research: 1. Most people make two trips or fewer to a dealership before buying a car 2. when picking a doctor, many individuals use recommendations from friends and family rather than consulting other health care professionals or “formal sources” such as employers, articles or Web sites And, of course, the last person I would look to for object…

Perhaps the author jumped to a conclusion that number of dealership visits correlates with informedness.

It seems reasonable to me; maybe I'm not modeling "most people" well, but it's hard to imagine someone going to dealerships multiple times for information; rather, they are shopping around for the dealerships to underbid each other so they can get a better price. That's a tip I read on the internet.

Re: People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors

#12

Post by RandomLensman »

That lake fishing example is terrible without any indication what "most" really means. If I take that to mean that 99% of all fish in one of the lakes are red, then seeing one red fish already makes me pretty confident which lake it is from.

There is also this massive assumption in whole thing that investing time to study or decide actually increases positive outcomes. Might need to show that and then see if time spent vs. possible upside is well allocated.

Re: People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors

#13

Post by Ma8ee »

cma wrote: post #3
willvarfar wrote: post #2

The article opens with a couple of examples of people allegedly not doing research: 1. Most people make two trips or fewer to a dealership before buying a car 2. when picking a doctor, many individuals use recommendations from friends and family rather than consulting other health care professionals or “formal sources” such as employers, articles or Web sites And, of course, the last person I would look to for object…

People may spend 3-4x as much time trying out and choosing a car as buying an expensive TV, even though the car costs ~20X more and more research, haggling, etc. on the car could be worth 3 TVs, but more on the TV could only be like at most .2 TVs.

Yes, but you very soon reach the point of diminishing returns when you try to research any purchase. After a maximum a few hours it is hard to find any more useful information about most consumer goods. You have read all the specifications, and the tests and the reviews and went to the stores to look at the products in person. So even if you might spend half a day researching an expensive TV, you won't make a better buy of a car even if you spend more than a day or two researching. And if you spend ten full days to buy a car, you are most certainly wasting your time (and will lose more income than you can optimise your car purchase).

Re: People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors

#16

Post by Consultant32452 »

willvarfar wrote: post #2

The article opens with a couple of examples of people allegedly not doing research: 1. Most people make two trips or fewer to a dealership before buying a car 2. when picking a doctor, many individuals use recommendations from friends and family rather than consulting other health care professionals or “formal sources” such as employers, articles or Web sites And, of course, the last person I would look to for object…

I judge my doctors by wait time. I found a doctor where I never have to wait in the lobby more than 10 mins past my appointment time. Unless you have a really unique health condition I don't understand the culture's behavior around patient doctor relationships. Who cares what other doctors think of him or what his Yelp review is. When I have a sinus infection does he write a prescription for z-pack. End of story.

Re: People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors

#17

Post by motohagiography »

"Jumpers," as described mostly just lacked a fear of consequences of being wrong and were presented with an incentive to guess. Not to be conspiratorial, but one can't help but notice a recent preoccupation in mainstream outlets with pathologizing conspiracy theorists, dissenters, and now, "jumpers."

Referencing Khaneman and Tversky's "system 1 and system 2" from their bestseller Thinking Fast and Slow without crediting it seems to be more about avoiding the scrutiny that would draw, and instead, appearing authoritative with statements about how ancient psychological researchers commonly distinguish between these types of thought. We should even be concerned someone who could be a "jumper," may also have schizophrenia, as our thinking may have applications to that.

Maybe it's interesting, or maybe on closer inspection and thoughtful consideration it resembles propaganda to ignore your instincts, trust the narrative, and provides blunt tools for being suspicious of others who don't. If only most people were smart and comfortable enough to jump to conclusions and then course correct as needed, we could avoid the consequences of groupthink by those who fear criticism above all.

Re: People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors

#18

Post by alistairSH »

willvarfar wrote: post #2

The article opens with a couple of examples of people allegedly not doing research: 1. Most people make two trips or fewer to a dealership before buying a car 2. when picking a doctor, many individuals use recommendations from friends and family rather than consulting other health care professionals or “formal sources” such as employers, articles or Web sites And, of course, the last person I would look to for object…

I bought my latest car in March. I performed most research and all price negotiation online. Even at that, I still visited 4 dealers. The first two to test a large SUV, which I thought I wanted, but ended up not liking. The third to test drive two smaller SUVs. And the fourth to pick-up the SUV I eventually purchased.

I wouldn't think this was an unusual pattern for many buyers in the internet age.

Re: People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors

#19

Post by wombatmobile »

The article lacked a single counter-example to show when jumping to a conclusion might be advantageous.

And yet much of life is dominated by such cases.

Great ball players jump all the time.

Hunters jump or go hungry.

Soldiers jump or get jumped.

Financial traders jump all day long. It doesn't mean they don't study at night, but during they day, they don't spend time pondering trades that disappear as fast as a gap in traffic.

Maitre d's jump.

Taxi drivers jump.

Fork lift drivers jump.

Customs inspectors jump.

Politicians jump.

Not everyone jumps.

Engineers work things out. But they still have to jump sometimes before the factory explodes or the heat shield disintegrates or the oxygen runs out.

Re: People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors

#20

Post by civilized »

willvarfar wrote: post #2

The article opens with a couple of examples of people allegedly not doing research: 1. Most people make two trips or fewer to a dealership before buying a car 2. when picking a doctor, many individuals use recommendations from friends and family rather than consulting other health care professionals or “formal sources” such as employers, articles or Web sites And, of course, the last person I would look to for object…

My wife and I have made one trip for every car that we bought.

1. We wanted a used Honda Civic. We found a used Honda Civic online, at a good price relative to Blue Book. We went to the dealership and bought the Honda Civic.

2. We wanted a used Honda CR-V. We found a used Honda CR-V online, at a good price relative to Blue Book. We went to the dealership and bought the Honda CR-V.

Both cars have been great. No need to overcomplicate things.

Stepping back, I've noticed a certain cognitive bias that's very common, but I don't know what its name might be. Basically, the bias is the idea that spending more time gathering information and analyzing is always good. To which I respond... maybe in some limited, abstract, ceteris paribus sense, but in real life? Not really.

1. You're not taking account of the opportunity cost, the things you could be doing that you're not because you're stuck on this one thing.

2. There is such a thing as overthinking / analysis paralysis, where your thinking actually gets worse the more you obsess about something. You may be better off unplugging, taking a walk, and coming back with a clear mind. You may be able to make a quick decision that's reasonably close to optimal and ends the sinking of your time into this one particular thing.

Post reply on HN