People who jump to conclusions show other kinds of thinking errors • Hacker News Board

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

#21

Post by nsxwolf » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:54 PM UTC

alistairSH wrote: post #18

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.

Last time we bought a car we knew what we wanted and what it should cost, but had to visit multiple dealers because they kept lying about availability, prices, etc.

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

#22

Post by alistairSH » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 12:57 PM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #16

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.

True for 90% of medical issues. The problem is those other 10% - will the GP you chose be able to handle them? Or, perhaps more critically, bow-out, and refer you when they cannot?

It's a tough problem to solve - wait time is certainly part of the solution, but so is bedside manner, the doctor's willingness to punt and refer you elsewhere for unique problems outside their area, price, location, and a hundred other things.

And that doesn't even address picking a specialist. You break your hand, how do you pick a hand surgeon on short notice? The cost of picking the worst guy could be high, but you know what they call the guy who graduated last in his class? Doctor.

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

#23

Post by alistairSH » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:00 PM UTC

RandomLensman wrote: post #12

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 spe…

I'd wager that's part of the puzzle - lacking information, you jump to the conclusion that 99% are single color in a given lake. But, "most" could be 51% or anywhere in between.

How many fish do you need to catch to be relatively confident you've covered the 51% possibility? 2-3? 9-10? I'm sure there's a mathematic solution, but my gut tells me I'd want more than 2-3. Maybe as many as 10 or 20, depending on how frequently fish are caught.

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

#24

Post by Consultant32452 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:07 PM UTC

alistairSH wrote: post #22

Consultant32452 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

True for 90% of medical issues. The problem is those other 10% - will the GP you chose be able to handle them? Or, perhaps more critically, bow-out, and refer you when they cannot? It's a tough problem to solve - wait time is certainly part of the solution, but so is bedside manner, the doctor's willingness to punt and refer you elsewhere for unique problems outside their area, price, location, and a hundred other th…

I'm a little spectrumy so I often forget how important emotional support/bedside manner is to many people. I see my doctor as an automaton who I feed problems to and he feeds me solutions.

Even something like a broken bone falls under the category of "normal" health issue. It happens all the time. You will be fine with a perfectly mediocre doctor dealing with your broken bone.

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

#25

Post by Loughla » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:10 PM UTC

medstrom wrote: post #11

IanSanders wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's a tip that was valid before internet pricing became a thing. Essentially, the price you see online is the price you pay now, because dealers have (mostly, and FINALLY) learned that if I don't see it at a good price, I'm not interested. Some still have the 'come in to see the price' and they don't move the volume of those with robust internet sales teams [source here that i don't have. Anyone have one?]

Now the extra costs come in on accessories, service plans, and warranties, whereas they used to make more profit on the actual sales.

We just bought a vehicle in March, and it was the best, least friction experience buying a car. I found the package I wanted, I found the color I wanted, I evaluated the price against online sources such as KBB, truecar, and those types of things, then I contacted the dealer who had it in stock online and set a date to come buy it. They didn't try any weird old-timey car sales tactics, because the price is the price. They offered extras, add-ons, the warranties, and service packages, with clear prices, and were respectful when I declined.

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

#26

Post by anovikov » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:13 PM UTC

Haha i am a person who jumps to conclusions, and i actually bought my most recent car after 1.5 visits to dealerships (i tried BMW but the dealer was rude to me so i left before i actually found out anything, and went straight to Volvo and i am super happy with my new S60). So i think i am qualified for an opinion :D

One thing that hits me is conspiracy theories. Although i am not buying into any of the currently circulating ones (covid deliberately invented by Chinese, mind control chips and 5G, faked Moon landings), i understand people who do. Actually, hiding link between cell phones and cancer was a very viable idea through ~mid-2000s when cell phones became just way too numerous so if the link was true, it would become impossible to hide (and this is about the time when i heard of this theory a lot, then it gradually subsided, i haven't really heard of it in any serious manner in the last 10 years). After all, we know that they quite deliberately denied addictiveness of tobacco? They denied harm from leaded gasoline and lead water pipes? There is so much nasty crap authorities concealed or actively denied because they made money on it. They still deny how dangerous and addictive sugar is. Many of them still deny global warming.

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

#27

Post by david422 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:15 PM UTC

version_five wrote: post #6

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…

Yeah the car example did not resonate with me either. (a) I hate car shopping, in particular any interactions with the salespeople (b) I have the internet (c) I don't believe there is some special deal I can unlock, I think that is a mistaken belief that many dealers like people to hold so they can make them feel like their getting them a special deal, when in reality the "negotiations" are just a bit of theatre (d)…

c) - haha, that is probably true. I have a relative that just bought a new car. After a little negotiation, got a couple thousand (?) knocked off the price of like a $35k car. "Great deal" - but I'm pretty sure the dealer is prepared to offer a price that is only as low as a great deal for the dealer as well.

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

#28

Post by vincentmarle » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:16 PM UTC

wongarsu wrote: post #8

cma wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

People don't value money linearly. You wouldn't pay an additional $10 for a cup of filter coffee, but most people wouldn't think twice about paying an additional $10 for a car. But it's the same amount of money, so surely that's irrational in that situation. In other situations it makes complete sense. If you have $1M, losing $10 isn't nearly as big a deal as when those $10 were all you had. If you try to apply game…

Not disagreeing with your conclusion but there’s a difference between spending $10 more for 3 years of utility vs $10 more for 3 minutes of utility.

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

#29

Post by alistairSH » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:19 PM UTC

Consultant32452 wrote: post #24

alistairSH wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True for 90% of medical issues. The problem is those other 10% - will the GP you chose be able to handle them? Or, perhaps more critically, bow-out, and refer you when they cannot? It's a tough problem to solve - wait time is certainly part of the solution, but so is bedside manner, the doctor's willingness to punt and refer you elsewhere for unique problems outside their area, price, location, and a hundred other th…

I'm a little spectrumy so I often forget how important emotional support/bedside manner is to many people. I see my doctor as an automaton who I feed problems to and he feeds me solutions. Even something like a broken bone falls under the category of "normal" health issue. It happens all the time. You will be fine with a perfectly mediocre doctor dealing with your broken bone.

My wife broke her hand a few years ago, it required surgery to repair. It was not a "normal" issue. I suppose it could be considered normal for a hand specialist, but when thumb mobility could be permanently compromised, you really don't want to pick the wrong surgeon.

As for bedside manner, I'm mostly with you - it's largely irrelevant. For me, it's more of a minimum acceptable level - as long as they're above it, all is good.

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

#30

Post by mensetmanusman » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:19 PM UTC

Conspiracy theories are a manifestation of skepticism.

One insight recently in the political theater is to determine what your audience is skeptical of. Everyone is skeptical of something, and these biases, when pinpointed, can be illuminating.

On any topic you can split skepticism into groups. Are you more skeptical of government? The pharmaceutical industry? Corporations? Which?