Judgement Errors
Consider the decision to forgo taking the vaccine in United States of America. After the covid vaccine rollout began in the USA they noted a number of patients developed thrombosis (blood clots) after the jab. Which caused widespread fear and the rollout was paused to do a risk-benefit analysis, to administer the vaccine. Among the many parameters tested were the number of expected cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome per 1 million vaccine doses, by sex and age group, with varying incidence and timing scenarios. They found that in females between the ages of 18-49 the risk was 7 cases, per million doses, and for men between the same ages, it was 1 case, per million doses. Yet USA saw a large number of people deciding against the vaccine.
Why did they take this decision? Even after this study which emphasizes a risk as small as .0007 percent. It seems irrational, according to lead scientists the decision is definitely detrimental to the health of everyone. Leaving aside the argument made by some about echo chambers and such, it could be, that their decision was partly due to the base rate fallacy. Base rate fallacy says, when people are provided with objective statistical information and individual stark information, they will ignore the statistical for the individual. News about people developing thrombosis is stark and scary, so, it is remembered better than the study conducted by the Centre for Disease Control. Now, there are probably several factors that contributed to vaccine hesitancy in USA. But, looking through the lens of this one study, base rate fallacy seems like a probable cause.
The nuts and bolts of how we make decisions has always been a fascinating subject in psychology, behavioral economics, and persuasion science. In a landmark paper psychologists, Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman provided major insight into the judgment calls we make under uncertainty. According to their research when faced with ambiguous or complicated situations, our decision-making becomes prone to predictable errors. These errors stem from heuristics or biases. Heuristics are common-sensical rules of thumb that allow us to make decisions quickly; for instance – if it feels good, it must be good. While Biases are systematic errors in our cognition, due to assumptions or oversimplifications. One example is – If I believe something, I find and remember only the information needed to prove my opinions.
In addition to heuristics and biases, cognitive distortions also play a role in our view of the world and therefore the choices we make. Distortions are patterns of negative thoughts that become entrenched due to repeated exposure. For instance, calling myself lazy for not meeting a deadline, then believing this label “lazy” as part of my identity.
When you start looking as I did, you will find your decisions entrenched in these errors, from some things as small as – what route do I take to the office today? do I trust this stranger I met about the fun facts he is sharing? To something bigger like- Which college should I go to? and who should I vote for? We rely on these shortcuts to make our decisions which can sometimes be harmless and sometimes very dangerous.
We are all mired in these errors, sometimes we can notice and correct them, and sometimes we will find ourselves defending our opinions till we and our opposers are blue in the face, each coming out convinced the other is wrong. We cannot eliminate or escape from these errors. In fact, they serve us in various ways, to make quick decisions. Question them yes, but with the reminder that we are human beings with limitations.
To all interested in taking these courses and reducing the influence of heuristics, biases, and distortions in your judgments. You can do so on Sages ICL with the links.
https://www.sagesleadershipacademy.com/courses/errors-in-judgments/
https://www.sagesleadershipacademy.com/courses/biases-in-decisions/
https://www.sagesleadershipacademy.com/courses/cognitive-distortions/