Optimistic update bias holds firm: Three tests of robustness following Shah et al.
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Optimistic update bias holds firm: Three tests of robustness following Shah et al.
A diverse body of research has demonstrated that people update their beliefs to a greater extent when receiving good news compared to bad news. Recently, a paper by Shah et al. claimed that this asymmetry does not exist. Here we carefully examine the experiments and simulations described in Shah et al. and follow their analytic approach on our data sets. After correcting for confounds we identi...
متن کاملOptimistic update bias increases in older age
BACKGROUND Healthy older adults report greater well-being and life satisfaction than their younger counterparts. One potential explanation for this is enhanced optimism. We tested the influence of age on optimistic and pessimistic beliefs about the future and the associated structural neural correlates. METHOD Eighteen young and 18 healthy older adults performed a belief updating paradigm, me...
متن کاملOptimistic bias and food.
Food consumption patterns are influenced by a number of factors, including social and cultural factors. It is difficult to effect dietary change, and one possible barrier to dietary change is optimistic bias. Research indicates that individuals tend to believe that they are less likely to experience negative events, and more likely to experience positive events than their peers; this phenomenon...
متن کاملpersonal fable: optimistic bias in cigarette smokers
background several empirical studies have shown the attitude of smokers to formulate judgments based on distortion in the risk perception. this alteration is produced by the activation of the optimistic bias characterized by a set of the unrealistic beliefs compared to the outcomes of their behavior. this bias exposes individuals to adopt lifestyles potentially dangerous for their health, under...
متن کاملOn Words, Tests, and Applications: Reply to Faith et al
Faith et al. (2003) strongly criticize our paper (Posadas et al. 2001). Their criticisms are based on what they consider our “ill definitions” and “erroneous applications” of the words complementarity, endemism, and biodiversity. The objectives of our reply to Faith et al. are to demonstrate that their criticisms do not satisfy epistemological and methodological tenets and to compare some aspec...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Consciousness and Cognition
سال: 2017
ISSN: 1053-8100
DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2016.10.013