This article contains my summary notes for “Debiasing” by Richard Larrick (2004), a chapter from the Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making. ((Larrick, R. P. (2004). Debiasing. In D. J. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds.), Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, (pp. 316–337). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Retrieved from here.))
What You Need to Know (Summary of My Notes)
Human thinking is flawed—there is a gap between how well we think and how well we want to think. How to we bridge this gap? One option is through the act of debiasing.
The very “shape” of our brains causes us to be biased—to make systematic thinking mistakes. There is a central and neglected question in current biases and debiasing literature: “How do you get people to adopt better decision strategies?” Debiasing is the art of reducing biases in human thinking, by finding a variety of useful bias-reducing techniques, and getting us to use them. Larrick groups these debiasing techniques into three categories: motivational, cognitive, and technological strategies.
What has been tried, and how well did it work? Note that the focus here is on personal strategies that we as individuals can implement ourselves; not strategies that, for example, rely on external manipulations of our environment.
Motivational strategies: Incentives aren’t very useful; they often create a “lost pilot” effect: “I don’t know where I’m going, but I’m making good time!” That is, incentives make you want to work hard, but this is useless without having the right tools or direction. Social accountability is a more promising form of motivation, but has its own problems. If we know what others expect us to decide, we may be biased towards that outcome. If we know what process others expect us to use, we may be biased towards that process.
Cognitive strategies: Teaching people to “consider the opposite” has been very successful at improving decision making. Training in specific thinking rules is also promising, though needs further study.
Technological strategies: Group decision making can work, but you really have to do it right. Decision-assisting software might help, but it needs more research.
There are a lot of challenges to debiasing. We naturally resist change: “You mean I’ve been doing it wrong for the last 50 years?” The benefits of debiasing are often unclear, difficult to measure, and challenging to implement. The techniques that work best are usually simple, easy, domain-specific (applicable to very specific problems), and bottom-up (“grown” in the individual, not mere instructions we are commanded to obey).
The research is promising, but little is known with confidence in the scientific literature. There are many things yet to do, many areas to explore, and many debiasing techniques to study further.
My Notes
There is a big gap between how we actually think and how we would ideally think. ((A “normative-descriptive” gap.))
The obvious question then follows: How can we close this gap? What can we do to improve our thinking? [click here to keep reading…]