【正文】 viors to do the opposite (that is, to overemphasize the influence of our situation and underemphasize the influence of our own personality). ? Defensive attribution hypothesis – defensive attributions are made when individuals witness or learn of a mishap happening to another person. In these situations, attributions of responsibility to the victim or harmdoer for the mishap will depend upon the severity of the outes of the mishap and the level of personal and situational similarity between the individual and victim. More responsibility will be attributed to the harmdoer as the oute bees more severe, and as personal or situational similarity decreases. ? Dunning–Kruger effect an effect in which inpetent people fail to realise they are inpetent because they lack the skill to distinguish between petence and inpetence[61] ? Egocentric bias – occurs when people claim more responsibility for themselves for the results of a joint action than an outside observer would credit them. ? Extrinsic incentives bias – an exception to the fundamental attribution error, when people view others as having (situational) extrinsic motivations and (dispositional) intrinsic motivations for oneself ? False consensus effect – the tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with them.[62] ? Forer effect (aka Barnum effect) – the tendency to give high accuracy ratings to descriptions of their personality that supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people. For example, horoscopes. Social biases (2/3) ? Fundamental attribution error – the tendency for people to overemphasize personalitybased explanations for behaviors observed in others while underemphasizing the role and power of situational influences on the same behavior (see also actorobserver bias, group attribution error, positivity effect, and negativity effect).[63] ? Group attribution error – the tendency to assume that group decision outes reflect the preferences of group members, even when information is available that clearly suggests otherwise. ? Halo effect – the tendency for a person39。s own particular strengths.[53] ? Social desirability bias the tendency to overreport socially desirable characteristics or behaviours and underreport socially undesirable characteristics or behaviours.[54] Decisionmaking, belief and behavioral biases (8/8) ? Status quo bias – the tendency to like things to stay relatively the same (see also loss aversion, endowment effect, and system justification).[55][56] ? Stereotyping – expecting a member of a group to have certain characteristics without having actual information about that individual. ? Subadditivity effect – the tendency to estimate that the likelihood of an event is less than the sum of its (more than two) mutually exclusive ponents.[57] ? Subjective validation – perception that something is true if a subject39。s own answers to questions. For example, for certain types of questions, answers that people rate as 99% certain turn out to be wrong 40% of the time.[16][48][49][50] ? Pareidolia – a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) is perceived as significant, ., seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon, and hearing nonexistent hidden messages on records played in reverse. ? Pessimism bias – the tendency for some people, especially those suffering from depression, to overestimate the likelihood of negative things happening to them. ? Planning fallacy – the tendency to underestimate taskpletion times.[38] ? Postpurchase rationalization – the tendency to persuade oneself through rational argument that a purchase was a good value. ? Proinnovation bias – the tendency to reflect a personal bias towards an invention/innovation, while often failing to identify limitations and weaknesses or address the possibility of failure. ? Pseudocertainty effect – the tendency to make riskaverse choices if the expected oute is positive, but make riskseeking choices to avoid negative outes.[51] Decisionmaking, belief and behavioral biases (7/8) ? Reactance – the urge to do the opposite of what someone wants you to do out of a need to resist a perceived attempt to constrain your freedom of choice (see also Reverse psychology). ? Reactive devaluation – devaluing proposals that are no longer hypothetical or purportedly originated with an adversary. ? Recency bias – a cognitive bias that results from disproportionate salience attributed to recent stimuli or observations – the tendency to weigh recent events more than earlier events (see also peakend rule, recency effect). ? Recency illusion – the illusion that a phenomenon, typically a word or language usage, that one has just begun to notice is a recent innovation (see also frequency illusion). ? Restraint bias – the tendency to overestimate one39。s fallacy – the tendency to think that future probabilities are altered by past events, when in reality they are unchanged. Results from an erroneous conceptualization of the law of large numbers. For example, I39。s ability to think about it from a lessinformed perspective. ? Decoy effect – preferences change when there is a third option that is asymmetrically dominated ? Denomination effect – the tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts (. coins) rather than large amounts (. bills).[22] ? Distinction bias – the tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them simultaneously than when evaluating them separately.[23] ? Duration neglect – the neglect of the duration of an episode in determining its value Decisionmaking, belief and behavioral biases (3/8) ? Empathy gap – the tendency to underestimate the influence or strength of feelings, in either oneself o