200 Cognitive Biases

1–10: Attention, Perception & Memory Distortions

Anchoring Bias
Relying too heavily on the first piece of information (the "anchor") we receive when making decisions.

The first number we hear pulls our estimate toward it.
Attentional Bias
Tendency to pay more attention to certain stimuli while neglecting others, often because of our current emotional state or expectations.

What we care about grabs our attention; the rest fades.
Availability Heuristic
Estimating likelihood or frequency of events based on how easily examples come to mind (recent, vivid, dramatic).

Easy-to-recall events feel more likely than they are.
Baader–Meinhof Phenomenon (Frequency Illusion)
Once you notice something, you start seeing it everywhere, creating the illusion it's suddenly more frequent.

Once you notice something, it seems to be everywhere.
Change Blindness
Failing to notice even large changes in a visual scene when our attention is directed elsewhere.

Big changes go unnoticed when attention is elsewhere.
Confirmation Bias
Seeking or interpreting evidence in ways that confirm our preexisting beliefs, and ignoring disconfirming data.

We let in evidence that agrees with us and filter out the rest.
Context Effect
Cognitive perception of stimuli is influenced by the surrounding environment or context.

The same thing is perceived differently in different settings.
Contrast Effect
Perception of something is affected by comparisons to something else (e.g., an object seems bigger if it's placed near smaller objects).

Things look bigger or smaller next to something else.
Egocentric Bias
Over-focusing on our own perspective and experiences, making it difficult to see situations through others' eyes.

We see the world mostly from our own point of view.
Illusory Truth Effect
Repeated statements feel more true over time, simply because we've heard them often.

Repetition makes a statement feel true.

11–20: Judgment under Uncertainty

Ambiguity Effect
Avoiding options for which missing information makes the probability of outcomes seem 'unknown.'

We avoid options with unknown odds.
Base Rate Neglect
Ignoring general (statistical) information in favor of specifics or anecdotes when estimating probabilities.

We ignore how rare something is when we hear specifics.
Belief Bias
Judging the strength of an argument by the plausibility of its conclusion rather than how strongly it's supported.

If the conclusion feels right, we accept weak logic.
Clustering Illusion
Seeing patterns in random data (e.g., 'hot streaks' in coin tosses).

Random data has clusters; we see patterns that are not there.
Conjunction Fallacy
Judging the conjunction of events as likelier than a single general event (e.g., "Linda is a bank teller and activist" seeming likelier than just "Linda is a bank teller").

A specific story feels more likely than a general one, but cannot be.
Gambler's Fallacy
Believing that past random events affect the probabilities in the random event at hand ("I've flipped five heads, so a tail is 'due'").

Past coin flips do not change the next flip.
Hindsight Bias
After an event, believing we "knew it all along" or that it was easily predictable.

After the fact, outcomes look obvious.
Hot-Hand Fallacy
Thinking someone who experiences success (e.g., making consecutive basketball shots) has a greater chance of further success, even in purely random sequences.

A streak does not mean the next shot is more likely.
Law of the Instrument
Overreliance on a familiar tool or approach ("If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.").

With a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Survivorship Bias
Focusing on successes or survivors while overlooking those that did not survive (creating a skewed perspective).

We study the winners and miss the failures.

Actor–Observer Bias
We attribute our own actions to external circumstances, but others' actions to their character or disposition.

I blame my situation; I blame your character.
Authority Bias
Being overly influenced by authority figures or experts, sometimes beyond rational justification.

We give extra weight to people with authority.
Bandwagon Effect (Social Proof)
Doing or believing things just because many other people do.

We adopt beliefs because many others do.
Bystander Effect
In a group, individuals are less likely to help someone in distress because they assume someone else will.

The more people watching, the less anyone helps.
Collective Effort Model
People in groups often reduce individual effort if they believe their contributions aren't personally critical.

People put in less effort when it is not individually visible.
False Consensus Effect
Overestimating how much other people share our own attitudes and behaviors.

We assume others share our views.
Illusion of Transparency
Tendency to overestimate others' ability to know our emotional states or intentions.

We think others can read our feelings more than they can.
Ingroup Bias
Showing preferential treatment and judgments toward members of one's own group over outsiders.

We favor people in our own group.
Outgroup Homogeneity Effect
Seeing members of other groups as more similar to each other than they really are.

"They are all alike; we are all different."
Social Comparison Bias
Disliking or feeling competitive with someone we perceive as "better" or more talented in some area we care about.

We dislike people who outshine us.

31–40: Motivation & Self-Perception

Dunning–Kruger Effect
Incompetent individuals overestimate their skill; experts may underestimate their relative competence.

Beginners overestimate; experts know how much they do not know.
Effort Justification
Placing greater value on outcomes that required more work, even if they aren't inherently better.

We value things more when they cost us effort.
Extrinsic Incentive Error
Believing others are more motivated by money or external rewards than they actually are—underestimating intrinsic motivations.

We think others are motivated by money; ourselves by meaning.
IKEA Effect
People value something they partially created more than a similar product they didn't help make.

We overvalue things we built ourselves.
Illusion of Control
Overestimating one's influence over external events, especially in random outcomes.

We think we control outcomes that are really chance.
Moral Licensing
After doing something morally good, feeling "licensed" to act in a self-indulgent or less moral way.

A good deed makes us feel licensed to do a bad one.
Planning Fallacy
Underestimating the time, costs, and risks of future actions, often leading to missed deadlines or budget overruns.

Tasks take longer than we plan.
Projection Bias
Assuming that our current preferences or values will remain constant in the future.

We assume our future self will feel like we do now.
Self-Serving Bias
Attributing successes to our own skill, and failures to external factors.

Successes are mine; failures are bad luck.
Sunk Cost Fallacy
Continuing a behavior or endeavor because of previously invested resources (time, money) rather than cutting losses.

We keep investing because of what we already spent.

41–50: Emotional & Affective Biases

Affect Heuristic
Making decisions based on our emotions ("gut feeling") rather than objective evidence.

How we feel about something colors how risky we think it is.
Empathy Gap
Underestimating the influence of emotional and visceral states on our behavior when we're not currently experiencing them.

In a calm state, we underestimate how hot states drive us.
Framing Effect
Being influenced by how information is presented (gain vs. loss framing) rather than just the facts themselves.

The same option feels different as a gain or a loss.
Hedonic Adaptation
Tendency to quickly return to a relatively stable level of happiness despite major positive or negative events.

We get used to good and bad changes and return to baseline.
Negativity Bias
Giving more weight to negative experiences or information than positive ones of equal intensity.

Bad things weigh more than equally good things.
Pessimism Bias
Overestimating the likelihood of negative outcomes, relative to probabilities.

We expect things to go worse than they likely will.
Positivity Bias (Optimism Bias)
Overestimating the likelihood of positive outcomes, relative to probabilities.

We expect things to go better than they likely will.
Priming
Exposure to a stimulus influences responses to subsequent stimuli, often unconsciously.

Earlier exposure shapes later reactions without our noticing.
Reactive Devaluation
Devaluing proposals or ideas merely because they originate from an adversary or disliked source.

An offer seems worse just because the other side made it.
Rosy Retrospection
Remembering past events as more positive than they actually were.

We remember the past as better than it was.

51–60: Decision & Behavior Traps

Choice-Supportive Bias
Remembering chosen options as better than they really were, and rejected options as worse.

After choosing, we remember our choice as better.
Decoy Effect
Preferences for options change when a third, asymmetrically dominated option is introduced.

A worse third option makes one of the others look better.
Distinction Bias
Viewing two options as more dissimilar when simultaneously evaluating them than when separately evaluating them.

Side by side, small differences seem bigger than they feel in life.
Endowment Effect
Placing higher value on things we own simply because we own them.

We value what we own more than the same thing we do not own.
Fear of Missing Out (FOMO)
Anxiety that not experiencing something (a trend or event) will lead to regret or lost opportunities.

We fear others are having experiences we are missing.
Hyperbolic Discounting
Preferring smaller, sooner rewards to larger, later rewards, irrationally undervaluing future gains.

We prefer smaller rewards now over bigger ones later.
Irrational Escalation
Continuing a decision even when rational analysis suggests a better alternative, often due to prior investment.

We keep raising the stakes to justify past choices.
Menu Dependence
Choices depend on how options are grouped or compared, not just on their absolute value.

What is on the menu shapes what we pick.
Regret Aversion
Avoiding taking actions for fear that whatever happens, we'll regret making the "wrong" choice.

We avoid choices we might regret, even good ones.
Status Quo Bias
Preferring things to stay the same by doing nothing or by sticking with a previous decision.

We prefer things to stay as they are.

61–70: Communication & Language Effects

Authority Suggestion Effect
The way language from an authority figure can override individual judgment (akin to Authority Bias).

A suggestion from an authority shapes what we believe.
Euphemism Treadmill
New, mild terms for a concept eventually take on the negative connotations of the old term.

Polite words for bad things eventually sound bad too.
Labeling Effect
Assigning a label to a person or thing influences how we perceive them or it afterward.

A label changes how we see a person or thing.
Name Letter Effect
People prefer letters in their own name and will make decisions biased toward them (e.g., brand names, locations).

We like letters in our own name more.
Rhyme-as-Reason Effect
Rhyming statements seem more truthful (e.g., "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit").

Rhyming phrases feel more true.
Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis (Linguistic Relativity)
The language we use shapes how we think and perceive reality.

The language we speak shapes how we think.
Semantic Priming
Words we read or hear can prime us to interpret subsequent information in aligned ways.

Hearing one word makes related words come faster.
Weasel Words
The strategic use of vague or ambiguous language to create an impression without making a firm statement.

Vague words sound meaningful but promise nothing.
Wording Effect
The specific phrasing in surveys or polls can influence participants' responses.

How a question is worded changes the answer.
Zeigarnik Effect
People remember uncompleted or interrupted tasks better than completed ones—can be language- or context-driven.

Unfinished tasks stick in memory more than finished ones.

Cheerleader Effect
Individuals appear more attractive in a group than they do alone.

People look more attractive in a group than alone.
Displacement of Conflict
Redirecting conflict from a powerful target to a safer or more convenient one.

Anger gets redirected at a safer target.
Double Standard
Judging the same action differently depending on who performs it or other group identifiers.

We judge others more harshly than ourselves for the same act.
Ethnocentrism
Evaluating other cultures or groups according to the standards of one's own culture, often with a sense of superiority.

We judge other cultures by our own standards.
Group Attribution Error
Believing that group members' characteristics and preferences are all related or individually similar.

We assume one member represents the whole group.
Halo Effect
Overall positive impression of a person (or brand) colors our judgments about their other traits or products.

One good trait makes us assume others.
Horns Effect (Reverse Halo)
Negative initial impression spills over into judgments about other aspects of a person or thing.

One bad trait makes us assume others.
Identifiable Victim Effect
We respond more strongly to specific individuals in crisis than to large, abstract groups.

One named person moves us more than thousands.
Social Desirability Bias
Answering questions or behaving in ways that are viewed favorably by others, rather than truthfully.

We present ourselves the way others want to see us.
Spiral of Silence
Individuals may stay silent if they believe their views are in the minority, thereby reinforcing that perceived majority view.

People stay quiet when they think their view is unpopular.

81–90: Memory, Recall, & Information Processing

Cryptomnesia
Mistaking a memory for a novel idea ("unconscious plagiarism").

We mistake a forgotten memory for a new idea.
Google Effect (Digital Amnesia)
Forgetting information that can easily be looked up online.

We forget what we know we can look up.
Illusory Correlation
Perceiving a relationship between variables (often people, events, or behaviors) even when no such relationship exists.

We see a link between things that are unrelated.
Leveling and Sharpening
When recounting memories, we drop details that seem irrelevant (leveling) but focus heavily on unusual details (sharpening).

Retold stories lose details and sharpen others.
Memory Inhibition
Recall of certain details is inhibited by exposure to related but misleading or distracting information.

Remembering some things makes us forget related ones.
Misattribution of Memory
Attributing a memory to the wrong source or confusing an imagined event with reality.

We remember the content but not where it came from.
Misinformation Effect
Post-event information can distort recall of the original event (especially in eyewitness testimony).

Information after an event changes our memory of it.
Peak–End Rule
We judge experiences largely based on how they felt at their peak (best or worst) and how they ended.

We remember the peak and the end, not the average.
Recall Bias
Systematic errors in memory due to personal beliefs, time passage, or emotional factors.

Memories are distorted by what happened since.
Telescoping Effect
Events from the past seem more recent than they are (forward telescoping) or more distant (backward telescoping).

Recent events feel older; old events feel more recent.

91–100: Moral, Ethical, & Political Biases

Just-World Hypothesis
Belief that the world is fair; people get what they deserve, and deserve what they get.

We assume people get what they deserve.
Outrage Bias
Tendency to become disproportionately angry or outraged at minor offenses, especially online.

Outrage spreads faster than nuance.
System Justification
Defending and rationalizing the status quo, even at personal or collective cost.

We defend the existing system, even when it harms us.
Tyranny of Small Decisions
Many small, individually rational decisions can lead to undesirable collective outcomes.

Many small choices add up to an outcome nobody chose.
Ultimate Attribution Error
Attributing negative outgroup behavior to dispositional causes while excusing the same behavior by ingroup members as situational.

Their group’s bad acts are character; ours are circumstance.
Worse-Than-Average Effect
Believing we are worse than average at tasks we're not confident in (opposite of the better-than-average effect).

At hard tasks, we think we are worse than average.
Zero-Sum Bias
Viewing situations as zero-sum (one side's gain is another's loss) even if they're not.

We assume one side’s gain is the other’s loss.
Decency Gap
Demanding higher moral standards from opponents while making excuses for lapses in one's own side.

We expect others to be less decent than they are.
Binding Bias
Overvaluing group cohesion or loyalty to the extent that it overrides personal moral judgments.

Early commitments bind later moral choices.
Apologies as Admission
In some cultures or contexts, apologizing is perceived as admission of guilt, discouraging genuine remorse or relationship repair.

We avoid apologizing because it feels like admitting guilt.

101–110: Time, Planning & Future-Oriented Biases

Temporal Discounting
Valuing immediate rewards disproportionately more than future rewards (similar to Hyperbolic Discounting).

Future rewards feel smaller the further away they are.
Present Bias
Focusing on immediate wants or needs at the expense of long-term goals.

Now beats later, even when later is better.
Ziegarnik–Lewin Effect
Unfinished goals or tasks dominate our attention, but finishing them can abruptly reduce motivation.

Interrupted tasks keep pulling at our mind.
Future Blindness
Underestimating potential changes or disruptions that might happen over time, leading to overconfidence.

We fail to imagine how different the future will be.
Expectation Escalation
Upwardly adjusting what we consider "normal" or "adequate" once a higher standard is reached.

Each improvement raises what we expect next.
Procrastination
Delaying tasks despite expecting to be worse off for the delay; often linked to anxiety and poor impulse control.

We put off tasks even when we know it costs us.
Time-Saving Bias
Overestimating the time saved by faster tasks and underestimating time saved by slower tasks.

We overestimate time saved by going faster from a high speed.
Punctuality Fallacy
Assuming that success depends on perfect timing, neglecting other critical factors such as quality or synergy.

We assume we will be on time despite past lateness.
Reminiscence Bump
People tend to recall many memories from adolescence and early adulthood because of that period's significance.

We remember our teens and twenties the most.
Transient Bias
Over-focusing on current conditions and forgetting that life circumstances are fluid.

We overweight how we feel right now.

111–120: Risk Assessment & Management

Action Bias
Preference for action over inaction, even if inaction would produce a better outcome.

We prefer doing something over doing nothing, even when worse.
Black Swan Blindness
Ignoring or downplaying low-probability, high-impact events until after they occur.

We ignore rare, extreme events until they happen.
Dread Risk
Overestimating the risk of a dramatic, publicized event (plane crash, terrorism) vs. more likely yet mundane risks (car accidents).

We fear dramatic risks more than common ones.
Zero-Risk Bias
Prefer reducing a small risk to zero over larger overall risk reductions elsewhere.

We overpay to remove a small risk entirely.
Exponential Growth Bias
Underestimating how quickly exponential processes grow (e.g., compound interest, viral spread).

We expect linear growth when it is exponential.
House-Money Effect
Taking more risks with money or resources perceived as "house money" (winnings or windfalls).

We gamble more freely with money we just won.
Sudden-Death Aversion
Avoiding high-risk/high-reward "sudden-death" scenarios, even when they could maximize chances of success.

We avoid sudden-death risks more than gradual ones.
Toxic Handling
One individual in a group handles all negativity and stress, skewing risk perceptions for everyone else.

We avoid things that touched something "bad", even if harmless.
Generalization of Failure
After one failure, seeing all risk-taking as more likely to fail.

One failure makes us expect failure everywhere.
Ambiguity Aversion
Preferring known probabilities over unknown probabilities, even if the unknown could be advantageous.

We prefer known risks over unknown ones.

121–130: Cultural, Ideological & Media-Driven Biases

Cultural Bias
Interpreting and judging phenomena in terms particular to one's own culture.

Our culture sets the default lens.
Denomination Effect
Spending more freely with smaller currency denominations or digital credits than large bills.

We spend small bills more freely than large ones.
Herding
Copying the masses' behavior, often driven by media, social networks, or cultural norms.

Investors and people follow the herd.
Groupthink
Desire for group cohesion leads to suppressing dissenting viewpoints and critical thinking.

The group silences doubts to agree.
Illusory Superiority (Better-Than-Average Effect)
Overestimating our own qualities and abilities relative to others.

Most of us rate ourselves above average, which can’t all be true.
Media Equation
People tend to treat media (like computers or TV) as if they were real people, applying social rules to them.

We treat computers and media like people.
Meme Theory (Thought Contagion)
Ideas spread like viruses, replicating through social and cultural transmission.

Ideas spread like contagions.
Normalization of Deviance
Gradual process by which unacceptable practices or standards become acceptable over time.

Small deviations become normal until disaster.
Punctuated Equilibrium in Culture
Long periods of cultural stability followed by sudden shifts, often triggered by external events.

Culture changes in sudden jumps, not steadily.
Socio-Centric Thinking
Viewing issues primarily through the lens of one's social group or ideology, ignoring broader perspectives.

We treat our society as the center of the world.

131–140: Mental Shortcuts & Heuristics

Affect Heuristic
Quick judgments based on emotional reactions rather than factual analysis (overlaps with "Affect Bias").

Feelings stand in for analysis.
Availability Cascade
Self-reinforcing process where a collective belief gains plausibility through repeated public discussion.

Repeated public claims become accepted truth.
Cognitive Ease
Preferencing ideas that are easy to process or recall over those that require more mental effort.

Easy to process feels true and good.
Fluency Heuristic
If one option is processed more fluently (faster, more familiar), we judge it to be superior.

Faster to recognize feels more valuable.
Forer Effect (Barnum Effect)
Seeing vague, general personality descriptions as uniquely applicable to ourselves.

Vague statements feel personally accurate.
Length Implication Heuristic
Longer messages or lists can appear more credible simply because they are more detailed.

Longer answers seem more correct.
Mere Exposure Effect
People develop a preference for things simply because they're familiar.

We like things more the more we see them.
Occam's Razor Misapplication
Over-simplifying solutions or dismissing complex truth by appealing to "the simplest explanation."

The simplest answer is not always right.
Processing Difficulty Effect
Occasionally, harder-to-read or decipher text can lead to better recall or deeper processing (counterintuitive effect).

Hard-to-read text is remembered better.
Scarcity Heuristic
Perceiving things as more valuable if they are scarce or limited.

Scarce things seem more valuable.

141–150: Errors in Explanation & Causality

Anthropomorphism
Attributing human traits or intentions to non-human entities or events.

We give human traits to non-human things.
Circular Reasoning
Using the conclusion as a premise without offering real evidence.

The conclusion is used as the evidence.
Correlation vs. Causation Error
Mistaking correlation for causation or failing to consider third variables or reverse causation.

Two things moving together does not mean one causes the other.
Curse of Knowledge
Once we know something, we find it hard to imagine not knowing it—making it difficult to teach or explain.

Experts forget what it is like not to know.
Distorted Definition of Randomness
Expecting random sequences to look more orderly or more 'patterned' than they truly are.

We think random should look evenly spread.
Essentialism
Believing that certain things have an unchanging 'essence' that dictates how they will behave or be perceived.

We think categories have a fixed hidden essence.
Focusing Effect
Overemphasizing a single factor at the expense of others when explaining outcomes.

We overweight one detail when predicting happiness.
Fundamental Attribution Error
Attributing others' behavior too much to personality and not enough to context—(Actor–Observer Bias is a related phenomenon).

We blame character and ignore circumstances.
Hasty Generalization
Drawing a broad conclusion from a tiny sample.

A few cases become a general rule.
Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
Assuming that because one thing happened after another, it was caused by the other ("after this, therefore because of this").

After it does not mean because of it.

151–160: Problem-Solving & Strategy Pitfalls

Bike-Shedding
Spending disproportionate time on trivial issues while neglecting more complex, important ones.

We argue about trivial things and rush the big ones.
Blaming the Victim
Finding reasons why the victim of a misfortune is responsible, often to preserve a sense of justice.

We blame victims to keep believing the world is fair.
Boundary Effect
Overlooking how changes near boundary conditions (limits) can invalidate certain assumptions or methods.

Arbitrary cutoffs feel meaningful.
Broken Window Theory (misused cognitively)
Extrapolating from small signs of disorder that major problems must exist or will develop if not corrected.

Small signs of disorder are treated as proof of bigger problems.
Cobra Effect
Solutions that exacerbate the problem they're trying to solve due to misguided incentives.

A fix creates incentives that make the problem worse.
Defensive Decision-Making
Choosing the option that protects against the worst outcome for oneself, rather than aiming for the best overall outcome.

We choose the safest option for us, not the best one.
Escalation of Commitment
Similar to the Sunk Cost Fallacy—continuing on a failing path to justify resources already spent.

We keep committing because we already committed.
Goal Dilution
When multiple goals are pursued simultaneously, motivation and effectiveness toward each goal can be diluted.

More goals means less progress on each.
Parkinson's Law of Triviality
Similar to Bike-Shedding—time spent on an issue is inversely proportional to its actual importance.

Simple topics get the most debate.
Tragedy of the Commons
Individuals, acting independently in self-interest, can deplete shared resources, harming everyone in the long run.

Shared resources get overused when each acts alone.

161–170: Economic & Market Biases

Bubble Thinking
Collective psychological phenomenon where asset prices rise far above fundamental value, driven by group euphoria.

Inside a bubble, it feels like prices will rise forever.
Diminishing Sensitivity
Gains or losses have diminishing psychological impact as their absolute amount grows (related to Prospect Theory).

Each extra dollar feels like less.
Disposition Effect
Tendency to sell assets that have increased in value while holding assets that have dropped in value, seeking to avoid loss realization.

We sell winners too soon and hold losers too long.
End of History Illusion
Underestimating how much our preferences and values will change in the future.

We think we have changed a lot but will not change much more.
Hedonic Framing
Splitting gains and combining losses to maximize perceived outcomes (e.g., listing multiple benefits separately, grouping costs together).

We bundle or split gains and losses to feel better.
Money Illusion
Focusing on nominal dollar amounts rather than real purchasing power (ignoring inflation or deflation).

We think in nominal dollars, not real value.
Prospect Theory (Loss Aversion)
We feel the pain of losses more strongly than the pleasure of equivalent gains.

Losses hurt about twice as much as equal gains feel good.
Reference Price Effect
A perceived "fair" or "normal" price serves as a reference; deviations feel like gains or losses.

We judge a price by a reference point.
Restraint Bias
Overestimating our capacity to resist temptation, which can lead to exposing ourselves to unnecessary risks.

We overestimate our ability to resist temptation.
Weber–Fechner Law
Perceived change in a stimulus is proportional to the initial intensity of that stimulus (applies to money, weight, brightness, etc.).

We notice changes relative to size, not absolute amounts.

171–180: Technology, Tools & Environment Biases

Automation Bias
Over-relying on automated systems (algorithms, software) even when they are flawed or incomplete.

We trust automated systems over our own judgment.
Digital Divide Fallacy
Ignoring that not all user bases have equal technological access or skill, skewing usage or adoption data.

Having access is not the same as being able to use it well.
Feature Creep
Overcomplicating products or systems by adding unnecessary features (can confuse or alienate users).

Each added feature makes the product harder to use.
Generational Bias
Assuming technological or cultural changes are inferior or superior based solely on generational identity.

We judge other generations by our own.
Not-Invented-Here Syndrome
Avoiding or undervaluing external ideas/technologies because they weren't developed in-house.

We reject ideas because we did not invent them.
Online Disinhibition Effect
People say or do things online they wouldn't do face to face, often due to perceived anonymity.

People act differently online than in person.
Overconfidence in Tools
Trusting technology's readouts or numeric data without cross-checking or common sense.

Fancy tools make us overconfident.
Platform Effect
Believing a certain platform's popularity or structure implies inherent superiority or inevitability.

The platform shapes the message.
Seductive Detail Effect
Irrelevant but interesting features or data can distract from the core purpose, reducing learning or clarity.

Interesting extras distract from the core message.
Technological Lock-In
Once a technology is adopted widely, switching becomes expensive or complicated, even if superior alternatives exist.

Early choices lock us in, even when better options appear.

181–190: Ethics, Morality & Relationship to Others

Altruism Bias
Overestimating the benevolence of our own motives, underestimating others' cynicism or self-interest.

We see ourselves as more generous than we act.
Defensive Attribution
Explaining others' misfortunes by blaming them for the situation, to protect our own sense of invulnerability.

We blame victims more when we feel similar to them.
Empathy Gap in Morality
Difficulty in understanding the moral choices of people in drastically different emotional states or contexts.

We underestimate how others feel in moral situations.
Ethical Fading
Situations in which the moral aspects of a decision are overlooked or 'faded out' under pressure.

Ethics fade from view when decisions feel technical.
Licensing Effect in Ethics
Doing one 'good deed' can make people feel they have a moral license to do something not-so-good afterward.

Past good behavior licenses future bad behavior.
Moral Credential Effect
Accumulating "moral credits" from past good deeds to rationalize or excuse future questionable actions.

Proving we are fair makes us feel free to be unfair.
Prejudice Blindness
Underestimating the extent of one's own biases or discriminatory behavior.

We do not see our own prejudice.
Psychological Numbing
Diminished emotional response when facing large-scale problems (e.g., statistics on famine or disasters).

More victims make us feel less, not more.
Self-Righteousness Bias
Viewing one's own moral stance as inherently superior, while dismissing legitimate points of others.

We believe we are morally superior.
Slippery Slope
Fearing that a small first step will lead to a chain of related (and often extreme) events, though sometimes the chain is improbable.

We assume one step will lead to the worst outcome.

191–200: Meta-Biases & Self-Reflection

Blind-Spot Bias
Recognizing the impact of biases in others' judgments while failing to see the impact of biases on one's own judgments.

We see biases in others but not ourselves.
Bias Blindness in Groups
Groups believe they are less biased than other groups, ignoring their own group-level blind spots.

Groups miss biases that individuals would catch.
Cynicism Bias
Overestimating selfishness or malicious intent in others, ignoring the possibility of honest mistakes or benign motives.

We assume others act from selfish motives.
Double-Counting Fallacy
Mistaking two pieces of evidence that are not truly independent as separate confirmations of a hypothesis.

Counting the same evidence twice inflates confidence.
Falsification Neglect
Not actively looking for ways to prove our beliefs wrong, contrary to the scientific ideal of falsification.

We seek evidence that agrees and skip tests that could disprove.
Gradual Decay of Bias Awareness
Even if we learn about biases, over time, we revert to old patterns unless we continuously practice reflection.

Awareness of our biases fades over time.
Hindsight Overcorrection
Sometimes, trying to avoid hindsight bias makes us overcorrect and assume we knew less than we did.

Correcting for hindsight, we swing too far the other way.
Instrumental Rationalization
Using superficial "rational" arguments to justify a pre-chosen conclusion, rather than letting logic guide the conclusion.

We justify the means because of the goal.
Noble Cause Corruption
Rationalizing unethical behavior in the name of a "greater good," ignoring immediate harm.

Believing in a noble cause can justify bad methods.
Third-Person Effect
Believing that media or biases affect others more than they affect us, underestimating our own susceptibility.

We think media influences others more than us.

Loading comments...

200 Cognitive Biases

200 Cognitive Biases

1–10: Attention, Perception & Memory Distortions

11–20: Judgment under Uncertainty

21–30: Social & Group Dynamics

31–40: Motivation & Self-Perception

41–50: Emotional & Affective Biases

51–60: Decision & Behavior Traps

61–70: Communication & Language Effects

71–80: Social Interaction & Identity

81–90: Memory, Recall, & Information Processing

91–100: Moral, Ethical, & Political Biases

101–110: Time, Planning & Future-Oriented Biases

111–120: Risk Assessment & Management

121–130: Cultural, Ideological & Media-Driven Biases

131–140: Mental Shortcuts & Heuristics

141–150: Errors in Explanation & Causality

151–160: Problem-Solving & Strategy Pitfalls

161–170: Economic & Market Biases

171–180: Technology, Tools & Environment Biases

181–190: Ethics, Morality & Relationship to Others

191–200: Meta-Biases & Self-Reflection