REFF - Faculty of Philosophy Repository
University of Belgrade - Faculty of Philosophy
    • English
    • Српски
    • Српски (Serbia)
  • English 
    • English
    • Serbian (Cyrillic)
    • Serbian (Latin)
  • Login
View Item 
  •   REFF
  • Psihologija / Psychology
  • Radovi istraživača / Researcher's publications - Odeljenje za psihologiju
  • View Item
  •   REFF
  • Psihologija / Psychology
  • Radovi istraživača / Researcher's publications - Odeljenje za psihologiju
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Individual differences in cognitive biases: Evidence against one-factor theory of rationality

No Thumbnail
Authors
Teovanović, Predrag
Knežević, Goran
Stankov, Lazar
Article (Published version)
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
In this paper we seek to gain an improved understanding of the structure of cognitive biases and their relationship with measures of intelligence and relevant non-cognitive constructs. We report on the outcomes of a study based on a heterogeneous set of seven cognitive biases - anchoring effect, belief bias, overconfidence bias, hindsight bias, base rate neglect, outcome bias and sunk cost effect. New scales for the assessment of these biases were administered to 243 undergraduate students along with measures of fluid (Gf) and crystallized (Gc) intelligence, a Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), Openness/Intellect (O/I) scale and Need for Cognition (NFC) scale. The expected experimental results were confirmed - i.e., each normatively irrelevant variable significantly influenced participants' responses. Also, with the exception of hindsight bias, all cognitive biases showed satisfactory reliability estimates (alpha s gt .70). However, correlations among the cognitive bias measures were l...ow (rs lt .20). Although exploratory factor analysis produced two factors, their robustness was doubtful. Cognitive bias measures were also relatively independent (rs lt .25) from the Gf, Gc, CRT, O/I and NFC and they define separate latent factors. This pattern of results suggests that a major part of the reliable variance of cognitive bias tasks is unique, and implies that a one-factor model of rational behavior is not plausible.

Keywords:
Rationality / Judgment and decision making / Intelligence / Factor analysis / Cognitive biases
Source:
Intelligence, 2015, 50, 75-86
Publisher:
  • Elsevier Science Inc, New York
Funding / projects:
  • Identification, measurement and development of the cognitive and emotional competences important for a Europe-oriented society (RS-179018)

DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2015.02.008

ISSN: 0160-2896

WoS: 000356766800008

Scopus: 2-s2.0-84924340166
[ Google Scholar ]
45
35
URI
http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1986
Collections
  • Radovi istraživača / Researcher's publications - Odeljenje za psihologiju
Institution/Community
Psihologija / Psychology
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Teovanović, Predrag
AU  - Knežević, Goran
AU  - Stankov, Lazar
PY  - 2015
UR  - http://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/1986
AB  - In this paper we seek to gain an improved understanding of the structure of cognitive biases and their relationship with measures of intelligence and relevant non-cognitive constructs. We report on the outcomes of a study based on a heterogeneous set of seven cognitive biases - anchoring effect, belief bias, overconfidence bias, hindsight bias, base rate neglect, outcome bias and sunk cost effect. New scales for the assessment of these biases were administered to 243 undergraduate students along with measures of fluid (Gf) and crystallized (Gc) intelligence, a Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), Openness/Intellect (O/I) scale and Need for Cognition (NFC) scale. The expected experimental results were confirmed - i.e., each normatively irrelevant variable significantly influenced participants' responses. Also, with the exception of hindsight bias, all cognitive biases showed satisfactory reliability estimates (alpha s  gt  .70). However, correlations among the cognitive bias measures were low (rs  lt  .20). Although exploratory factor analysis produced two factors, their robustness was doubtful. Cognitive bias measures were also relatively independent (rs  lt  .25) from the Gf, Gc, CRT, O/I and NFC and they define separate latent factors. This pattern of results suggests that a major part of the reliable variance of cognitive bias tasks is unique, and implies that a one-factor model of rational behavior is not plausible.
PB  - Elsevier Science Inc, New York
T2  - Intelligence
T1  - Individual differences in cognitive biases: Evidence against one-factor theory of rationality
EP  - 86
SP  - 75
VL  - 50
DO  - 10.1016/j.intell.2015.02.008
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Teovanović, Predrag and Knežević, Goran and Stankov, Lazar",
year = "2015",
abstract = "In this paper we seek to gain an improved understanding of the structure of cognitive biases and their relationship with measures of intelligence and relevant non-cognitive constructs. We report on the outcomes of a study based on a heterogeneous set of seven cognitive biases - anchoring effect, belief bias, overconfidence bias, hindsight bias, base rate neglect, outcome bias and sunk cost effect. New scales for the assessment of these biases were administered to 243 undergraduate students along with measures of fluid (Gf) and crystallized (Gc) intelligence, a Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), Openness/Intellect (O/I) scale and Need for Cognition (NFC) scale. The expected experimental results were confirmed - i.e., each normatively irrelevant variable significantly influenced participants' responses. Also, with the exception of hindsight bias, all cognitive biases showed satisfactory reliability estimates (alpha s  gt  .70). However, correlations among the cognitive bias measures were low (rs  lt  .20). Although exploratory factor analysis produced two factors, their robustness was doubtful. Cognitive bias measures were also relatively independent (rs  lt  .25) from the Gf, Gc, CRT, O/I and NFC and they define separate latent factors. This pattern of results suggests that a major part of the reliable variance of cognitive bias tasks is unique, and implies that a one-factor model of rational behavior is not plausible.",
publisher = "Elsevier Science Inc, New York",
journal = "Intelligence",
title = "Individual differences in cognitive biases: Evidence against one-factor theory of rationality",
pages = "86-75",
volume = "50",
doi = "10.1016/j.intell.2015.02.008"
}
Teovanović, P., Knežević, G.,& Stankov, L.. (2015). Individual differences in cognitive biases: Evidence against one-factor theory of rationality. in Intelligence
Elsevier Science Inc, New York., 50, 75-86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.02.008
Teovanović P, Knežević G, Stankov L. Individual differences in cognitive biases: Evidence against one-factor theory of rationality. in Intelligence. 2015;50:75-86.
doi:10.1016/j.intell.2015.02.008 .
Teovanović, Predrag, Knežević, Goran, Stankov, Lazar, "Individual differences in cognitive biases: Evidence against one-factor theory of rationality" in Intelligence, 50 (2015):75-86,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.02.008 . .

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About REFF | Send Feedback

OpenAIRERCUB
 

 

All of DSpaceInstitutions/communitiesAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis institutionAuthorsTitlesSubjects

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
About REFF | Send Feedback

OpenAIRERCUB