Academic literature on the topic 'Egocentric bias'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Egocentric bias.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Egocentric bias"
1
김은영, Choongkil Lee, and 김택준. "Repulsive bias in egocentric localization." Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology 26, no. 4 (December 2014): 295–316. http://dx.doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2014.26.4.005.
Full text
2
Dimmock, Paul. "Knowledge, belief, and egocentric bias." Synthese 196, no. 8 (November 9, 2017): 3409–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1603-9.
Full text
3
Hayashi, Hajimu, and Mina Nishikawa. "Egocentric bias in affective perspective taking." Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the Japanese Psychological Association 82 (September 25, 2018): 1PM—096–1PM—096. http://dx.doi.org/10.4992/pacjpa.82.0_1pm-096.
Full text
4
Hayashi, Yugo. "Facilitating Perspective Taking in Groups." International Journal of Software Science and Computational Intelligence 5, no. 1 (January 2013): 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijssci.2013010101.
Full textAbstract:
The present study investigates the nature of egocentric biases in a situation where a speaker is surrounded by social actors with different perspectives. In this context, the author investigated how communication channels function to ease egocentric bias during collaborative activities. To investigate this point, the author used conversational agents as social actors. The present study therefore created a virtual situation where a speaker was surrounded by several speakers. The author hypothesized that the diversity of communication channels available to the audience would increase the awareness of others and facilitate the adoption of an exocentric perspective. The results of the analysis show that participants who engaged in the collaboration task with various communication channels used fewer egocentric perspectives. Studies in egocentrism and communication have not yet investigated the conversational dynamics of multiple speakers. This study therefore provides a new perspective about the kinds of factors that may ease such biases.
5
Clark, Dale L. "Aesop's fox: Consequentialist virtue meets egocentric bias." Philosophical Psychology 22, no. 6 (December 2009): 727–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09515080903409911.
Full text
6
Wallin, Annika. "Is egocentric bias evidence for simulation theory?" Synthese 178, no. 3 (September 2, 2009): 503–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9653-2.
Full text
7
Samuel, Steven, Edward W. Legg, Robert Lurz, and Nicola S. Clayton. "Egocentric bias across mental and non-mental representations in the Sandbox Task." Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 71, no. 11 (January 1, 2018): 2395–410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1747021817742367.
Full textAbstract:
In the Sandbox Task, participants indicate where a protagonist who has a false belief about the location of an object will look for that object in a trough filled with a substrate that conceals the hidden object’s location. Previous findings that participants tend to indicate a location closer to where they themselves know the object to be located have been interpreted as evidence of egocentric bias when attributing mental states to others. We tested the assumption that such biases occur as a result of reasoning about mental states specifically. We found that participants showed more egocentric bias when reasoning from a protagonist’s false belief than from their own memory, but found equivalent levels of bias when they were asked to indicate where a false film would depict the object as when they were asked about a protagonist’s false belief. Our findings suggest that that egocentric biases found in adult false belief tasks are more likely due to a general difficulty with reasoning about false representations than a specialised difficulty with reasoning about false mental states.
8
Hayashi, Hajimu, and Mina Nishikawa. "Egocentric bias in emotional understanding of children and adults." Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 185 (September 2019): 224–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.04.009.
Full text
9
Wexler, Mark. "Voluntary Head Movement and Allocentric Perception of Space." Psychological Science 14, no. 4 (July 2003): 340–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.14491.
Full textAbstract:
Although visual input is egocentric, at least some visual perceptions and representations are allocentric, that is, independent of the observer's vantage point or motion. Three experiments investigated the visual perception of three-dimensional object motion during voluntary and involuntary motion in human subjects. The results show that the motor command contributes to the objective perception of space: Observers are more likely to apply, consciously and unconsciously, spatial criteria relative to an allocentric frame of reference when they are executing voluntary head movements than while they are undergoing similar involuntary displacements (which lead to a more egocentric bias). Furthermore, details of the motor command are crucial to spatial vision, as allocentric bias decreases or disappears when self-motion and motor command do not match.
10
Samuel, Steven, Anna Frohnwieser, Robert Lurz, and Nicola S. Clayton. "Reduced egocentric bias when perspective-taking compared with working from rules." Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 73, no. 9 (May 22, 2020): 1368–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1747021820916707.
Full textAbstract:
Previous research has suggested that adults are sometimes egocentric, erroneously attributing their current beliefs, perspectives, and opinions to others. Interestingly, this egocentricity is sometimes stronger when perspective-taking than when working from functionally identical but non-perspectival rules. Much of our knowledge of egocentric bias comes from Level 1 perspective-taking (e.g., judging whether something is seen) and judgements made about narrated characters or avatars rather than truly social stimuli such as another person in the same room. We tested whether adults would be egocentric on a Level 2 perspective-taking task (judging how something appears), in which they were instructed to indicate on a continuous colour scale the colour of an object as seen through a filter. In our first experiment, we manipulated the participants’ knowledge of the object’s true colour. We also asked participants to judge either what the filtered colour looked like to themselves or to another person present in the room. We found participants’ judgements did not vary across conditions. In a second experiment, we instead manipulated how much participants knew about the object’s colour when it was filtered. We found that participants were biased towards the true colour of the object when making judgements about targets they could not see relative to targets they could, but that this bias disappeared when the instruction was to imagine what the object looked like to another person. We interpret these findings as indicative of reduced egocentricity when considering other people’s experiences of events relative to considering functionally identical but abstract rules.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Egocentric bias"
1
Knutsen, Dominique. "Le rôle de l'accessibilité en mémoire dans la réutilisation des références en dialogue collaboratif : Contribution à l'étude du dialogue humain-humain et humain-système." Thesis, Poitiers, 2014. http://www.theses.fr/2014POIT5009/document.
Full textAbstract:
En dialogue humain-humain et humain-système, le terrain commun (constitué des informations que les locuteurs ont conscience de partager ; Clark & Marshall, 1981) sert de base à la production de références adaptées au partenaire (Isaacs & Clark, 1987 ; Powers et al., 2005). La production des références appartenant au terrain commun dépend de leur accessibilité en mémoire pour chaque partenaire : plus une référence est accessible, plus elle est susceptible d'être produite (Horton & Gerrig, 2005a, 2005b). En ce sens, la production de références appartenant au terrain commun fait l'objet d'un biais égocentrique, étant donné qu'elle reflète principalement l'état mental du partenaire produisant les références (Barr & Keysar, 2002 ; Keysar, 1997). L'objectif de la thèse est de montrer que l'accessibilité en mémoire des références du terrain commun influence non seulement l'adaptation à autrui, mais aussi la réutilisation des références, c'est-à-dire la production de références après leur intégration au terrain commun par les partenaires. Cinq expériences ont été réalisées en vue de caractériser la réutilisation des références en dialogue humain-humain et humain-système. Il s'agit également d'isoler les facteurs linguistiques et non-linguistiques susceptibles d'influencer l'accessibilité en mémoire des références appartenant au terrain commun. Les résultats ont confirmé que la réutilisation pendant le dialogue fait l'objet d'un biais égocentrique. La production par soi et par autrui au moment où les références sont intégrées au terrain commun constitue un déterminant important du niveau d'accessibilité de ces références. Par ailleurs, le niveau d'accessibilité des références varie au long de l'interaction. Sur la base de ces résultats, un nouveau modèle théorique est développé en vue de rendre compte du dialogue de manière dynamique. Les implications pour le dialogue humain-humain et humain-système sont discutéesIn human-human and human-system dialogue, the common ground (which includes the knowledge that the dialogue partners are aware of sharing; Clark & Marshall, 1981) serves as a basis for the production of partner-adapted references (Isaacs & Clark, 1987; Powers et al., 2005). The production of references which belong to the common ground is guided by their accessibility in memory from each speaker's point of view: the more accessible a reference, the more likely it is to be produced (Horton & Gerrig, 2005a, 2005b). In this sense, the production of references which belong to the common ground is subject to an egocentric bias, as it mainly reflects the state of mind of the speaking producing the references (Barr & Keysar, 2002; Keysar, 1997). The purpose of this thesis is to show that the accessibility in memory of the references which belong to the common ground guides not only partner-adaptation, but also reference reuse, that is, reference production after these references have been grounded by the speakers. Five experiments were conducted in order to characterize reference reuse in human-human and human-system dialogue. The aim was also to identify the linguistic and nonlinguistic factors which are likely to influence the accessibility in memory of the references which belong to the common ground. The results confirmed that reuse during dialogue is subject to an egocentric bias. Self- and partner-production at the time of reference grounding constitutes an important determinant of reference subsequent accessibility. What's more, reference accessibility varies throughout the interaction. On the basis of these results, a new theoretical model is developed in order to account for dialogue in a dynamic fashion. Implications for human-human and human-system dialogue are then discussed
2
Sereevinyayut, Piya. "On estimate aggregation : studies of how decision makers aggregate quantitative estimates in three different cases." Doctoral thesis, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/10803/125062.
Full textAbstract:
This dissertation examines how people aggregate quantitative advices to reach their own estimates. Each chapter explores a different situation that could affect how advices are evaluated, and consequentially how advices will be combined. The first chapter demonstrates that people measure advices' extremity degrees by anhoring upon the advice set's median. It also shows that, unlike multiplicative scaling, additive scaling of advices affects how outliers are perceived. The second chapter deals with advices that are obtained serially. The results reveals that whether people execute the aggregation sequentially or only once at the end of the series affects how an outlier in the series is detected and combined. The third chapter studies how people revise their own estimates with advices of others, and finds that people revise more if they appear a dissensus. Consequentially having multiple advices can attenuate of the effect of egocentricity and improve accuracy of revisions compared to having only a single adviceAquesta tesi estudia com les persones agreguen consells quantitatius per arribar a les seves pròpies estimacions. Cada capítol explora una situació diferent que podria afectar com s'avaluen els consells, i en conseqüència com es combinen aquests consells. El primer capítol demostra que les persones mesuren els graus extrems dels consells per ancoratge a la mediana del conjunt de consells. També es mostra que, en comptes d’una escala multiplicadora,l’ escala additiva dels consells afecta a com es perceben els valors atípics. El segon capítol tracta de consells que s'obtenen en sèrie. Els resultats revelen que si les persones executen l'agregació seqüencialment o només una vegada al final de la sèrie, afecta a com es detecten i es combinen els valors atípics en la sèrie. El tercer capítol estudia com les persones revisen les seves estimacions a partir consells dels altres, i es troba que les persones revisen més si es troben en un dissens. Conseqüentment, tenir consells múltiples pot atenuar l'efecte d'egocentrisme i millorar la precisió de les revisions si es compara en tenir només un únic consell.
3
"Action, Prediction, or Attention: Does the “Egocentric Temporal Order Bias” Support a Constructive Model of Perception?" Master's thesis, 2020. http://hdl.handle.net/2286/R.I.62985.
Full textAbstract:
abstract: Temporal-order judgments can require integration of self-generated action-events and external sensory information. In a previous study, it was found that participants are biased to perceive one’s own action-events to occur prior to simultaneous external events. This phenomenon, named the “Egocentric Temporal Order Bias”, or ETO bias, was demonstrated as a 67% probability for participants to report self-generated events as occurring prior to simultaneous externally-determined events. These results were interpreted as supporting a feed-forward, constructive model of perception. However, the empirical data could support many potential mechanisms. The present study tests whether the ETO bias is driven by attentional differences, feed-forward predictability, or action. These findings support that participants exhibit a bias due to both feed-forward predictability and action, and a Bayesian analysis supports that these effects are quantitatively unique. Therefore, the results indicate that the ETO bias is largely driven by one’s own action, over and above feed-forward predictability.Dissertation/Thesis
Masters Thesis Psychology 2020
4
Belli, Alex. "Going to extremes : an investigation into consumers' excessive behaviours." Thesis, 2018. http://hdl.handle.net/10453/133296.
Full textAbstract:
University of Technology Sydney. Faculty of Business.[Essay 1] Empirical evidence has suggested that individuals adopting a maximizing decision-strategy (“only the best will do”) are victims of a “paradox”, in that the effort they expend to enlarge their choice sets and search for the best option ultimately imperils their wellbeing. However, recent research has challenged the commonly held beliefs that maximization is detrimental for an individual’s wellbeing and that overchoice is the main culprit of this phenomenon. In order to overcome these assumptions, we conducted two multi-level meta-analyses on 197 effect sizes, focusing on the effects of maximization on both positive and negative wellbeing. First, we found that maximization is a “double jeopardy” for decision-makers, as it increases negative wellbeing and reduces positive wellbeing. In addition, these effects are mitigated by how the maximization trait is conceptualized (high standards dimension only versus multiple dimensions), the type of wellbeing studied (eudaimonic versus positive hedonic wellbeing) and the decision context (consumption vs others). Furthermore, this study revisits and provides a more comprehensive account of the “maximization paradox” and the assumption that having too much choice decreases maximizers’ wellbeing. Our results offer insights for marketing and public policy and put forward interventions to inhibit the negative effects of maximization. [Essay 2] Decades of research on decision making suggest that time pressure can promote either risk-aversion or risk-seeking. In the present research, we explain this inconsistency by drawing on an egocentric bias framework. Specifically, we focus on two characteristics of risky decisions. First, since individuals tend to be more unrealistically optimistic about the future under time pressure, they are more risk-seeking when outcome probabilities are ambiguous rather than explicit because the former can be interpreted to one’s advantage. Second, because time pressure hampers the adoption of others’ view, decision-makers take more risks when acting on others’ behalf as they downplay their anxiety response to risk. Three multilevel multivariate meta-analyses (k=102) support our predictions derived from the egocentric bias. Furthermore, results show that the contingencies previously identified by primary studies (gains/losses frames and outcome probabilities) do not account for the inconsistent influence of time pressure on risky decisions. Importantly, findings are robust across primary studies’ methodological characteristics. Our research provides insights for organizations and public policy practitioners concerned by safeguarding the best interests of both harassed decision-makers and the bearers of the consequences of their decisions. [Essay 3] Does time pressure increase people’s tendency to overconsume? Despite a very rich literature on the effects of time pressure on consumer behaviour, no studies have been able to answer this question. One scenario-based experiment (study 1), an exploratory study (study 2a) and one lab experiment (study 2b) attempt to address this issue. Whereas study 1 (n = 203) discovers that individuals believe they would consume less under time pressure, studies 2a (n = 28) and 2b (n = 91) show that in reality they tend to consume more when their consumption is time-bound than when it is not. Drawing on the theories of affective forecasting, the researcher proposes the relationship between time limitation and consumption is mediated by anticipated regret (“the fear of missing out”). Specifically, time pressure leads to anticipated regret, which in turn triggers a compensatory behaviour aimed to achieve a more positive state. The paper discusses the theoretical, managerial and public implications of our findings along with the avenues for future research.
5
Brito, Catarina Isabel Figueiredo. "Injustiça, comparação social, enviesamentos egocêntricos e legitimidade da autoridade em contexto desportivo." Master's thesis, 2018. http://hdl.handle.net/10071/17378.
Full textAbstract:
No contexto desportivo, crianças e adultos submetem-se voluntariamente ao treinador
– uma autoridade que quando é considerada legítima é respeitada pelos membros do grupo, as
suas regras e decisões são aceites e cumpridas voluntariamente e, consequentemente, o grupo
é eficaz. Porque os pais influenciam muito a prática desportiva das crianças até à
adolescência, a legitimidade dos treinadores na perspetiva dos pais é um tópico de estudo
importante.
A investigação em justiça distributiva e procedimental tem mostrado que os
julgamentos de justiça têm impacto nas perceções da legitimidade das autoridades, e se a
comparação social está presente, esse impacto é ainda maior. Outro aspeto importante nestes
julgamentos são os enviesamentos egocêntricos: as injustiças que ameaçam os benefícios do
próprio indivíduo são percebidas como mais injustas do que as que afetam os benefícios das
outras pessoas. Torna-se assim importante estudar o efeito da justiça, da comparação social e
dos enviesamentos egocêntricos na legitimidade do treinador.
Cento e sessenta e quatro pais de atletas em desportos coletivos até aos 12 anos de
idade participaram num estudo experimental em que foram apresentados cenários de uma
situação desportiva num design 2 valência da justiça (treinador justo; treinador injusto) x 2
processo de comparação (julgamento autónomo; julgamento autónomo) x 2 alvo da (in)justiça
(meu filho; outro jogador).
Os resultados mostram que os participantes nas condições de injustiça consideraram o
treinador menos justo e menos legítimo do que os participantes nas condições de justiça. Este
trabalho reforça a importância da justiça dos treinadores na perspetiva dos pais, mas também
dos atletas devido à influência que os pais têm na participação desportiva dos seus filhos.In the sport context, children and adults willingly subordinate to the coach – an authority that, when seen as legitimate is respected by the members of the group, his rules and decisions are accepted and complied willingly and, consequently the group is effective. Because parents influence the sport practice of their children very much until they reach adolescence, the legitimacy of coaches as perceived by the parents is an important topic of study. The research in distributive and procedural justice has shown that justice judgements have an impact on the perception of the authority’s legitimacy and if social comparison is present, that impact is even bigger. Other important aspect in these judgments is the egocentric bias: injustices that threaten the individual’s own benefits are perceived as more unjust than those that affect other people’s benefits. Thereby, it’s important to study the effects of justice, social comparison and egocentrical bias on the coach’s legitimacy. One hundred and sixty-four parents of children until 12 years-old in sport teams participated in an experimental study with scenarios in design 2 justice valence (just coach; unjust coach) x 2 comparison processes (autonomous judgement; comparative judgment) x 2 (in)justice target (my child; another player). The results show that participants in unjust conditions perceive the coach as less just and less legitimate than participants in just conditions. This investigation strengthens the importance of the coaches’s justice in parent’s perspective, but also in the athlete’s perspective, because of the influence parents have on their children sport participation.
Books on the topic "Egocentric bias"
1
Van Swol, Lyn M., Jihyun Esther Paik, and Andrew Prahl. Advice Recipients. Edited by Erina L. MacGeorge and Lyn M. Van Swol. Oxford University Press, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190630188.013.2.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter examines the psychology of advice recipients, focusing on research predominantly conducted using the Judge Advisor System, in which a participant “judge” receives advice from one or more advisors but has ultimate responsibility for making the decision. First, it reviews methods of typical Judge Advisor System experiments. Next, it surveys the research to explore why decision makers often do not seek out advice, focusing on the costs of advice and decision-maker overconfidence. It then examines why decision makers underutilize the advice they receive due to factors like confirmation bias, egocentric discounting, and power. In addition, factors that increase the utilization of advice, such as trust, advisor confidence, and advisor expertise, are considered. Finally, the influence of advice-recipient power and reception to computerized advice are examined in depth. Finally, advice to decision makers about how to seek and utilize advice to make better decisions is provided.
Book chapters on the topic "Egocentric bias"
1
Scoville, Ryan M. "Egocentric Bias in Perceptions of Customary International Law." In International Law as Behavior, 74–97. Cambridge University Press, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781316979792.004.
Full text
2
Blome-Tillmann, Michael. "Psychological Invariantism." In The Semantics of Knowledge Attributions, 157–72. Oxford University Press, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198716303.003.0009.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter discusses psychological invariantist explanations of the Bank Case data. According to the first view examined here, the relevant data can be accounted for by postulating a lack of belief. This view, however, is found to be implausible for a number of reasons. The remaining sections of the chapter are then devoted to views according to which our truth-value intuitions in the Bank Case (and related cases) are the result of general patterns of cognitive error or bias. The chapter takes a closer look at three different versions of this view—namely, at versions seeking explanations of the mentioned data by means of the Availability Heuristics (Williamson), Egocentric Bias and Epistemic Angst (Jennifer Nagel), and Epistemic Focal Bias (Mikkel Gerken).
3
Franck, Susan D. "Cognitive Psychology and Empirical Insights for ITA." In Arbitration Costs, 25–66. Oxford University Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190054434.003.0002.
Full textAbstract:
Cognitive psychology affects information gathering, analysis, and decision-making. There is no evidence that international investment law is immune from those influences, yet the influence of psychology has been remarkably under-scrutinized. To bridge the divide, Chapter 2 explores the roots of law and psychology and considers how cognition errors could influence international investment law. It then describes the literature on cognitive illusions, including illusions involving information accessibility (i.e., availability, representativeness, primacy, and recency), information presentation (i.e., framing, loss aversion, and anchoring), and self-assessments (i.e., confirmation bias, egocentrism, and bias blind spots). It then preliminarily explores how these phenomena might affect debates about international investment dispute settlement. The final section explores debiasing opportunities deriving from quality empiricism.
Conference papers on the topic "Egocentric bias"
1
Zhang, Tianyu, Weiqing Min, Jiahao Yang, Tao Liu, Shuqiang Jiang, and Yong Rui. "What If We Could Not See? Counterfactual Analysis for Egocentric Action Anticipation." In Thirtieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence {IJCAI-21}. California: International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2021/182.
Full textAbstract:
Egocentric action anticipation aims at predicting the near future based on past observation in first-person vision. While future actions may be wrongly predicted due to the dataset bias, we present a counterfactual analysis framework for egocentric action anticipation (CA-EAA) to enhance the capacity. In the factual case, we can predict the upcoming action based on visual features and semantic labels from past observation. Imagining one counterfactual situation where no visual representation had been observed, we would obtain a counterfactual predicted action only using past semantic labels. In this way, we can reduce the side-effect caused by semantic labels via a comparison between factual and counterfactual outcomes, which moves a step towards unbiased prediction for egocentric action anticipation. We conduct experiments on two large-scale egocentric video datasets. Qualitative and quantitative results validate the effectiveness of our proposed CA-EAA.
2
Ramin, Frederike. "The role of egocentric bias in undergraduate Agile software development teams." In ICSE '20: 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3377812.3382167.
Full text