As we continue to go through the journey of life and use our talents and skills to build a better future, we still have to face decisions on what we want for this life we have. Again, it is valuable to understand the Cognitive Biases and how they shape our lives. Our journeys are all different, and what information we are exposed to can dictate many of these biases. Below are four Cognitive Biases that introduce how judgmental and what can happen after decisions are made.

Choice Supportive Bias

With wanting to balance work and sleep, making time to be social is equally essential. We decide how much time should be dedicated to being social and balancing other priorities. Some may not consider that if they prioritize one thing over the other, this decision could impact them. Once a decision is made to put one priority over another, people can tend to focus more on how it becomes beneficial to them but leave out the flaws. This is called the choice supportive bias. Another name for this bias is post-purchase rationalization, and according to Conversions Uplift, some don't recall the behavior to support their decisions. Peter Cathcart Wason, a Psychologist, created an experiment known as Wason's 2-4-6 Hypothesis Rule Discovery Task. With this experiment, he centered it around the confirmation bias and how existing beliefs can be confirmed by those who seek information that sides to their beliefs. Wason's Rule Discovery Task has been made into classroom activities to explain and show how this can confirm the confirmation bias some may have.

An example of this bias can be found from Very Well Mind on how with laws centered around gun control, some may support gun control and only seek stories and news that support their belief. When a gun is involved in any circumstance, that person will find a way to make it fit their belief in gun control. This can also be applied to someone who has an opposing view; they'll only seek what their opinion holds on a topic and interpret it to match their belief. 

Ingroup Preference Bias

People tend to divide themselves into groups and then add positive attributes to their own group. This is called an ingroup preference bias. Imagine this scenario: You're part of this group; all you can talk about with others and constantly think about is the enjoyment you have with this group. How you all think similarly, love to do the same events, and talk makes you want to see the good side in things. You continue with your communications and adventures with the group, but you aren't cautious of the things you say and do and how it affects others you talk to. In research from Christopher L. Aberson and Lauren M. Howanski on Effect of Self-Esteem, Status, and Identification on Two Forms of Ingroup Bias, they state and back up with more research on how ingroup preference bias can be related to one's self-esteem. Ingroup bias and self-esteem can discriminate between self-esteem and how someone who is depressed promotes ingroup bias. 

With racism being a difficult topic, it is also a strong example of this bias. Understanding Prejudice provides the example and more information on ingroup favoritism. One group could have negative feelings towards an opposing group, and it can be because of bias and negative associations from the other group. People tend to divide themselves into groups and then add positive attributes to their own group. Once someone divides themselves into a specific group, their mind will be fulfilled with only information on these particular groups' points and values. They won't have an open mind to understand an opposing side and only want to hear what they want to hear and see what they want to see. From just this bias, more biases such as confirmation bias can occur.

Fundamental Attribution Error

Has someone ever cut you off while driving? Whether you’re in a good or bad driving mood that day, you’ll likely have a negative stream of thoughts flow through your mind at that moment. Maybe even while you continue to drive. Instead of considering why the other person may have cut you off, you'll continue to be angered by this brief interaction because it could've led to something dangerous. On the other hand, On the flip side, when we are the ones to cut someone off while driving because "we're late" or "in a rush," we don't consider how that person may have felt and convince ourselves it was for the better. This example was provided by Ethics Unwrapped when giving an example of what fundamental attribution error is. As some may only focus on situational factors, we tend to forget how our actions can have consequences and what we could say about ourselves as individuals. Essentially, we judge others on their actions from what was shown. From that, that is how we label someone; however, when it comes to you personally doing the same thing, you don't believe yourself to be a person associated with doing that.

 According to Simply Psychology, an experiment, The Attribution of Attitudes, was done by Edward E. Jones and Victor A. Harris, and the fundamental attribution error confounded their hypothesis. With this experiment, participants listened to pro-and anti-Fidel Castro speeches and then were asked to rate the speakers; however, the speaker's positions were determined by a simple coin flip. Those who chose Castro's favor continued on with their final vote of being in favor when exposed to it not being a natural experience of listening to a speech. This experiment ties into the fundamental attribution error because that speakers' actions and words were viewed as authentic, genuine and cheerful even though it wasn't. Because the speaker had a favorable view of Castro, they believed Castro was a positive person more than negative, only because the speaker could say good things about him and not a balance of good or bad, or just wrong.

Halo Effect

The halo effect is when one judges another on their traits by assuming because they’re good or bad at “something” is good or bad at o, they’ll be good or bad at another thing. One will find positivity in something that looks good or beautiful but not in something that looks bad. This effect creates a judgmental mindset when looking and comparing something to another. Very Well mind gives the example of how someone who has good looks or is physically attractive will be associated with pleasant or other positive attributes. If someone seems to run down and not physically appealing, they'll think of them negatively. Examples of the halo effect can be found in the workplace when someone is interviewing and potentially being hired. Study Finds states that in research from Greene King, a survey of hiring managers and bosses in the United Kingdom, 51% said they have knowingly discriminated against a potential employee because of the way they looked because of tattoos, piercings, hair colors, and more. 

In a staged interview by Richard E. Nisbett and Timothy DeCamp, Wilson provides evidence using a staged videotaped interview. A college instructor was told to act positively in one interview and harmful in another. Based on that, the subjects who saw the warm instructor rated him as appealing. Still, those who saw the cold instructor rated him as irritating and reported their dislike of the instructor even because they disliked his attributes (which lowered their global evaluations). The rest of this study then discusses how the halo effect is a global evaluation and provides more on the experiment based on a college student's evaluation of a professor on how this effect came to play.

---

These cognitive biases introduce us to how judgmental some people and decisions can be. Everyone's journeys and exposure to information are different but educating yourself is valuable to understand cognitive biases and how, when it comes to dealing with everyday thoughts, actions, words, and more, we can be aware and less judgmental!