Availability heuristic
Encyclopedia : A : AV : AVA : Availability heuristic
The availability heuristic is a rule of thumb, or heuristic, which occurs when people estimate the probability of an outcome based on how easy that outcome is to imagine. As such, vividly described, emotionally-charged possibilities will be perceived as being more likely than those that are harder to picture or are difficult to understand, resulting in a corresponding cognitive bias.
For example, most people think that dying from a shark attack is more likely than dying from being hit by falling airplane parts, yet the opposite is true by a factor of 30.[[Citing sources citation needed]] Perhaps this is because sharks are inherently terrifying or because shark attacks receive more media coverage. Many people seem to fear plane crashes, yet one is far more likely to be harmed in a car accident on the way to the airport. Similarly, much more money is spent on fighting terrorism than on preventing car crashes, yet the latter kill many more people per year and former causes more deaths than it saves.[link]
One important corollary finding to this heuristic is that people asked to imagine an outcome tend to immediately view it as more likely than people that were not asked to imagine the specific outcome. If group A was asked to imagine a specific outcome and then asked if it was a likely outcome, and group B was asked whether the same specific outcome was likely without being asked to imagine it first, the members of group A tend to view the outcome as more likely than the members of group B, thereby demonstrating the tendency toward using an availability heuristic as a basis for logic.
In one experiment that occurred before the 1976 US Presidential election, participants were asked simply to imagine Gerald Ford winning the upcoming election. Those who were asked to do this subsequently viewed Ford as being significantly more likely to win the upcoming election, and vice versa for participants that had been asked to imagine Jimmy Carter. Analogous results were found with vivid versus pallid descriptions of outcomes in other experiments.
An opposite effect of this bias, called denial, occurs when an outcome is so upsetting that the very act of thinking about it leads to an increased refusal to believe it might occur. In this case, being asked to imagine the outcome actually made participants view it as less likely.
Reasoners taking advantage of the availability heuristic in reasoning may commit the fallacy of misleading vividness. See also the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.
This phenomenon was first reported by psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, who also identified the representativeness heuristic. To see how availability differs from related terms vividness and salience, see availability, salience and vividness.
References
- Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207-232.
- Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1130.
- Combs, B. & Slovic, P. (1979). Newspaper coverage of causes of death. Journalism Quarterly, 56, 837-843.
- Carroll, J. S. (1978). The effect of imagining an event on expectations for the event: An interpretation in terms of the availability heuristic. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 88-96.
External links
From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.