IB Docs (2) Team
SAQ marking: Cognitive biases
Below you will find seven sample SAQs for the question: Explain one bias in thinking and decision-making with reference to one study.
For each of the samples, refer to the rubric to award marks 1 - 9. After each sample, there is a predicted grade as well as feedback on the strengths and limitations of the sample.
SAQ rubricSAQ Sample 1
English and Mussweiler studied anchoring bias and its effect on courtroom sentencing. Anchoring bias is a heuristic, a mental shortcut that humans use due to being cognitive misers. When we engage in System 1 thinking we make a quick decision without considering all the information that is available and rely on previous knowledge or schemas, as well as using heuristics to make decisions. Anchoring bias is a shortcut by which a decision is influenced by an “anchor.” This is a value that is presented and which we then use as a basis for judgment. For example, when bargaining in the marketplace, if you are told that the original price is 1000 dollars, you are more likely to assume that the item has a higher value than if the original price was given as 600 dollars.
English and Mussweiler carried out a lab experiment using German law students to test the effect of anchoring bias on courtroom sentencing. The participants of the study were presented with a rape case and were asked to assist in the sentencing process. Participants were randomly allocated to one of two different conditions. One group was given a high-anchor, saying the prosecution recommends a 44-month sentence, whereas the other group was given a low anchor of 2 months. The results found that the high anchor group opted for a significantly higher sentence; the sentence was on average 8 months longer than the low-anchor condition.
The results of this study demonstrate the effect of the cognitive bias. Since the law students did not have time to study the case fully, their decision relied partially on the anchor given to them. This allowed them to make a quick decision without using too much energy.
286 words
The bias in thinking and decision-making is explained. The study is relevant and linked back to the bias, although the link could be a bit stronger. 8 marks
SAQ Sample 2
According to the Dual Processing Model, humans have two modes of thinking – System 1 and System 2. System 1 thinking is quick, intuitive and requires little effort, using knowledge from previous experiences. System 1 also employs heuristics, which are mental shortcuts used to process information. Heuristics are a cognitive bias because their quick and intuitive nature can result in incorrect logic and assumptions. One such cognitive bias is the anchoring bias, where people, when given an initial value, are likely to guess a value that is close to the initial value.
One study of the anchoring bias was done by English and Mussweiler. The aim of the study was to see whether an anchor could influence a jury’s recommended sentence. The sample was made up of law students. They were given a rape case and in one condition, the judge said a high maximum sentence and in the other condition, the judge said a low maximum sentence. Participants were more likely to recommend a higher sentence when given the higher anchor. This shows that the anchor had an influence on the participants’ decisions. The implication of this study is that if a sentence is recommended in court, either by a judge or by a lawyer, the jurors could use that anchor for making the decision. The fact that they used law students shows that education does not necessarily have an influence on whether we use heuristics.
236 words
SAQ Sample 3
Cognitive biases are patterns of thinking that are often incorrect and arise from System 1 thinking that due to its speed and simplicity, is prone to mistakes. One example of a cognitive bias is anchoring bias, which refers to relying on an initial piece of information to make a judgment. The anchoring effect was studied by Englisch in courtrooms.
The researchers carried out a study that focused on the role of anchoring bias in decision-making in courtrooms. A group of students was allocated and given a scenario where they were told about a man accused of rape and asked what sentence they would recommend. The two options were either a high sentence or a low sentence. This information was then used as an “anchor.” The participants that were given the higher anchor recommended longer sentences than those with the lower anchor.
Thus, one can conclude that people often rely on the initial piece of information given to make a decision as a result of system 1 thinking.
168 words
SAQ Sample 4
One cognitive bias is schema processing. We tend to make decisions based on what we already know - often called confirmation bias. We do this because we want to use as little cognitive energy as possible. We are cognitive misers.
An example of this cognitive bias is seen in Bartlett's War with Ghosts study. In this study, British participants listened as the researcher told them a story by Native Americans. They were then asked to repeat the story to another participant or to repeat it to themselves. The researchers found that in both cases, there was a bias in what they remembered. The participants made the story shorter, put it into an order that was familiar to them, and changed the ending to a "British ending." In addition, concepts that were foreign to them - like canoes - were changed to something familiar, like boats.
This study shows that we are biased in the way that we process cognitive information.
160 words
Although it is correct that schema may lead to errors in thinking and decision making, this is not explained in any detail. the concept of confirmation bias is not well understood. The study is irrelevant to the demands of the question. 1 mark.
SAQ Sample 5
The cognitive approach studies how people think and process information. The approach argues that we are all information processors. However, we don’t like to think as it takes too much energy. So, we often look for shortcuts in our thinking. This type of thinking is sometimes referred to as System 1 thinking, or heuristics. These short-cuts bias our thinking and decision-making, often leading to choices that are not based on enough information which may lead to negative or incorrect results.
One example of a cognitive bias is the anchoring effect. This happens when we are not sure how to make a decision and so use the first piece of information, usually a numeric value, to base our decision on. So, if I ask how much an iPhone costs, you might not know. But if I ask you if you think that 1000 dollars is a good price for an iPhone, you would use the value of 1000 dollars to make your decision.
A study that looked at anchoring bias was done by English and Mussweiler where they asked German law students to decide the sentence for a rapist after reading a courtroom script. In one condition, the prosecutor asked for a sentence of 34 months and in the other condition, the prosecutor asked for only 12 months. When asked how many months the rapist should receive, it is clear that the law students used the number they were given to base their sentence on. The participants in the first condition recommended eight months longer (on average) than the second group. Their decisions were biased by being exposed to the number of months said by the prosecutor.
277 words
A good response with regard to the explanation of the bias, but the study could be more explicitly linked back to the question. 6 marks
SAQ Sample 6
One cognitive bias is the illusory correlation, explained through a study done by Hamilton and Gifford. Stereotyping is defined as attributing behaviours to certain groups based on schema. It has an effect on our perception. The illusory correlation says that people tend to make weak links between two variables which help with categorization of others.
The study done by Hamilton and Gifford looked at how stereotypes happen especially how negative stereotypes get attributed to a group. There were two groups consisting of 26 individuals. 18 were described through statements that had positive traits and 8 that had negative traits. Group B consisted of only 13 individuals, where the ratio of negative to positive traits remained the same - 9:4. These statements were then presented to participants in a quick manner in order to see actually how quickly stereotypes can form. They were then asked to answer how they felt about each of the groups on a series of traits such as helpfulness, reliability, and kindness.
The results suggested that group B was perceived to have more negative traits. This can be explained by the illusory correlation. In the minority group, it seems that there is a higher number of individuals that have negative traits, thus leading participants towards stereotyping the whole group as being more negative. This result can also be explained through confirmation bias where we tend to want to look for information that confirms our beliefs such as the minority possessing more negative traits.
246 words
The illusory correlation is identified as a cognitive bias, but it is not explained in satisfactory detail. the study is described but is more about the formation of stereotyping than cognitive bias in decision making. This should be a more explicit focus. The final paragraph’s addition of confirmation bias is not clear. 5 marks.
SAQ Sample 7
One cognitive bias is optimism bias. This is a bias that is often seen in health research. The optimism bias causes a person to believe that they are at a lower risk of experiencing a negative event compared to others. For example, when asked about your level of exercise, you might say that you exercise at least four days a week for one hour. But actually, it is much lower than that. Or, when asked what your chances are of getting the flu this year, you underestimate your chances, believing that you are overall healthy and so don’t need to worry. This has an effect on our behaviour because you might not get a flu shot if you think that you won’t get the flu. This may result in you getting sick. Psychologists argue that this bias helps us to believe in the “just world hypothesis” – those that get sick deserve it.
In one study, researchers asked participants to fill out a questionnaire, asking them about their level of risk compared to others for a list of problems (cancer, diabetes). When they were asked to rate their level of risk after being told the risk for their age and gender, they were less optimistic than when there were not. This shows that people, if not taught about risk, will be overly optimistic about their chances of not getting a health problem.
232 words
The cognitive bias is well explained by the study is poorly described and not satisfactorily linked back to the question. 4 marks.
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn