Quotes About Judgment

How do people make the judgments and how do they assign decision weights? We start from two simple answers, then qualify them. Here are the oversimplified answers: People overestimate the probabilities of unlikely events. People overweight unlikely events in their decisions.

Evaluating people as attractive or not is a basic assessment. You do that automatically whether or not you want to, and it influences you.

Amos and I introduced the idea of a conjunction fallacy, which people commit when they judge a conjunction of two events (here, bank teller and feminist) to be more probable than one of the events (bank teller) in a direct comparison.

A stupid decision that works out well becomes a brilliant decision in hindsight.

The prominence of causal intuitions is a recurrent theme in this book because people are prone to apply causal thinking inappropriately, to situations that require statistical reasoning.

System 1 is radically insensitive to both the quality and the quantity of the information that gives rise to impressions and intuitions.

Averaging two guesses by the same person does not improve judgments as much as does seeking out an independent second opinion. As Vul and Pashler put it, "You can gain about 1/10th as much from asking yourself the same question twice as you can from getting a second opinion from someone else." This is not a large improvement. But you can make the effect much larger by waiting to make a second guess.

The only test of rationality is not whether a person's beliefs and preferences are reasonable, but whether they are internally consistent.

Maintaining one's vigilance against biases is a chore—but the chance to avoid a costly mistake is sometimes worth the effort.

Because it is much easier, as well as far more enjoyable, to identify and label the mistakes of others than to recognize our own. Questioning what we believe and want is difficult at the

Claims for correct intuitions in an unpredictable situation are self-delusional at best, sometimes worse.

What you see is all there is

Based on observations of the policies of my own government, I viewed this action as an acceptable option.

I hope to be viewed and judged first and foremost by my accomplishments and capabilities as a leader - regardless of my gender.

The way my body is viewed in the world is different than a male body. People are going to write about the performance, but they're probably also going to be writing about what I was wearing or my hair, which just doesn't happen to men.

If to the viewer's eyes, my world appears less beautiful than his, I'm to be pitied and the viewer praised.

When you're representing a sport, people are more likely to judge and comment as, unlike other fields, sport permits every viewer to participate to a certain level.

As a viewer, you can comment on an actor's looks, but don't target him/her. As it is, he/she may be battling certain physical, emotional or health problems.

When you have Candidate A saying the sky is blue, and Candidate B saying it's a cloudy day, I look outside and I see, well, it's a cloudy day. I should be able to tell my viewers, 'Candidate A is wrong, Candidate B is right,' and not have to say, 'Well, you decide.' Then it would be like I'm an idiot.

The minute viewers callin or write about your looks, they were not listening to what you were saying.

Interviews, and hence interviewers, are there to help shed light, and to let viewers judge for themselves. We are not judges, juries, commentators or torturers - nor friends, either.

Someone - a man - advised me not to become a news anchor because my eyelashes were too long, and they would distract the viewers.

The viewers have the brains to decide the merits of a film and there is no point in blaming them if it flops.

We notice in others only those things that relate to ourselves. For example, you could find someone hilarious and brilliant, and I could find the same person idiotic and annoying. It's the same person doing the same thing, but because we are viewing them from our own unique perspectives, they mirror back to us something different.