Quotes About Evaluation

Matters of judgment, including professional judgments, occupy a space between questions of fact or computation on the one hand and matters of taste or opinion on the other. They are defined by the expectation of bounded disagreement.

Any aspect of life to which attention is directed will loom large in a global evaluation. This is the essence of the focusing illusion, which can be described in a single sentence: Nothing in life is as important as you think it is when you are thinking about it.

As we have seen, rationality is generally served by broader and more comprehensive frames, and joint evaluation is obviously broader than single evaluation.

Losses are weighted about twice as much as gains in several contexts:

Self-criticism is one of the functions of System 2.

People are asked for a prediction but they substitute an evaluation of the evidence, without noticing that the question they answer is not the one they were asked. This process is guaranteed to generate predictions that are systematically biased; they completely ignore regression to the mean.

do not simply trust intuitive judgment—your own or that of others—but do not dismiss it, either.

Personnel decisions are noisy. Interviewers of job candidates make widely different assessments of the same people. Performance ratings of the same employees are also highly variable and depend more on the person doing the assessment than on the performance being assessed.

Firmly resolve that you will hire the candidate whose final score is the highest, even if there is another one whom you like better

A vast amount of research offers a promise: you are much more likely to find the best candidate if you use this procedure than if you do what people normally do in such situations, which is to go into the interview unprepared and to make choices by an overall intuitive judgment such as "I looked into his eyes and liked what I saw.

an objective observer is more likely to detect our errors than we are

Many of us spontaneously anticipate how friends and colleagues will evaluate our choices; the quality and content of these anticipated judgments therefore matters. The expectation of intelligent gossip is a powerful motive for serious self-criticism

Hindsight bias has pernicious effects on the evaluations of decision makers. It leads observers to assess the quality of a decision not by whether the process was sound but by whether its outcome was good or bad.

Personnel decisions are noisy. Interviewers of job candidates make widely different assessments of the same people. Performance ratings of the same employees are also highly variable and depend more on the person doing

The general tendency to overestimate the probability of conjunctive events leads to unwarranted optimism in the evaluation of the likelihood that a plan will succeed or that a project will be completed on time.

The brief pleasure of a cool breeze on a hot day may make you slightly more positive and optimistic about whatever you are evaluating at that time.

demonstrated experimentally, but few can actually be measured.

Start with an estimate of average GPA. Determine the GPA that matches your impression of the evidence. Estimate the correlation between your evidence and GPA.

Our predilection for causal thinking exposes us to serious mistakes in evaluating the randomness of truly random events.

The question we face is whether this candidate can succeed. The question we seem to answer is whether she interviews well. Let's not substitute.

judgment, there is noise—and more of it than we think.

Regla del pico final: la estimación en retrospectiva global estaba bien predicha por el valor medio del nivel de dolor manifestado en el peor momento de la experiencia y al terminar esta. • Olvido de la duración: la duración del procedimiento no tuvo efecto alguno sobre las estimaciones del dolor total.

Variability in judgments is also expected and welcome in a competitive situation in which the best judgments will be rewarded.

The associative machinery seeks causes. The difficulty we have with statistical regularities is that they call for a different approach. Instead of focusing on how the event at hand came to be, the statistical view relates it to what could have happened instead. Nothing in particular caused it to be what it is—chance selected it from among its alternatives. Our predilection for causal thinking exposes us to serious mistakes in evaluating the randomness of truly random events.