The Electronic Hive Mind and Cybersecurity

2019 ◽  
pp. 206-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shalin Hai-Jew
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Mass Scale ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Micro Scale ◽  
Weakest Link ◽  
System 2 ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
System 1 ◽  
Scale Data

If people are the “weakest link” in cybersecurity because of their psychological make-up and hardwiring—their socialized desire to trust and cooperate with others, their cognitive biases and misperceptions, their preferences for convenience, their general going with System 1 inattention instead of System 2 attention and thinking—this begs the question of whether the same micro-scale cognitive limits found in individual users are also present on a mass scale. After all, there have been discovered problematic unthinking leanings in group decision making: obedience to authority, bystander effects, groupthink, and the Abilene paradox, among others. Using a range of often mass-scale data sources and data analytics tools, research questions were asked around three areas: (1) the level of sophistication of the cybersecurity electronic hive mind towards cybersecurity issues, (2) the gap between the non-expert members and the expert members in the hive mind, and (3) whether the extant hive mind was more reflective of mob unthinkingness or deliberation and wisdom.

Cognitive Biases in Decision Making in Post-Bureaucratic Organizations

2017 ◽  
pp. 358-382
Author(s):  
Marie-Therese Claes ◽  
Thibault Jacquemin
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Behavioral Economics ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Rational Choice Theory ◽  
Choice Theory ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Rational Decision ◽  
Bureaucratic Organization ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1

In today's post-bureaucratic organization, where decision-making is decentralized, most managers are confronted with highly complex situations where time-constraint and availability of information makes the decision-making process essential. Studies show that a great amount of decisions are not taken after a rational decision-making process but rather rely on instinct, emotion or quickly processed information. After briefly describing the journey of thoughts from Rational Choice Theory to the emergence of Behavioral Economics, this chapter will elaborate on the mechanisms that are at play in decision-making in an attempt to understand the root causes of cognitive biases, using the theory of Kahneman's (2011) System 1 and System 2. It will discuss the linkage between the complexity of decision-making and post-bureaucratic organization.

Errors in Surgical Neuropathology and the Influence of Cognitive Biases: The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis

2006 ◽  
Vol 130 (5) ◽  
pp. 613-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger E. McLendon
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Medical Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Correct Diagnosis ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
Medical Decision ◽  
Intelligence Analysis ◽  
First Impression ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Abstract Context.—A significant difficulty that pathologists encounter in arriving at a correct diagnosis is related to the way information from various sources is processed and assimilated in context. Objective.—These issues are addressed by the science of cognitive psychology. Although cognitive biases are the focus of a number of studies on medical decision making, few if any focus on the visual sciences. Data Sources.—A recent publication authored by Richards Heuer, Jr, The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis, directly addresses many of the cognitive biases faced by neuropathologists and anatomic pathologists in general. These biases include visual anticipation, first impression, and established mindsets and subconsciously influence our critical decision-making processes. Conclusions.—The book points out that while biases are an inherent property of cognition, the influence of such biases can be recognized and the effects blunted.

Bias and Heuristics

2020 ◽  
pp. 119-126
Author(s):  
Thomas Boraud
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Bias ◽  
Automatic System ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Dilution Effect ◽  
Herbert Simon ◽  
Anchoring Effect ◽  
First Impression ◽  
Human Decision ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1

This chapter addresses the cognitive bias and heuristics of judgement. It also considers possible underlying neural mechanisms. Economist Herbert Simon introduced the notion of heuristics in judgement to define the approximate rational rules upon which individuals rely to make decisions. Experimental psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky transformed this notion of heuristics by highlighting the cognitive biases that influence judgements. From his work with Tversky, Kahneman elaborated the two-systems theory. According to him, human decision-making is the result of a competition between a fast, automatic system (System 1) that is prone to make mistakes and a slower, more demanding but also more reliable one (System 2). Both systems use heuristics, but the second compensates with anticipation. This chapter then looks at initial bias and beliefs. It also explains the anchoring effect, as well as the dilution effect. Anchoring is the excessive influence of a first impression on judgements.

scholarly journals Decision Making in English as an Additional Language: Surprises and Advantages

2022 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. p1
Author(s):  
Steve Daniel Przymus ◽  
Zachary Brooks
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Adult Learners ◽  
English Learners ◽  
First Language ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Cognitive Reflection ◽  
Analytical Thinking ◽  
System 2 ◽  
K 12 ◽  
System 1

Do adult learners of English make different and sometimes better decisions in English than their monolingual peers and teachers? It is likely, possible, and probable. Using evidence from classroom decision making studies, with over 500 participants, we demonstrate that often adult English learners (henceforth adult Active Bilingual Learners/Users of English [ABLE]) make more accurate decisions in English than first language English speakers, when given time and the ability to utilize their whole linguistic repertoire (i.e., translanguaging). We specifically look at differences in decisions that involve 1) common adverbs of frequency (rare, possible, likely, frequently, etc.) and 2) system 1 (implicit) vs. system 2 (analytical) thinking in cognitive reflection tests, such as math story problems. Understanding these surprising differences and advantages in decision making in English as an Additional Language (EAL) has important practical implications for test preparation and daily instruction for adult ABLE students, and potentially as well for ABLE youth in K-12 schools.

scholarly journals Decision-Making of Communication Robots Through Robot Ethics

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 467-477
Author(s):  
Tomomi Hashimoto ◽  
Xingyu Tao ◽  
Takuma Suzuki ◽  
Takafumi Kurose ◽  
Yoshio Nishikawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Unsolved Problem ◽  
Critical Level ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Status Quo Bias ◽  
Robot Ethics ◽  
The Status ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1

With the recent developments in robotics, the ability of robots to recognize their environment has significantly improved. However, the manner in which robots behave depending on a particular situation remains an unsolved problem. In this study, we propose a decision-making method for robots based on robot ethics. Specifically, we applied the two-level theory of utilitarianism, comprising SYSTEM 1 (intuitive level) for quick decisions and SYSTEM 2 (critical level) for slow but careful decisions. SYSTEM 1 represented a set of heuristically determined responses and SYSTEM 2 represented a rule-based discriminator. The decision-making method was as follows. First, SYSTEM 1 selected the response to the input. Next, SYSTEM 2 selected the rule that the robot’s behavior should follow depending on the amount of happiness and unhappiness of the human, robot, situation, and society. We assumed three choices for SYSTEM 2. We assigned “non-cooperation” to asocial comments, “cooperation” to when the amount of happiness was considered to be high beyond the status quo bias, and “withholding” to all other cases. In the case of choosing between cooperation or non-cooperation, we modified the behavior selected in SYSTEM 1. An impression evaluation experiment was conducted, and the effectiveness of the proposed method was demonstrated.

Translatorial dual-processing–evidence from interlingual trainee subtitling

Babel ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikołaj Deckert
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
The Other ◽  
Dual Processing ◽  
Translation Quality ◽  
System 2 ◽  
The One ◽  
Stage 1 ◽  
Cross Language ◽  
System 1

Drawing on cognitive linguistics and psychology, this paper attempts to model the subtitler’s decision-making as involving two types of operations. They are referred to as System 1 and System 2, the former being fast, automatic and requiring little effort, and the latter being slower, controlled and effortful. To test the dual-processing hypothesis, I analyse trainee subtitlers’ renditions with a focus on the construction “you + to like + me” which exemplifies a cross-language asymmetry and a potential (disguised) translation challenge. Remarkably, the English construction is employed equally-conventionally to represent the concept of being favourably disposed to somebody in a non-physical/sexual manner, on the one hand, and being attracted to somebody, on the other. In Polish, however, the “prototypes” will typically be represented as distinct expressions. The present findings suggest that because differentiating between the prototypes and coding them linguistically is not challenging to the participants, it is the automation of their judgment that leads them to settle for flawed target variants (Stage 1). Additional evidence is obtained (Stage 2) as participants are induced to go from System 1 to System 2 thinking–a cross-stage comparison indicates that the fast-to-slow switch reorients the trainees’ subtitling choices and ultimately improves translation quality.

Physician, know thyself: implicit and explicit decision-making for mechanical thrombectomy in stroke

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 952-956 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle M Fargen ◽  
Thabele M Leslie-Mazwi ◽  
Michael Chen ◽  
Joshua A Hirsch
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Mechanical Thrombectomy ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Vessel Occlusion ◽  
Implicit System ◽  
Numbers Needed To Treat ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
System 2 ◽  
Implicit And Explicit ◽  
System 1

Few clinical situations in medical practice are as time-sensitive and and have such profound ramifications as selection of patients with acute stroke for mechanical thrombectomy (MT). Emergent large vessel occlusion has become a treatable disease with minimal numbers needed to treat to achieve a functional, long-term neurologic outcome. However, MT carries risk and many patients who are appropriately reperfused continue to have significant neurologic deficits and disability despite a successful procedure. The decision to offer or withhold MT can be complex. Frequently decisions must be made based on incomplete information or emergently while the physician is awoken from sleep or distracted while performing other procedures. A growing number of studies have examined cognitive errors and biases as they pertain to patient diagnosis and treatment in medicine. Dual process theory identifies two decision-making processes as system 1 ('implicit') and system 2 ('explicit') and describes the patterns through which decisions are formulated. The implicit system is the default pathway as it requires little effort or focus, uses mental short cuts, and is rapid; however, this pathway is subject to considerable bias and error. This manuscript reviews the mechanisms underlying the way in which physician decisions about MT are made, specifically highlighting prominent biases that may affect judgment, and reviews other important principles, such as confidence in decisions, aggressiveness to pursue MT, and strategies to improve decisions.

From Analogical to Analytical Thinking and Back

2020 ◽  
pp. 223-244
Author(s):  
Sébastien Pesce
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Professional Activity ◽  
Main Aspect ◽  
Analytical Thinking ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1 ◽  
Logic Of Inquiry

This chapter shows the importance for teachers to enter into a truly reflexive activity and to make it the main aspect of their professional activity. The author describes ways teachers can regain control over the activity of thinking and adapt their modes of reasoning to educational situations by developing control over the transition from system 1 to system 2. The aim is to consider the conditions for developing decision-making procedures, both reflexive and collective, when faced with complex situations (particularly crises), based on a deliberation rooted in a logic of inquiry.

Asymmetry and automaticity in translation

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 469-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikołaj Deckert
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Cognitive Linguistics ◽  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
Task Instruction ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1

Abstract This article adopts an interdisciplinary approach to integrate insights from cognitive psychology and Cognitive Linguistics into translational inquiry by modeling the translator’s operations as alternating between System 1 and System 2 thinking. We analyze trainee output to investigate translatorial decision-making in scenarios employing instances of basic cross-linguistic asymmetry in the partitioning of conceptual material. The objective is to better understand the role that automaticity plays in those contexts: how pronounced it is, how it influences translation output, and to what extent the skill of monitoring it can be regarded a component of translation competence. The study also tests, in one condition, whether the translator trainer can induce System 2 processing in trainees by issuing extra pre-task instruction, thereby helping optimize their performance.

scholarly journals Accuracy of ‘My Gut Feeling:’ Comparing System 1 to System 2 Decision-Making for Acuity Prediction, Disposition and Diagnosis in an Academic Emergency Department

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 653-657 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Cabrera ◽  
Jonathan Thomas ◽  
Jeffrey Wiswell ◽  
James Walston ◽  
Joel Anderson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
System 2 ◽  
System 1
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document