Julia GalefVerified account

I'm certain none of these biases apply to me.

"Overprecision" reminds me of "rationalization". Out of context I'd think "How could that be a bad thing?" Scenario: A: I think you're being overprecise. B: Yeah I'm being overprecise! Because I believe in truth and precision. This guy doesn't like people being precise!

... or when someone accurately criticizes their own flaws, we tell them to stop being so negative about themselves. It seems that westerners in general love to say that they are infatuated with integrity, and yet when someone displays it, they choose to disdain that person.

That's fantastic. And I have two papers in preparation that will both need to cite this.

What are the contributions of underestimation, underplacement and underprecision in the incidence of "impostor syndrome"? It maybe interesting to get at least some self-reports for starters.

There's a 2007 paper by Don Moore and Paul J. Healy which says that overprecision is the only consistent bias, but tends to reduce the magnitude of the other two: http://healy.econ.ohio-state.edu/papers/Moore_Healy-TroubleWithOverconfidence_WP.pdf …

@MonikaJeon1

Tbh I dislike disambiguation. To me the aim is to unify as much phenomena under the same continuous mechanism. One of the banes of psychology and philosophy compared to physics is the invention of new phrases for every new phenomena instead of synthesizing it with the old.

We have in our society words to label people who undervalue themselves or their capabilities, words like underestimate, and vice versa overestimate, yet when someone estimates just right, we call them arrogant, even if they can back up their knowledge base in comparison to yours.

Do you view things like “confidence” as tools-useful or not-for taking action? I don’t have a lot of patience for dealing with “overconfidence”. In many contexts people MUST be able to perform certain tasks. Overconfidence has no place. Surgery for example.

the person that wrote that is overconfident