The Cognitive Bias Ontology

The Cognitive Bias Ontology is a project that aims to create a comprehensive collection of all the cognitive biases peculiar to human beings. Cognitive bias refers to a systematic (that is, nonrandom and, thus, predictable) deviation from rationality in judgment or decision-making¹.

In other words, Cognitive bias is a tendency to act in an irrational way due to our limited ability to process information objectively; it is not always negative, but it can cloud our judgment and affect how clearly we perceive situations, people, or potential risks.

For the study and understanding of each bias, the Cognitive Bias Codex Wheel, a handy visualization of the 188 cognitive biases listed by Wikipedia and shown as follows:

Next, a dedicated ontology was developed for each bias following what is defined by "the eXtreme Design approach"². The Cognitive Bias Codex Wheel is composed of 20 clusters of bias and each of them describes a specific category in which the biases act. For the development of the project, our group focused on the analysis and modeling of two of these bias clusters described as follows:

We notice flaws in others more easily than we notice flaws in ourselves

• Bias blind spot
• Naïve cynicism
• Naïve realism

This cluster of bias is also known as the "bias of noticing flaws in others more easily than in ourselves." This bias reflects a tendency in human cognition where individuals are often more adept at recognizing and pointing out flaws, mistakes, or shortcomings in others while being less able to recognize the same flaws within themselves.

There are a few psychological and cognitive factors that contribute to this bias:

1. Self-Enhancement Bias: People generally have a desire to maintain a positive self-image. This can lead to a tendency to downplay or overlook one's own flaws and mistakes while being more critical of others.
2. Confirmation Bias: We tend to seek out information that confirms our existing beliefs or biases. When evaluating others, we may be more inclined to look for evidence that supports our perception of their flaws.
3. Attribution Theory: When it comes to explaining behavior, individuals often attribute their own actions to external factors while attributing the behavior of others to internal characteristics. This means that when we make mistakes, we may attribute them to situational factors beyond our control, but when others make mistakes, we attribute them to personal flaws or shortcomings.
4. Selective Attention and Perception: Our attention is limited, and we tend to focus on information that is most salient or relevant to us. When evaluating others, we may be more attuned to their behavior and actions, making their flaws more noticeable to us. However, when it comes to evaluating ourselves, we may overlook or rationalize our own flaws because they are not as salient or threatening to our self-image.

We tend to find stories and patterns even when looking at sparse data

• Confabulation
• Clustering illusion
• Insensitivity to sample size
• Neglect of probability
• Anecdotal fallacy
• Illusion of validity
• Masked–man fallacy
• Recency illusion
• Gambler's fallacy
• Hot–hand fallacy
• Illusory correlation
• Pareidolia
• Anthropomorphism

This cluster bias refers to the tendency to find patterns and stories in sparse or random data is known as "apophenia." Apophenia refers to the human inclination to perceive meaningful connections or patterns in unrelated or random information. This cognitive bias can lead individuals to see trends, correlations, or meaningful narratives even when they may not actually exist. Several factors contribute to apophenia:

1. Pattern Recognition: Human brains are naturally wired to recognize patterns and make sense of the environment. This evolutionary trait has been crucial for survival. However, it can lead to seeing patterns even when they are not present.

2. Cognitive Schemas: Our brains operate based on pre-existing mental frameworks or schemas. These schemas influence how we interpret information and can predispose us to perceive connections or patterns that align with our existing beliefs or expectations.

3. Need for Meaning: Humans have a strong psychological need for meaning and coherence. When faced with ambiguous or uncertain information, we tend to impose meaning on it to create a more understandable and predictable world.

4. Confirmation Bias: Once we form a belief or see a pattern, we may be inclined to seek out information that confirms our interpretation while ignoring or downplaying contradictory evidence.

5. Narrative Instinct: Humans are natural storytellers, and our brains often construct narratives to make sense of events. This storytelling instinct can contribute to the creation of patterns or connections, even in the absence of substantial evidence.

The full documentation about the development of the Cognitive Bias Ontology project can be found here.

The Cognitive Bias Ontology project is the final result of the 2023 Knowledge Representation and Extraction course held by professor Aldo Gangemi at the University of Bologna.

References:

Footnotes

1. Blanco, F. (2017). Cognitive Bias. In: Vonk, J., Shackelford, T. (eds) Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior ↩

2. Presutti, Valentina, Enrico Daga, Aldo Gangemi and Eva Blomqvist. “eXtreme Design with Content Ontology Design Patterns.” WOP (2009). ↩