ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021
The Measurement of Individual Differences in Cognitive Biases: A Review and Improvement.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do Peer Cliques and Gender Differences Shape Adolescent Depression Under Bullying? Exploring the Mediating Power of Cognitive Biases.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Incidence of cognitive errors in difficult airway management: an inference human factors study from the Pediatric Difficult Intubation Registry.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Cognitive biases and contextual factors explaining variability in nurses' fall risk judgements: a multi-centre cross-sectional study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Article
- The prodromal individuals' perspective on active recruitment for early detection of α-synucleinopathies.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2025Article
- A common factor underlying individual differences in confirmation bias.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Changing Decisions: The Interaction between Framing and Decoy Effects.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A reassessment of the Resistance to Framing scale.Behavior research methods · 2023Article
- Computational meaningfulness as the source of beneficial cognitive biases.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- The heuristics-and-biases inventory: An open-source tool to explore individual differences in rationality.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Assessment of cognitive biases in Augmented Reality: Beyond eye tracking.Journal of eye movement research · 2022Article
- From Cognitive Bias Toward Advanced Computational Intelligence for Smart Infrastructure Monitoring.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The Impact of Cognitive Biases on Professionals' Decision-Making: A Review of Four Occupational Areas.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Individual differences have been neglected in decision-making research on heuristics and cognitive biases. Addressing that issue requires having reliable measures. The author first reviewed the research on the measurement of individual differences in cognitive biases. While reliable measures of a dozen biases are currently available, our review revealed that some measures require improvement and measures of other key biases are still lacking (e.g., confirmation bias). We then conducted empirical work showing that adjustments produced a significant improvement of some measures and that confirmation bias can be reliably measured. Overall, our review and findings highlight that the measurement of individual differences in cognitive biases is still in its infancy. In particular, we suggest that contextualized (in addition to generic) measures need to be improved or developed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.