User:Rafael9724/sandbox

Durability of Anchoring
Anchoring effects are also shown to remain adequately present given the accessibility of knowledge pertaining to the target. This, in turn, suggests that despite a delay in judgement towards a target, the extent of anchoring effects have seen to remain unmitigated within a give time period. A series of three experiments were conducted to test the longevity of anchoring effects. It was observed that despite a delay of one week being introduced for half the sample population of each experiment, similar results of immediate judgement and delayed judgement of the target were achieved. Indicating that the extent of anchoring being reduced despite a delayed judgement of one week remains absent. The experiments concluded that external information experienced within the delayed judgement period shows little influence relative to self-generated anchors even with commonly encountered targets (temperature) used in one of the experiments, showing that anchoring effects may precede priming (psychology) in duration especially when the anchoring effects were formed during the task. Further research to conclude an effect that is effectively retained over a substantial period of time has proven inconsistent.

Anchoring Bias in Groups
Given the old saying that 'Two Heads are Better than One', it is often presumed that groups come to a more unbiased decision relative to individuals. However, this assumption is supported with varied findings that could not come to a general consensus. Nevertheless, it is acknowledged that groups are able to perform better than an individual member, they are found to be just as biased or even more biased relative to their individual counterparts. A possible cause would be the discriminatory fashion in which information is communicated, processed and aggregated based on each individual's anchored knowledge and belief. This results in a diminished quality in the decision-making process and consequently, amplifies the pre-existing anchored biases.

With anchoring effects present within groups, the causes of its occurrence remain obscure due to the ambiguity if such anchors have established at the group level or simply the culmination of several individual's personal anchors that are adopted by the whole group. Previous studies have evidenced that when given an anchor before the experiment, individual members consolidated the respective anchors given beforehand to attain a decision in the direction of the anchor placed. However, a distinction between individual and group-based anchor biases do exist with groups tending to ignore or disregard external information due to the confidence in the decision which can only be induced from the joint decision-making process. The presence of pre-anchor preferences also impeded the extent to which external anchors affected the group decision as groups tend to allocate more weight to relevant information typically arriving in the form of self-generated anchors from the group according to the 'competing anchor hypthesis'.

A series of experiments were conducted to investigate anchoring bias in groups and possible solutions to avoid or mitigate anchoring. The first experiment established that groups are indeed influenced by anchors while the other two experiments highlighted methods to overcome group anchoring bias. Utilized methods include the use of process accountability and motivation through competition instead of cooperation to reduce the influence of anchors within groups.

Overconfidence
Cognitive conceit or overconfidence arises from other factors like personal cognitive attributes such as knowledge and decision-making ability, decreasing the probability to pursue external sources of confirmation. This factor has also been shown to arise with tasks with greater difficulty. Even within subject matter experts, they were also prey to such behaviour of overconfidence and should more so, actively reduce such behaviour. Following the study of estimations under uncertain,despite several attempts to curb overconfidence proving unsuccessful, Tversky and Kahneman(1971) research suggest an effective solution to overconfidence is for subjects to explicitly establish anchors to help reduce overconfidence in their estimates.