Abstract answers and availability bias

- I wonder if [[abstract answers]], in and of themselves, have increased value due to [[availability bias]] I wonder if [[abstract answers]], in and of themselves, have increased value due to [[availability bias]] I wonder if [[abstract answers]], in and of themselves, have increased value due to [[availability bias]] Because they come up with various cases, we assume they have a high value Abstractions get matched at the right frequency, they increase in value due to availability bias - Abstraction becomes more valuable with availability bias because it gets matched at the right frequency. - The "concrete/abstract" division is ambiguous, [[False dichotomy]], and there may be a cut-off point for a little more resolution. - It is possible that it just feels like it is worth more, but it is not actually worth more. - It's like the Barnum effect. - Like cold reading. - The value and method of abstraction depends on individual cognitive ability and proficiency - In "[[Abstraction is not a one way street.]]" it is noted that there are a myriad of ways to abstract, which vary according to individual cognitive ability and proficiency. - Surely it is better to ask concretely than to ask [[oddly abstractly]]`? We find value in abstract answers because we are more proficient at connecting abstract answers to concrete value, and most people are not capable of proper abstraction or proper concretization.` - When we think of the Barnum effect, we think of value as an attribute of an answer, when in fact it is an [[Interaction Attributes]], because the value is created by the thoughts that the answer provokes in the receiver.

This conversation produced two thought fragments - Interaction Attributes - abstract is a false dichotomy

BELOW_IS_LESS_INTERESTING

抽象的思考と可用性バイアス

2023-09-04 11:32

Summary of notes

. Abstract answers are often thought to be more valuable due to their broader applicability, which may be due to availability bias. However, it is noted that the “concrete/abstract” dichotomy is ambiguous and requires a higher resolution perspective.

Relation to Fragment

. The fragment “Abstraction is not a one way street.” is closely related to the note. While the note discusses the value of abstraction and the problems with its dichotomy, “Abstraction is not a one way street,” points out that there are a myriad of ways to abstract, which vary according to individual cognitive ability and proficiency. This is an embodiment of the “higher resolution perspective” advocated in the note.

deep thinking

Thinking about the value of abstraction and its methods provides profound insight into how we process, understand, and communicate information. However, the process is highly dependent on individual cognitive abilities and proficiency and cannot be defined in general terms.

summary of thoughts and title

. The value and methods of abstraction depend on individual cognitive ability and proficiency.”

extra info

TITLES: ["The rule of not making up words on your own"], "How can the ability to abstract be taught?", "The Intellectual Production of Engineers: A Reaction Summary", "Abstraction is not a one way street", "Hatena2014-01-04", "Rebuilding (~1 chapter) for creating English version"] generated: 2023-09-04 11:32

previous notes

Abstract thinking and availability bias

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/抽象的回答と可用性バイアス using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.