Unit 2 · 2.2
Thinking, Problem-Solving, Judgments, and Decision-Making
Unit 2 is 15–25% of the multiple-choice section. Judgment items are won by naming the shortcut that fits THIS scene — not by dumping every bias you know. · about 5 minutes with the essay beats.
You do not remember what happened. You remember what you encoded — and what later got in the way.
Read the scene first. The term will wait. When it lands, you will be able to use it on a stranger’s story — that is the exam, and that is also why this subject is interesting.
A scene you already lived
Do not hunt the term yet. Let this sit. The exam will hand you a stranger’s version of the same night.
The quiz app asks which city is larger. You have never seen a census. You pick the city that exploded on your feed last week — a stadium, a skyline, a celebrity landing there. It feels like the right answer. It is not evidence. It is availability: a vivid example arriving faster than a base rate. A classmate who ‘looks like’ a coder gets the internship in your head before the transcript does. A first number on a stall anchors the rest of the bargain. The exam will not ask whether you are foolish. It will ask which shortcut actually ran. Gut feeling is a process with a name, and the name is not always insight.
What the paper actually asks
These are the scoring targets. If you can do them on a new story, you are ready — flashcards can wait.
- Name the heuristic or bias that actually fits THIS scene, not a list dump.
- Separate algorithms from heuristics; availability from representativeness.
- Read a small data display about judgments without inventing causation.
The mechanism
Once you can walk this, you will start seeing it at dinner, in a group chat, in your own delay. That is the fun of this course.
An algorithm is a step-by-step procedure that guarantees a solution if one exists and you finish the steps — a formula, a systematic search of every locker. A heuristic is a shortcut that is often fast and often good enough, and sometimes systematically wrong. Insight is a sudden reorganization of the problem; it is real enough as an experience and limited as an explanation — a feeling of ‘now I see it’ is not a proof you skipped every bias, and it is not a tiny lightning bolt you can point to on a cartoon brain.
Name the shortcut that fits. Availability: judged probability follows how easily examples come to mind (a viral accident, a family story). Representativeness: judged category membership follows similarity to a prototype, often ignoring base rates (the quiet classmate ‘is’ the librarian; the sporty one ‘is’ the captain). Anchoring: an early number tugs later estimates. Confirmation: you hunt for what fits the hunch and skip what does not. Overconfidence: certainty outruns accuracy. Framing: the same numbers feel different as lives saved versus lives lost, or as 90% jam versus 10% missing. Mental set: yesterday’s strategy is still driving, even when the lock changed. Functional fixedness: a usual use of an object blocks a new use.
Dual-process language is a teaching sketch: a fast, automatic pass and a slower, more effortful pass. It is not two colored lobes, not a brain-scan souvenir, and not a moral (fast is not ‘dumb’). Use it to say a judgment was quick and cue-driven, then name the actual heuristic. Do not treat IQ as a shield against heuristics. Shortcuts show up in careful people. Trusting your gut always is a slogan, not a method.
Algorithm
stepwise, complete, slow
Heuristic
fast, usually good, sometimes biased
Availability
easy to bring to mind
Representativeness
looks like the prototype
Anchoring
first number tugs the next
Confirmation
hunt for what you already like
Mental set
the old move blocks a new one
Framing
same facts, different wording
Words worth owning
A definition is a tool. The confusable is the distractor. Learn both and the clever wrong answer stops working.
Algorithm
A step-by-step procedure that guarantees a correct solution if one exists and the steps are completed.
Confusable. A heuristic is faster and does not guarantee. Insight is a sudden reorganization, not a recipe you can write out in advance.
Heuristic
A mental shortcut that often produces a good-enough judgment quickly, with systematic error patterns the exam will name.
Confusable. Not ‘being sloppy’ as a character trait. Not an algorithm. Name which heuristic.
Availability heuristic
Judging frequency or probability by how easily examples come to mind.
Confusable. Representativeness is about similarity to a prototype, not about vivid ease of recall.
Representativeness heuristic
Judging category or probability by similarity to a prototype, often neglecting base rates.
Confusable. Availability is ease of coming to mind. Looking like a type is representativeness.
Anchoring
An early number or starting value tugs later estimates even when the start is arbitrary.
Confusable. Not framing (which is about how the same information is worded or packaged).
Confirmation bias
Seeking, noticing, or remembering evidence that fits a current belief and missing what does not.
Confusable. Not the same as overconfidence (certainty outrunning accuracy), though they can travel together.
Framing
The wording or packaging of the same information changes the choice (gains vs losses, 90% vs 10%).
Confusable. Not anchoring (a starting number). Framing is the window, not the first digit.
Functional fixedness
Stuck on an object’s usual function, so a new use that would solve the problem does not appear.
Confusable. Mental set is a stuck strategy or procedure. Functional fixedness is a stuck use of an object.
A study you can actually use
Classic or labeled hypothetical. Either way: what was done, what was found, what it cannot claim.
Classic (classroom-common) · mid-20th century (classroom-common)
Duncker-style candle problem (functional fixedness)
- What was done
- Classroom-common version: people are asked to mount a candle on a wall with a box of tacks and matches present. The usual use of the box (container) tends to hide the solution of using the box as a shelf.
- Finding
- A familiar function can block a needed new function. That is functional fixedness as a problem-solving limit, not a measure of ‘creativity scores.’
- Limit — what it cannot claim
- A classroom puzzle is not a life. Materials, instructions, and whether the box is shown full or empty all matter. Do not invent a success percentage or a journal.
- How AAQ would probe it
- Method: structured problem-solving demonstration. Variable: how the materials are presented. Application: functional fixedness, not availability. Limit: one puzzle, not a personality test.
Labeled hypothetical
Hypothetical estimated vs recorded causes of missed practices (original practice source, not a published paper)
Original practice source, not a published paper.
- What was done
- A coach asks 40 players to estimate what share of last term’s missed practices came from each cause, then compares those estimates with the office attendance log. A viral clip of a dramatic sideline injury had circulated that month. Estimated vs recorded shares: viral-looking injuries 38% vs 9%; ordinary illness 22% vs 47%; transport problems 25% vs 28%; family events 15% vs 16%.
- Finding
- Injuries were judged far more common than the log showed; ordinary illness was judged too rare. A fair claim is that a vivid clip can pull frequency estimates — availability — not that the log ‘proved illness causes injury,’ and not that players are careless as a trait.
- Limit — what it cannot claim
- Labeled hypothetical. Numbers exist only in this practice card. One team, one term, self-estimated percentages. The clip was not randomly assigned, so this display is not a clean experiment on media. Do not cite it as a real paper.
- How AAQ would probe it
- Practice 3: read estimated vs recorded. Statistic: injuries overestimated, illness underestimated — direction, not a fake p-value. Argumentation: availability, not representativeness (the miss is ease of a vivid example, not a prototype of a ‘typical player’). Cannot claim the clip caused the estimates without a design that manipulates the clip.
Someone’s Tuesday
If it only lives in the textbook, it will not survive a novel stem. This is the idea wearing ordinary clothes.
A scholarship post goes viral because one student from your city got in. Suddenly that school ‘is’ the path, even if the quiet table of acceptance rates says otherwise — availability sitting on base rates. Choosing a science partner because they ‘look like’ a lab person, ignoring who actually keeps a notebook: representativeness. A street stall’s first price becomes the whole negotiation: anchoring. Scrolling only the comments that agree that the referee was biased: confirmation. A box used only as a box when you needed a step: functional fixedness. Rewriting last week’s essay plan onto a prompt that is a different task: mental set. The exam move is one name, not a confession.
Where clever students go wrong
The trap is usually a neighboring term that almost fits. Name it so it stops feeling smart.
‘Trust your gut always’ is a poster, not a method. Gut is often a fast heuristic; name it. ‘IQ means you don’t use heuristics’ is false — shortcuts show up in people who score well on tests. Dual-process is not a brain scan of two personalities living in two hemispheres. Insight is not magic and not proof you were rational. Dumping every bias you memorized onto one stem is how you miss. Pick the one that fits the scene.
A stem, then the move
Watch me work one. Then you will do four without looking back.
Scenario
After a week of flood clips on a group chat, Jin estimates that floods cause more local absences than colds, though the school office list shows the opposite. A friend who ‘looks like a prefect’ is guessed to have the highest marks before anyone checks the board. Which two heuristics, in order?
Walkthrough
Vivid clips making floods feel common is availability (ease of coming to mind), not representativeness. Guessing marks from a prefect-like look is representativeness (prototype), not availability. Do not call either an algorithm. Do not call the first one framing unless the stem is about wording of the same numbers. The office list is the base-rate display; the clips did not rewrite it.
The move
Availability, then representativeness. Two different shortcuts. The list does not prove the clips caused the estimate without a design.
Try tonight · 5 minutes
A living experiment, not a vibe
Do this on your actual Tuesday. The paper will later hand you a stranger’s version of the same five minutes.
Catch one ‘this feels like the right answer’ moment — a news clip, a bargain’s first number, a person who ‘looks like’ a type. Name the shortcut. Write one piece of evidence you did not use.
Prove it
Four items. No looking back.
One at a time. After each submit I will show the key, why it is right, and why the others felt clever.
Item 1 of 4 · Practice 1 · Concept application
After a week of flood clips on her group chat, Anika estimates that floods cause more local school absences than colds, though she has never seen the office list. Which shortcut best fits?
Keys A–D select. Enter checks.
Write it · AAQ
Read the frequencies; do not invent a cause
Say the move in your own mouth. If you can write it, you own it — rereading is not the same thing.
Original practice source, not a published paper. Estimated vs recorded shares of missed practices: injuries 38% vs 9%; ordinary illness 22% vs 47%. Identify the research method as this comparison actually is (players’ estimates vs a log — not random assignment). Then say what the 38 vs 9 comparison allows you to claim, and name the heuristic that best fits an overestimate of injuries after a viral clip.
Move: Practice 3 + application. The display is a comparison of estimates with records, not an experiment. Direction only. Availability, not a character verdict.
Where curiosity goes next
Related rooms. Open the one that still tugs.