Identifying effective cognitive biases in information retrieval

The purpose of this study is to identify the types of cognitive biases in the process of information retrieval. This research used a mixed-method approach for data collection. The research population consisted of 25 information retrieval specialists and 30 post-graduate students. We employed three tools for collecting data, including a checklist, log files and semi-structured interviews. The findings showed that from the perspective of information retrieval specialists, the cognitive biases such as ‘Familiarity’, ‘Anchoring’, ‘Rush to solve’ and ‘Curse of knowledge’ could be of the greatest importance in the field of information retrieval. Also, in terms of users’ searching, the ‘Rush to solve problems’ and ‘Mere exposure effects’ biases have the highest frequency, and the ‘Outcome’ and ‘Curse of knowledge’ biases have the lowest frequency in the process of user retrieval information. It can be concluded that, because cognitive biases occurring in information retrieval, designers of information retrieval systems and librarians should pay attention to this issue in designing and evaluating information systems.

EXPRESS: Marketing Ideas: How to Write Research Articles that Readers Understand and Cite

Academia is a marketplace of ideas. Just as firms market their products with packaging and advertising, scholars market their ideas with writing. Even the best ideas will make an impact only if others understand and build upon them. Why, then, is academic writing often difficult to understand? By conducting two experiments and analyzing the text of 1640 articles in premier marketing journals, we show that scholars write unclearly in part because they forget that they know more about their research than readers, a phenomenon called “the curse of knowledge.” Knowledge, or familiarity with one’s own research, exacerbates three practices that make academic writing difficult to understand: abstraction, technical language, and passive writing. When marketing scholars know more about a research project, they use more abstract, technical, and passive writing to describe it. Articles with more abstract, technical, and passive writing are harder for readers to understand and are less likely to be cited. We call for scholars to overcome the curse of knowledge and provide two tools -- a website (writingclaritycalculator.com) and a tutorial -- to help them recognize and repair unclear writing so they can write articles that are more likely to make an impact.

Are the classic false belief tasks cursed? Young children are just as likely as older children to pass a false belief task when they are not required to overcome the curse of knowledge

The question of when children understand that others have minds that can represent or misrepresent reality (i.e., possess a ‘Theory of Mind’) is hotly debated. This understanding plays a fundamental role in social interaction (e.g., interpreting human behavior, communicating, empathizing). Most research on this topic has relied on false belief tasks such as the ‘Sally-Anne Task’, because researchers have argued that it is the strongest litmus test examining one’s understanding that the mind can misrepresent reality. Unfortunately, in addition to a variety of other cognitive demands this widely used measure also unnecessarily involves overcoming a bias that is especially pronounced in young children—the ‘curse of knowledge’ (the tendency to be biased by one’s knowledge when considering less-informed perspectives). Three- to 6-year-old’s (n = 230) false belief reasoning was examined across tasks that either did, or did not, require overcoming the curse of knowledge, revealing that when the curse of knowledge was removed three-year-olds were significantly better at inferring false beliefs, and as accurate as five- and six-year-olds. These findings reveal that the classic task is not specifically measuring false belief understanding. Instead, previously observed developmental changes in children’s performance could be attributed to the ability to overcome the curse of knowledge. Similarly, previously observed relationships between individual differences in false belief reasoning and a variety of social outcomes could instead be the result of individual differences in the ability to overcome the curse of knowledge, highlighting the need to re-evaluate how best to interpret large bodies of research on false belief reasoning and social-emotional functioning.

Lessons Learned from a Writing to Learn Program for Public Health Students at the University of Tokyo

We have taught writing for public health to students completing a Master of Public Health since 2016 in Japan. We adopted a writing-to-learn approach and assigned work to students to write health materials that encourage recipients to perform health behaviors (eg, drafting a poster to encourage lay audiences to adopt preventive behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic). We collected students’ work assignments and products from 2016 to 2020 and reviewed them to identify distinctive trends common to all years. We found that there was a curse of knowledge (ie, difficulties to imagine the state of mind of not knowing when knowing something) among students. Students strongly embraced the adage “knowledge is power” and underestimated the difficulties lay audiences face. Their writing was somewhat dogmatic, whereby experts imparted privileged knowledge to ignorant non-experts. However, it is well known that merely imparting knowledge often does not work to educate lay audiences about making better decisions. Debiasing this curse of knowledge among students will be the main target of our writing education.