https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
+ Hedonic adaption: Hedonic adaption is special psychological effects that explains about how we perceive about happiness. Even after a big happy moment, our level of happiness do down quickly. We adapt our perception to our current situations. So it's like nothing will last forever. Hedonic adaption is both good and bad. It makes us adapt quickly with any situations. It keeps us safe. So we should appreciate it and learn how to make use of this effect rather than blaming it. Learns to attend with everything you do even it's bad, explore something news. It will help you deal with bad effects of hedonic adaptation.
+ Mindfulness: Do some mindfulness exercise. We feel stress because our mind think we're having problems. Our mind made up our feelings to keep us safe [7]. It's good for us. Mindfulness help us understand more about feeling and more enjoy the moment.
+ Mind body connection: Your health affects your mental, and your mental will affect your health. To me, it's not because some spiritual belief, but it's how systems work [3] [4]. Our body, our mind are systems. They are part of bigger system. They connect each others and interact with each other, sending some feedback. So try to improve both your health and your mental. Try to improve your health diet, do exercises and taking care of our thoughts and feelings.
+ We aren't rational. Our thinking system is optimal but it has limitations [3]. It has a lot of problems (cognitive biases). Learn to appreciate and find a way to make it better. For example, we can adapt. We update our belief overtime. Try to make new better habits[5]. Make small steps.
+ There isn't perfect things. Every systems aren't perfect. Our immune system, our cognitive system, organizations, data structures, design patterns,... Appreciate what works, what not and improve it.
Some interesting books, articles you might interest:
[1] https://www.plantinghappiness.co.uk/hedonic-adaptation/
[2] https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
[3] https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Systems-Donella-H-Meadows/dp...
[4] https://www.amazon.com/Mindbody-Prescription-Healing-Body-Pa...
[5] https://jamesclear.com/atomic-habits
[6] https://www.coursera.org/learn/the-science-of-well-being
[7] https://www.amazon.com/Wisdom-Insecurity-Message-Age-Anxiety...
Daniel Kahneman analyzed a bunch of data that lead him to concluded that the typical interview process did nothing to help select the best candidate. There's a chapter about it in Thinking Fast And Slow [1] and the advice he gives is summarized in this article [2]. I remember thinking after reading this book that it was just a matter of time until everyone everywhere would be denouncing interviews but here we are - old habits die hard.
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
[2] https://www.businessinsider.com/daniel-kahneman-on-hiring-de...
Veritasium did a great job summarizing the idea: https://youtu.be/UBVV8pch1dM
This applies to almost all issues too, plane accidents being one of the more obvious ones (plane travel is many times safer than car travel, and yet many people don't see it that way).
Thinking Fast and Slow is a great book that covers at length recency bias and its affects [1]. Quite eye opening to me was one study where people were asked to spin a wheel with 1-100, and then asked how many African nations are in the UN. The number on the wheel had a profound affect on the number people picked [2], despite the fact that the number on the wheel should clearly has no meaning.
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
[2] https://www.realclearscience.com/lists/10_problems_with_how_...
[1] https://www.amazon.com/JavaScript-Definitive-Guide-Activate-... [2] https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp... [3]https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Probability-Models-Tenth... [4] https://www.amazon.com/Hackers-Black-Book-Important-Informat...
Let me suggest such a metric: A T-value. That is, the degree to which the actual outcome deviates from the expected outcome.
For example, say you have a hospital that does stem cell transplants. For each patient before the treatment you assess the "chance that the patient will die within 1 year" based on that patient's age, sex, BMI, heart and lung function, type of disease, time since last relapse, quality of donor match, etc. From this you estimate that 19.6% of the hospital's patients who are treated over a particular period will die within 1 year, with a standard deviation of 3.7%. The actual mortality rate for this group of patients turns out to be 26.2%. So the T-value is +1.78; this is the 'single metric' used to evaluate the competence of the hospital.
> there's the problem of deference to eminence combined with small in-bred communities within each speciality or sub-specialty (who would likely be the only people with the training to evaluate their peers reliably).
Keep in mind that expertise is only required in estimating pre-treatment "chance that the patient will die within 1 year". Determining whether a patient is alive after a year and calculating the T-value can be done by anyone. And even when estimating expected mortality, there is plenty of evidence that a simple algorithm can actually beat the experts - Daniel Kahneman devotes a whole chapter to this point in 'Thinking Fast and Slow' [1].
[1] Chapter 21: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00555X8OA/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...
Antifragile https://www.amazon.com/Antifragile-Things-That-Disorder-Ince...
High Output Management https://www.amazon.com/High-Output-Management-Andrew-Grove/d...
The Master Switch https://www.amazon.com/Master-Switch-Rise-Information-Empire...
Thinking Fast and Slow https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
[1]: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0374533555/ref=as_li_tl?ie...
People that create apps create them to make money, not because they make you more productive or help you be more creative.
[1]https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
[2]https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/collections/newton
[3]http://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/Viewer.aspx?ref=arundel_ms_263_...
Interestingly, he won his nobel prize in the field of economics, but he's a psychologist, not an economist. His research was so influential that it changed business strategies (esp. around how meetings are held) forever.
I can't say enough good things about Thinking Fast and Slow. Go read it.
I posted this article in reply to another comment in this thread, but I think many will find it interesting and useful. It's a good jumping off point into his research and why it's important.
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/frontal-cortex/why-smart-peopl...
I tend to agree with this sentiment especially considering I have read and tried to apply quite a few in my own life.
However, I am currently working my way through Thinking, Fast and Slow[0] and I can't recommend it enough. It's not so much a self-improvement/help book as it is a way to define the language we use in speaking about the different systems of the brain (think intuitive vs effortful). Worth the read.
[0]https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
[0] - https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
Great book about the way humans think.
"Oh look, this $2500 sofa is only $1899.99 right now. What a great deal!"
One experiment had respondents use the last two digits of their social security number as the initial price for a bottle of wine or other good. This completely-arbitrary price had a strong correlation with the price they were willing to pay for the item.
The effect is described in greater detail in Thinking, Fast and Slow[3]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring
[2] http://www.inc.com/the-build-network/the-anchoring-effect.ht...
[3] http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
Here's some books that I read & recommend re: applied systems thinking & ecosystems.
http://www.amazon.com/Permaculture-Principles-Pathways-beyon...
http://www.amazon.com/Edible-Forest-Gardens-2-set/dp/1890132...
http://www.amazon.com/One-Straw-Revolution-Introduction-Natu...
http://www.amazon.com/1491-Revelations-Americas-Before-Colum...
http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Germs-Steel-Fates-Societies/dp/03...
http://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Societies-Choose-Succeed-Revi...
http://www.newsociety.com/Books/D/Decline-and-Fall
http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
http://www.amazon.com/Consciousness-Social-Brain-Michael-Gra...
http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Scratch-Making-Relationship-Rules/...
Related reading : Thinking fast & slow [1]
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
1. Thinking fast and slow - Understanding how we actually think as opposed to how we think we think is a critical skill, especially in a startup. Having a Nobel prize winner explain how the two systems of your brain work together (and can sabotage you) was enlightening and enjoyable. This book helped me understand many aspects of design and sales that had been black boxes for me
http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
2. Art and Fear - This is a book nominally about the relationship between artists and how they go about making art but it is useful for anyone creative. It's about how to go about making when you have errands to run, a deadline, or just don't feel like it. As a dev I found it inspiring
http://www.amazon.com/Art-Fear-Observations-Rewards-Artmakin...
http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
If you're into this type of psychology, check out "Thinking Fast and Slow" by D. Kahnemann.
http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
From what this guy describes, "test prep" sounds like "educating students".
I agree that grading of essays is a disaster. It's not specific to standardized tests, however - that's how all my essays were graded from grade 1 all the way to college.
Another way to game the test is on the test giver's side - they get to define what the pass/fail thresholds are.
This is why tests are standardized, not left up to the schools or teachers.
[1] A hard problem: "What is the optimal incarceration time to dissuade people from pedophilia." An easy problem: "How angry do pedophiles make me feel?" When most people hear the first question, which is hard, their mind substitutes the second much easier question for it. See Kahneman's book "Thinking Fast and Slow" for more on this. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0374533555/ref=as_li_tl?ie=...
* A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy - http://www.amazon.com/dp/0195374614/
Honorable Mention:
* Anything You Want - http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00506NRBS
* On Intelligence - http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003J4VE5Y/
* Thinking Fast and Thinking Slow - http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00555X8OA/
Related:
Because it's irrational and doesn't represent the real probability of an event happening again. The argument is therefore that we are shaping policy (with ramifications on economics, privacy and politics) based on poor statistical analysis. I'd recommend reading Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow if you're interested in understanding how irrational our minds are. http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
I'm thinking about a study cited in Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow[1] where the participants did better on a test when the questions where in a blurry font. I believe it was suggested that being forced to exert mental effort to read the questions forced their brain into "actual thinking mode" as opposed to "pattern recognition" mode.
ie. If we know it's probably not an ad, but it looks like an ad, is it a more effective bit of non-ad? (well, it is an ad, but it's an ad we want to see.)
[1]http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
I have't looked at the actual research behind the topics they are covering, but at least there seems to be a good reference list in the book so it should be possible dig out the articles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow
http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
Psychologist and Nobel econ prize winner Daniel Kahneman has written about this in his book "Thinking, Fast and Slow" [1]. I am currently halfway through this book and it's been an insightful read so far.
[1] - http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
it's a very good book. i just gave a friend a copy today (if anyone in santiago is looking for a spanish language copy it's sold out in all the shops but bazuca.cl still have it in stock - i guess no-one thinks of buying books there!)
An obvious counterpoint: I doubt higher prices has any correlation with sales numbers in the iOS market. And while there are successful high-priced games (Minecraft at $6.99), that's because they are high quality games. I think Minecraft would undoubtedly sell more units if it were at $2.99.
Another thing to consider is the psychological "anchor effect"; Dan Kahneman (Nobel Prize in Economics) conducted a famous experiment in which college students were influenced by a number they knew to be completely random:
Amos and I once rigged a wheel of fortune. It was marked from 0 to 100, but we had it built so that it would stop only at 10 or 65. We recruited students of the University of Oregon as participants in our experiment. One of us would stand in front of a small group, spin the wheel, and ask them to write down the number on which the wheel stopped, which of course was either 10 or 65. We then asked them 2 questions: 1. Is the percentage of African nations among UN members larger or smaller than the number you just wrote? 2. What is your best guess of the percentage of African nations in the UN? The spin of a wheel of fortune – even one that is not rigged – cannot possibly yield useful information about anything, and the participants in our experiment should simply have ignored it. But they did not ignore it. The average estimates of those who saw 10 and 65 were 25% and 45%, respectively. The summary: there is room in setting initial prices to convince people think they should be paying a higher price.
http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
- Yeah, we were afraid that the name is too clever for System 1 [1] to understand. On the other hand it feels good once you get it and it makes you feel kinda like a photography insider :) Also I'm not a native English speaker, but my English friends could pronounce it even without having an idea about d.o.f.
- There is no single particularly clever part about this, just the G+ style grid made possible by on-the-fly image rendering/resizing with imgix.com [2] and the absence of chrome/distractions. My company is working on a much more advanced photo hosting solution and we basically launched this to have a really minimalistic service to which we will be able to trickle down advanced behind-the-curtain stuff once it is proven to work for users.
- will check jux.com out thanks!
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/... [2] imgix.com - these guys are just starting out so it is bumpy sometimes, but I've been recommending them because it is such a good idea
There's a book i've been enjoying [Thinking Fast and Slow](http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...) that addresses this in great detail.
I suspect it falls into this general realm: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effort_justification
edit: Specifically I believe I recall this (from the linked Wikipedia page) in Thinking Fast and Slow:
One of the first and most classic examples of effort justification is Aronson and Mills's study.[2] A group of young women who volunteered to join a discussion group on the topic "Psychology of Sex" were asked to do a small reading test to make sure they were not too embarrassed to talk about sexual-related topics with others. The mild-embarrassment condition subjects were asked to read aloud a list of sex-related words such as "prostitute" or "virgin". The severe-embarrassment condition subjects were asked to read aloud a list of highly sexual words (e.g. "fuck", "cock") and to read two vivid descriptions of sexual activity taken from contemporary novels. All subjects then listened to a recording of a discussion about "Sexual Behavior in Animals" which was dull and unappealing. When asked to rate the group and its members, control and mild-embarrassment groups did not differ, but the severe-embarrassment group's ratings were significantly higher. This group, whose initiation process was more difficult (embarrassment = effort), had to increase their subjective value of the discussion group to resolve the dissonance.
The cited study is: Aronson, E., & Mills, J. (1959) The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology ,59, 177-181.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahneman_the_riddle_of_exper...
http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
[1]- http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
[2]- http://www.amazon.com/Nudge-Improving-Decisions-Health-Happi...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
and
http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
http://www.amazon.com/What-Intelligence-Tests-Miss-Psycholog...
http://yalepress.yale.edu/book.asp?isbn=9780300123852
is great, as is Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman.
http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...
I've had about ten requests from men to explain the phrase "winning the cocktail party". None from women.
A male friend, who spends a not inconsiderable time cruising feminist sites, was one of those who asked what it meant. I find it odd to realize that most men don't observe something that is obvious to every woman I know: that there is a competitive male dynamic to groups that is completely different from the way female groups act. They don't know, of course, because unless the group is overwhelmingly female, the dynamic of any mixed group always defaults to male, with women fading back into supporting conversational roles. Maybe it's the kind of thing you can only observe by contrast to the extremely anti-competitive nature of female groups.
The easiest way to put it (and this is hardly original) is that men in groups are focused on their role within the group. Women in groups are focused on the group. Men gain status by standing out from the group; women gain status by submerging themselves into it--by strengthening the group, often at the expense of themselves.
Both these styles have advantages and drawbacks. I'm not trying to establish that one is better than the other. But I'm kind of shocked, though I shouldn't be, to realize that men don't even see it, the way they don't see catcalling, because it never happens when they're around.
I've seen this kind of behavior a lot more often since I began looking for it.
BTW, if you're interested in cognitive biases more generally, check out Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow (http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/...).
Thinking, Fast and Slow : http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00555X8OA?ie=UTF8&tag=...
Here's my Kindle @ Amazon link - does it work if you're you and... well, not me? https://kindle.amazon.com/profile/David-N--Welton/208047#rec...
It shows what I've been reading lately, notes, etc...
Speaking of which, something that aggregated Kindle reading patterns of HN readers is something I would love to see as an application. How cool would that be? Popular books, notes, etc...
You will be missed! Sad to hear he passed, but glad he was able to go out on his own terms.