In sum, one important conclusion is to be continuously aware of the potentially distorting influence of outcome knowledge on the evaluation of our own (or other’s) prior knowledge state. Surprisingly, attempts to overcome hindsight bias have mainly failed, whereas only a few debiasing techniques show promising results. It happens when being given new information changes our recollection from an original thought to something different (Mazzoni & Vannucci, 2007). Hindsight bias has been found in political decision-making (as well as in other applied domains). Moreover, lifespan studies have shown that children and older adults show larger hindsight bias than young adults. The hindsight bias involves the tendency people have to assume that they knew the outcome of an event after the outcome has already been determined. For example, some authors found that hindsight bias tends to increase with the tendency toward favorable self-presentation and to decrease with intelligence.

In addition, the strength of hindsight bias appears to be related to some personality traits and also to age. Depending on the task, motivational factors may also exert their influence. Using stochastic models of hindsight bias allows us to estimate the relative proportions of these mechanisms. Hindsight bias is the misconception, after the fact, that one always knew that they were right. In Experiment 2 I employed a traditional test of the hindsight bias and recruited Ohio State University varsity baseball players, who may be considered super. Theoretical approaches suggest that there are distinct components of hindsight bias, and that several, mainly cognitive, mechanisms are responsible for them. Core research questions are (1) how to explain hindsight bias in terms of underlying processes, (2) whether there are individual differences in susceptibility, (3) how the bias possibly impedes decision-making in applied contexts, such as political decision-making, and (4) how possibly to overcome it. The Supreme Court affords that privilege to the officers involved in use-of-force cases. In that case, the court ruled that officers should not be judged from that 20/20 perspective but ONLY by what the officers knew at the time. About 50 years of research on hindsight bias have meanwhile brought a wealth of findings and insights. You have an unfair advantage because you have what the Supreme Court called clear 20/20 hindsight in Graham v. These judgment distortions are very robust and have been observed in a variety of domains and tasks. For example, following a political election, persons tend to retrospectively adjust their predictions to the actual outcome. Hindsight bias describes the tendency of persons-after the outcome of an event is known-to overestimate their foresight.

Hindsight bias.