Curious people can be annoying!

Every human being curious by nature. This is why people seem enthusiastic and pay attention to what we want to know. We always have an ability to search for something new and try to hang around any person who we think they hold important informations that could respond our curiousity even it is not our business. This might make people being annoying and rude by asking too much to get to know other's business. Ultimately, the curiousity bias causes us to violate the privacy of others and that make us reduce the value of ourselves that not deserve the respect from another people.

The Implicit Association Test and The Political Compass test are valuable.

The implicit Association test was creat to help people study and comprehend about implicit biases and the Political Compass Test seek to succer people in identifying their general ideological perspective.

The Implicit Association Test provide variety of test for us to get the result that tell what we truely think about other people. 

The political Compass Test provide essential questions for test takers to rate the statement which insist of strongly agree, agree, disagree and strongly disagree. The test use people choices to define which ideological perspective they have.

I took the Emotion detection task and the skin-tone test. My results for the emotion detection task told me that my ability to detect emotions from facial expression is high about 67%. The skin-tone test suggested me that i have a strong automatic preference for light skin compared to dark skin.

In the Political Compass test i got a result that placed me kind of in the middle but slightly to the left-Authoritarian.

I admit that the result of the skin-tone test was true. I grew up and live in the society surround with people who had ligjt skin. Therefore, i'm okay with the result. 

If you are interested in taking these tests yourself, then follow these links:

https://www.politicalcompass.org/test

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/takeatest.html

1st News Article Discussion Task

I just read the article from The Guardian website. The article was talking about the strike between the Egypt officer and three terrorists. This violence occured today near the temple which located in tourist city of luxor, Egypt. The officer opened fire on three men after they had refused to undergo security screening at a check point before go into Karnak temple. The police shot two attackers as they pulled out weapons concealed in their bags, killing one and seriously wounding another. Suddenly, a third attackers managed to detonate a bomb he was carring and died. There were still loads of detail about the article. If you want to read more about it, please follow this link:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/10/egyptian-tourist-city-of-luxor-hit-by-suicide-bomb-attack

How cognitive biases important for us?

My media class and i read an article about cognitive biases last week. If you interested, you can check it out by this link: http://io9.com/5974468/the-most-common-cognitive-biases-that-prevent-you-from-being-rational

There are three biases that i spend more time to focus on: confirmation bias, ingroup bias and gambler's fallacy. In my opinion i think confirmation bias and ingroup bias are quiet similar. Those two biases talked about how people have a narrow-minded and confident about their perspective. However, gambler fallacy was different to thoes discrimination. It seem to more focus on a group of people as gamblers and it gave us a real statement and ideas to be thinking about. Therefore, i'd like to pick up gambler fallacy as an special topic to concentrate on.

It's called a fallacy, but it's more a glitch in our thinking. We tend to put a tremendous amount of weight on previous events, believing that they'll somehow influence future outcomes. The classic example is coin-tossing. After flipping heads, say, five consecutive times, our inclination is to predict an increase in likelihood that the next coin toss will be tails — that the odds must certainly be in the favor of heads. But in reality, the odds are still 50/50. As statisticians say, the outcomes in different tosses are statistically independent and the probability of any outcome is still 50%. Relatedly, there's also the positive expectation bias — which often fuels gambling addictions. It's the sense that our luck has to eventually change and that good fortune is on the way. It also contribues to the "hot hand" misconception. Similarly, it's the same feeling we get when we start a new relationship that leads us to believe it will be better than the last one. 

For me, i don't have any experience about gambler fallacy. However, in my own opinion think this bias often occur when people play gambling. The gambler have strongly believe in their sense. They usually feel like they come with their good luck. They think good luck will bring them money. However, it totally a wrong believe. It is not about luck or sense that they believe. The chance they win is 50/50 due to the risk taking is independent.

In short, cognitive biases are great. These ideas help us systematize our mind. Sometimes we have no ideas about why we can make a decision easily or even judge another people automatically. These is because of thier look, their personality, their behavior or because our biases was working. That is still the knowlege that we haven't understand profoundly and it is an interesting issue to learn.

1st post

Animal: lion

Name: Tangmo

Interesting: English and laws