Discover published sets by community

This bias may have helped early humans to make quick decisions using minimal information.

The focus on immediate examples that come to mind may have helped our ancestors avoid dangers and remember critical survival information.

This bias could have assisted in maintaining stable, cohesive social groups, which were crucial for the survival of early humans.

An inflated belief in one's abilities could have led to higher status and more mating opportunities in early human societies.

Focusing on survivors could have helped early humans emulate successful strategies rather than the myriad failed attempts.

The greater sensitivity to loss may have been an adaptation to ensure survival by prioritizing the avoidance of potential threats.

Valuing personal possessions more than new items could have helped maintain ownership and control over resources in early human societies.

Believing events were predictable after they have occurred may have helped early humans create coherent narratives for learning and future planning.

Failing to accurately judge risk may have been advantageous if it led to cautious behavior in dangerous environments.

Attributing others' behavior to character rather than context may have simplified the complex social world for our ancestors.

Favoritism towards one's own group likely encouraged group cohesion, which was essential for the survival of interdependent individuals.

Conforming with the group may have improved chances of survival by aligning with the majority decision, which could have been based on collective wisdom.

Misunderstanding randomness could be a byproduct of the search for patterns, which generally enhanced survival in a patterned natural world.

Attributing success to internal factors and failures to external factors may have helped maintain a positive self-image and resilience.

The belief in a just world where actions have fair consequences could have encouraged beneficial social behavior and deterred harm to others in tightly knit communities.

Perceiving situations as zero-sum may have been an effective strategy in resource-scarce environments where one person's gain often was another's loss.

Once understanding or learning is achieved, it's challenging to imagine not knowing it, possibly because shared knowledge reinforced group cohesiveness.

Expecting positive outcomes could have encouraged risk-taking in pursuit of rewards, necessary for the advancement of early human society.

Deferring to authority figures could have helped maintain social hierarchies and order in early human societies.

Reluctance to help when others are present may stem from shared responsibility and the assumption that someone else will act, thus conserving one's own resources.

Prioritizing immediate rewards over future ones could have benefited survival when the future was uncertain and immediate gain ensured survival.

The preference for familiar stimuli could have led to a reduced fear response to known elements in the environment, preserving energy for true threats.

This bias might reflect an evolutionary drive to protect one's own group and its creations, potentially leading to greater group self-reliance.

A preference for action over inaction could have been selected for, as taking action often led to more favorable outcomes in a dynamic, changing environment.