005 - PhD Paradox

#Logic and Cognitive Bias tend to predictably diverge when examining problems structured like "If B > A and C > B, then C > A".

An example of this I've frequently come across is the cognitive bias favoring a PhD, pitted against the logic of research processes.

If an individual peer reviews the research to determine what is published in prestigious journals, is consulted by PhDs, and generally demonstrates the capacities that are heuristically associated with a PhD, then logic statistically indicates baseline equality. Formal education has no hard causal relation to this, only correlation. We can structure this as "A ~ = B", where A is an individual with a PhD, and B is an individual with identical capacities but without a PhD.

If an #HR department or #investor is looking for ways to quickly reduce their workload, cognitive bias offers the temptation of applying heuristics and anchoring their perception to symbolism, themselves instances of Substitution Bias, such as screening out anyone without a PhD. We can structure this as "A > B".

This initial divergence from logic also causes increasing consequences over time, as it places all weight on the symbol associated with capacities, a PhD, and little or none on the capacities themselves. This strongly incentivizes people to merely acquire the symbol and ignore developing the value of capacities.

Microsoft Research was known for recruiting only PhDs, and they recruited a massive number over the years. However, they failed to achieve what teams more than an order of magnitude smaller were able to because they placed all weight on the symbol, not the actual value.

Google famously discovered that counter to their expectations, their employees with a computer science degree weren't their most productive. They initially assumed the symbol but discovered that the value of capacities ruled in practice.

No remotely ethical company can apply the above "A > B" example of cognitive bias, nor can any company be ethical that is using an applicant tracking system (ATS) built to apply such biases automatically.

Placing all weight on a symbol is effectively no different than superstition, like the Roman practice of having "Household Gods". However, reality doesn't care about superstition, and those who favor it can look to Pompei as a case study.

#bias #cognitivebias #ethics #reasoning #education

This came to mind as I was reviewing a particularly interesting paper in peer review on the subject of cognitive bias. While I can't share any of the paper's contents due to the terms of being a reviewer, I can recommend that researchers accept at least one offer to review for a journal within their domain. If you want to encounter interesting ideas and findings first, be a reviewer.

If you want your employees to encounter such ideas and findings first, encourage them to review them as well.