The main purpose of this study was to identify different cognitive rules that lead to a particular judgment bias. To fulfill this purpose, a new method Spectral analysis was introduced and applied. Participants judged time saved by driving faster, fuel saved by replacing a car and braking capacity at different speeds. These problems invite the time saving bias (e.g., time saved from speed increases at higher speeds overestimated), the miles per gallon, MPG illusion (misjudgment of fuel saved by replacing a car) and the braking capacity bias (overestimation of braking capacity after speed increase). The average results replicated the biases. Spectral analysis of individual participants and problems showed that a speed difference rule explained about half of the time saving judgments and about three fourth of the MPG judgments. A difference between speeds rule described about one third of the biased braking judgments and a ratio/proportion rule about one fifth of the time saving and MPG judgments. All rules give biased judgments in all three domains. The paper ends with a discussion of hierarchies of cognitive rules, applications of the results, and how to mitigate or avoid the biases and the risks associated with the biases.

这项研究的主要目的是确定导致特定判断偏差的不同认知规则。为了达到这个目的，引入并应用了一种新的光谱分析方法。参加者们评判了通过更快地驾驶节省的时间，通过更换汽车节省的燃料以及不同速度下的制动能力。这些问题会导致节省时间的偏差（例如，在高估较高速度时因节省速度而节省的时间），每加仑行驶的英里数，MPG幻觉（通过更换汽车节省燃料的错误判断）以及制动能力偏差（对速度后的制动能力的高估）增加）。平均结果复制了偏差。对单个参与者和问题的频谱分析表明，速度差异规则可解释约一半的省时判断，约占四分之三的MPG判断。速度规则之间的差异描述了大约三分之一的偏向制动判断，而比率/比例规则描述了时间节省和MPG判断的大约五分之一。所有规则在所有三个领域都给出有偏见的判断。本文最后讨论了认知规则的层次结构，结果的应用以及如何减轻或避免偏见以及与偏见相关的风险。