One of the main biases that might impact the project is Anchoring. Anchoring describes the basic human instinct, to begin with, an initial position and adjusts accordingly to the information received. However, due to the human need to anchor to a comfortable position, this can often lead to adjustments that are inaccurate or unsuccessful (Arnott, 1998). This can be directly transposed into the programming world, with examples such as anchoring into a certain algorithm that is not appropriate for the circumstances and being unable to adjust due to group disagreements or lack of creativity.
The most proficient way of addressing this within a group as well as individually is to conduct peer reviews and critical discussions regarding decisions. It is important to create an environment within which members feel free and comfortable to share their opinions; contributing to spirited discussions. Alongside this, it is important to conduct serious thought during major decisions and actions, and most importantly to keep an open mind while doing so, attempting not to get anchored into a point, and being flexible enough to adjust accordingly.
Complexity in coding is one of the main detractors of the field of software engineering. The complexity of coding combined with the potential time constraints leads to stresses amongst groups as well as individuals within programming projects. For example, task stress; the stress that arises from having to make an important decision with limited time is one of the main aspects of the Complexity bias (Arnott, 2018). This can quickly become one of the main biases within the ISP team, wanting to avoid complexity within programming and take the easier route.
Individually, the best way to overcome this bias is to view the project from a growth perspective rather than an academic perspective. By doing so, complex topics will become learning opportunities rather than annoyances caused by an academic project. From a group perspective, the foremost method of overcoming this bias is to take on the challenge of complexity as a group, rather than forcing one or more group members who are proficient in the field to conduct the more challenging and complex topics.
Within the ISP, one of the main biases that might develop is the bias for desire. This can be caused by a multitude of factors; primarily overconfidence and wishful thinking. Due to both overconfidence and wishful thinking, members within the ISP team might have hindered judgment which leads to worsened decision-making. For example, people who want to win a lottery, or a particular job might at times overestimate their chances of success even with present information that contradicts their chances (Arnott, 1998). This can be increasingly prevalent within the ISP team, as each member might have a different desire for what the result should look like, or be.
Individually, the finest way to address this bias would be to do so as a group. By clearly defining the end goals of a project, proper methods to achieve the end goal, and considering contextual factors; the group as a whole can overcome the decision-making bias that results directly from Desire. While there might be certain ways to do so completely individually, this is the finest way to do so from an individual and group perspective.
Human beings have certain personality-based biases, one of which is the Halo effect. The Halo effect describes when there is a false perception within individuals regarding another individual’s traits, and to perceive a spillover effect from one aspect of the individual’s personality to another (Mind Tools Content Team, 2022). This can lead to personal biases within individuals of the ISP team, where each member might have a negative or positive perception of another member of the team, and approach their constructive ideas and perspective through their lens, leading to bias in decision making.
To deal with it, the best method is to simply aim to keep an open mind. Humans will always have biases and there is no way to rectify this, the brain might perceive one person as good and the other as bad; the best way to rectify this instead is to judge individual ideas rather than the source of these ideas. To look at each perspective as simply a perspective, rather than a perspective from someone specific. By doing so, the Halo effect can be overcome.
Taking risks, and trial and error proved to be one of the most important tools when writing code for programs. Especially when large amounts of code are involved, thus the safety bias can be hugely damaging and prevalent within the ISP team. Safety bias refers to the human tendency to want to avoid loss, preferring to take no risks as it might lead to an adverse outcome, and essentially the human tendency to want to remain as safe as possible (Abkwoitz, 2022). The safety bias can hinder decision-making severely, as it can impair several major tools within programming and coding, as well as generally hinder creativity.
Similar to the method of overcoming the complexity bias, overcoming the safety bias is to do so from a growth perspective. In seeing every risk as a possible way to grow, the human brain is less likely to avoid such risks. As well as this, it is possible to mitigate these biases as a group, one of the primary ways being to provide a way back to the previously safe environment. Alongside this, keeping an open mind aids not just the Safety bias but most of the other biases. In combining all these methods, the Safety bias can be mitigated through individual and group effort.
Arnott, D. (1998). (rep.). A Taxonomy of Decision Biases (pp. 1–48). Caulfield East, Victoria: Monash University. Retrieved December 10, 2022, from https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=c58cca5c8e8774eb5b17ac3159914d1f1357a014
Mind Tools Content Team. (n.d.). Cognitive Bias.MindTools. Retrieved December 11, 2022, from https://www.mindtools.com/a0ozgex/cognitive-bias
Abkowitz, A. (2022, August 4). The 5 biggest biases that affect decision-making. NeuroLeadership Institute. Retrieved December 11, 2022, from https://neuroleadership.com/your-brain-at-work/seeds-model-biases-affect-decision-making/