The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hindsight Bias
Abstract
Hindsight bias occurs when people feel that they “knew it all along,” that is, when they believe that an event is more predictable after it becomes known than it was before it became known. Hindsight bias embodies any combination of three aspects: memory distortion, beliefs about events’ objective likelihoods, or subjective beliefs about one’s own prediction abilities. Hindsight bias stems from (a) cognitive inputs (people selectively recall information consistent with what they now know to be true and engage in sensemaking to impose meaning on their own knowledge), (b) metacognitive inputs (the ease with which a past outcome is understood may be misattributed to its assumed prior likelihood), and (c) motivational inputs (people have a need to see the world as orderly and predictable and to avoid being blamed for problems). Consequences of hindsight bias include myopic attention to a single causal understanding of the past (to the neglect of other reasonable explanations) as well as general overconfidence in the certainty of one’s judgments. New technologies for visualizing and understanding data sets may have the unintended consequence of heightening hindsight bias, but an intervention that encourages people to consider alternative causal explanations for a given outcome can reduce hindsight bias.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Measures in accordance with (b), which are intended to maintain an awareness of the automation bias, seem out of place: it introduces a concrete psychological aspect that sticks out from the more technical and operational aspects outlined in the other provisions, especially considering that automation bias is just one of many relevant biases (e.g., hindsight bias, confidence bias [36, 66]), heuris”
From On the Quest for Effectiveness in Human Oversight: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (2024) · cites this paper as [66]
Citations
Cites
Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry
Flavell, J. H. (1979) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.34.10.906 · Cited by 11,282 · cited 1×
“Metacognitions are thoughts about one’s own thoughts (Flavell, 1979; Werth, Strack, & Förster, 2002).”
Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/1529-1006.01431 · Cited by 3,893
Self-citationConditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree.
Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/a0016755 · Cited by 2,443
Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”
Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.2.263 · Cited by 2,379 · cited 1×
“…& Thomas, 1998; Walster, 1967), such that people who possess dispositionally greater needs for control or closure show greater hindsight bias (Campbell & Tesser, 1983; Musch, 2003; Tykocinski, 2001; see also Hirt, Kardes, & Markman, 2004; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Musch & Wagner, 2007).”
The Meaning Maintenance Model: On the Coherence of Social Motivations
Heine, S. J., Proulx, T., & Vohs, K. D. (2006) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1002_1 · Cited by 1,437 · cited 1×
“People seek meaning through religion, ideologies, and other worldviews that impose order and predictability on life (Heine, Proulx, & Vohs, 2006; Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004; King, Hicks, Krull, & Del Gaiso, 2006; Kray et al., 2010; Pyszczynski, Greenberg, & Solomon, 1999).”
Self-citationRoese, N. J. (1997) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.133 · Cited by 1,156 · cited 1×
“Counterfactuals are thoughts of what might have been, of what could have happened if some past action had been different (Roese, 1997).”
Self-citationLacking control increases illusory pattern perception
Whitson, J. A., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1159845 · Cited by 1,119
Self-Enhancement: Food for Thought
Sedikides, C., & Gregg, A. P. (2008) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00068.x · Cited by 880
Compensatory Control: Achieving Order Through the Mind, Our Institutions, and the Heavens
Kay, A. C., Whitson, J. A., Gaucher, D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2009) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01649.x · Cited by 598
Mussweiler, T., Strack, F., & Pfeiffer, T. (2000) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/01461672002611010 · Cited by 556
Schwarz, N., Sanna, L. J., Skurnik, I., & Yoon, C. (2007) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(06)39003-x · Cited by 441
Research works printed but not linked: 178
- 10.1177/1088868309341564 · DOI
- American Law Institute, 2010, Restatement of the law third torts: Liability for physical and emotional harm, 1
- Anderson J. C., 1997, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 16, 20
- 10.1016/0167-4870(93)90018-G · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-006X.49.3.323 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-2909.110.3.486 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0021-9010.73.2.305 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0015504 · DOI
- 10.1177/1088868307301033 · DOI
- 10.2214/ajr.175.3.1750597 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0021971 · DOI
- 10.1080/09658210701390701 · DOI
- 10.1287/mnsc.1090.1000 · DOI
- 10.1080/09658210244000513 · DOI
- 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.132 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.07.007 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/MC.38.3.356 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03195302 · DOI
- 10.1016/0273-2297(90)90003-M · DOI
- 10.1207/s15324834basp1902_5 · DOI
- 10.1207/S15324834BASP2401_3 · DOI
- 10.2307/256462 · DOI
- 10.1177/0146167206288282 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0028579 · DOI
- 10.3758/s13423-011-0062-4 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1983.tb00868.x · DOI
- 10.1177/01461672992511005 · DOI
- 10.1521/jscp.1989.8.3.331 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF01067031 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.02.003 · DOI
- 10.1006/obhd.1999.2841 · DOI
- 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90010-Q · DOI
- 10.1016/0749-5978(87)90005-7 · DOI
- 10.1016/0092-6566(92)90059-D · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.03.001 · DOI
- 10.2307/1422863 · DOI
- Eberwine K., 2005, Case Western Reserve Law Review, 55, 633
- 10.1037/0033-2909.99.1.3 · DOI
- 10.1177/1088868308316091 · DOI
- 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.114 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.24.2.387 · DOI
- 10.3758/PBR.17.2.149 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.07.001 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00343.x · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-1523.1.3.288 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511809477.032 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511809477.024 · DOI
- 10.1016/0030-5073(75)90002-1 · DOI
- 10.1037/1076-898X.11.2.124 · DOI
- 10.1002/bsl.897 · DOI
- 10.1002/1099-0720(200009)14:5<397::AID-ACP658>3.0.CO;2-M · DOI
- 10.1086/527342 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03196819 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15324834basp2602&3_1 · DOI
- 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.48 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.30.5.960 · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1022352330466 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-2909.107.3.311 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03197054 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02271.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jesp.2003.07.009 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1069 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0278-7393.26.3.566 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.437 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0278-4254(97)10003-5 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2308/accr.2006.81.2.377 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1101 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF01499075 · DOI
- 10.1177/1088868309353750 · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1007755019837 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.90.1.179 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1006/obhd.1999.2847 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.joep.2006.11.002 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.6.2.107 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00534-4 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0017905 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-1-4899-0924-4 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/BF01499038 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.32.2.311 · DOI
- 10.1002/9780470752937.ch16 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1986.tb01139.x · DOI
- 10.1177/0146167282082012 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.004 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.12.009 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.47.6.1231 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.84.1.29 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.03.004 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.264 · DOI
- 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.32 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1994.tb01850.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00813.x · DOI
- 10.1080/09658210244000522 · DOI
- 10.1037/0021-9010.76.4.569 · DOI
- 10.1348/014466600164499 · DOI
- 10.1002/bdm.632 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.07.017 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.01.004 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.838 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.02.007 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0076486 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.502 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/BF03212966 · DOI
- 10.1177/1948550611401756 · DOI
- 10.1080/09658210244000540 · DOI
- 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.64 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.472 · DOI
- 10.1177/01461672952112001 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0020449 · DOI
- 10.1027/1864-9335.39.3.182 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.34.5.1043 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0017006 · DOI
- 10.1027/1618-3169.55.5.342 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.737 · DOI
- 10.1506/car.25.1.10 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.2044-8309.1981.tb00479.x · DOI
- Peters P. G., 1999, Arizona State Law Journal, 31, 1277
- 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.09.013 · DOI
- 10.1080/09658210244000603 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00381.x · DOI
- 10.1002/acp.1377 · DOI
- 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.147 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.14.4.709 · DOI
- 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.14 · DOI
- 10.1026//1618-3169.49.4.270 · DOI
- 10.1080/09658210244000487 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.835 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/1600229 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03212965 · DOI
- 10.1002/9780470752937.ch13 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01703.x · DOI
- 10.1177/01461672972312002 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.77.3.437 · DOI
- 10.1006/jesp.1996.0010 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00033.x · DOI
- Roese N. J., 2007, Social psychology: A handbook of basic principles, 2, 91
- Roese N. J., 2010, Harvard Business Review, 88, 26
- 10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00013-8 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00528-0 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00704.x · DOI
- 10.1521/soco.2007.25.1.185 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03213410 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.28.3.497 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1196/annals.1279.012 · DOI
- 10.1086/378531 · DOI
- 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90044-T · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.04.001 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0023581 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01642.x · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03202434 · DOI
- 10.1016/0749-5978(92)90064-E · DOI
- 10.1006/obhd.1993.1053 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00078.x · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-1523.3.4.544 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10979-005-5692-5 · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1025706823554 · DOI
- 10.1006/obhd.1997.2682 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0034782 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0077095 · DOI
- Tetlock P. E., 2005, Expert political judgment: How good is it? How can we know
- 10.1017/S0003055400400043 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.143 · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.29.5.904 · DOI
- 10.1016/0749-596X(85)90049-X · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.403 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0146167201273011 · DOI
- 10.1002/ejsp.120 · DOI
- 10.1177/001872676702000302 · DOI
- 10.1177/1368430208095399 · DOI
- 10.1177/0146167291171005 · DOI
- 10.1006/obhd.2001.2976 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00085.x · DOI
- 10.1037/0278-7393.24.2.415 · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-1523.4.2.345 · DOI
- 10.1037/0894-4105.20.4.461 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10339-011-0414-z · DOI
- 10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00052-X · DOI
- 10.1006/obhd.1995.1093 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An Agenda for Purely Confirmatory Research
Wagenmakers, E.-J., Wetzels, R., Borsboom, D., van der Maas, H. L. J., & Kievit, R. A. (2012) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691612463078 · Cited by 1,042
“We also know that people fall prey to hindsight bias, the tendency to judge an event as more predictable after it has occurred (Roese & Vohs, 2012).”
Human- versus Artificial Intelligence
Korteling, J. E. (., van de Boer-Visschedijk, G. C., Blankendaal, R. A. M., Boonekamp, R. C., & Eikelboom, A. R. (2021) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2021.622364 · Cited by 619
“…1974), the Hindsight bias (the tendency to erroneously perceive events as inevitable or more likely once they have occurred, Hoffrage et al., 2000; Roese and Vohs, 2012) the Availability bias (judging the frequency, importance, or likelihood of an event by the ease with which relevant instances…”
BackgroundError and discrepancy in radiology: inevitable or avoidable?
Brady, A. P. (2016) · Insights into Imaging · doi:10.1007/s13244-016-0534-1 · Cited by 612
Action Errors, Error Management, and Learning in Organizations
Fresé, M., & Keith, N. (2014) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015205 · Cited by 546
Haustein, S., & Jensen, A. F. (2018) · International Journal of Sustainable Transportation · doi:10.1080/15568318.2017.1398790 · Cited by 303
Metadata
- Authors
- Roese, N. J., & Vohs, K. D.
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Venue
- Perspectives on Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 411-426
- ISSN
- 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-6924
- OpenAlex
- W4211165067
- Cited by
- 457
- References
- 186
- Citations by year
- 2026: 35 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 9.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Keywords
- hindsight bias, memory distortion, perceived predictability, metacognition, overconfidence, causal explanation, sensemaking, alternative explanations, data visualization, bias reduction interventions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
