Skip to main content

Table 2 Affective biases relevant for bioethics listed in alphabetical order with explanations and an indication for what type of bioethics this bias may be most relevant to assess

From: Biases in bioethics: a narrative review

Affective bias

Definition/short description

Type of bioethics

Affective forecasting

The tendency to let present emotional states and conceptions to be projected to future events

A, EA, CEC

Aversion to risk, uncertainty, or ambiguity

The tendency to let the fear of risk, uncertainty, or ambiguity influence decision-making

A, EA, (ELS), CEC

Compassion fade

The tendency to be more compassionate towards few identifiable victims than towards many anonymous ones, which is related to identifiability bias (bias towards caring more for the identified)

A, EA, CEC

Empathy gap

The tendency to underestimate the influence or strength of feelings, in either oneself or others

A, EA, CEC

Exaggerated expectation

The tendency to expect or predict more extreme outcomes than those that actually happen

A, EA, CEC, PEC

Identifiability bias

The inclination to focus on identified persons (or issues) and give them priority. Related to the “singularity effect”

A, EA, ER, CEC

Impact bias

The tendency to overestimate the impact of a future event

A, EA, CEC

Loss aversion

The perceived disadvantage of giving up an item is greater than the utility associated with acquiring it

A, EA, CEC

Omission bias

The tendency to judge harmful actions (commissions) as worse than equally harmful inactions (omissions)

A, EA,d, CEC

Optimism bias

The tendency to overestimating the probability and beneficence of favorable outcomes and to those of underestimate of undesirable outcomes (this is related to other biases, such as wishful thinking, the valence effect, positive outcome bias, and pro-innovation bias)

A, EA, CEC

Pessimism bias

The tendency to overestimate the probability and negative consequences of negative outcomes or things happening

A, EA, CEC

Projection bias

The inclination to think that others have the same attitude, belief, or priority that one has oneself, even when this is unlikely

A, EA, CEC

Prominence effect

The tendency that one dominant factor determines the decision-makers’ preferences. This relates to what has been called the scope neglect, scope insensitivity, and opportunity cost neglect

A, ER, EA, ELS, CEC, PEC

Pseudo-certainty effect

The tendency to make risk-averse decisions for positive expected outcomes and risk-seeking for expected negative outcomes

A, EA, CEC

Salience bias

The tendency to focus on items that are emotionally more prominent or striking and ignore those that are less so

A, EA, CEC

Yuck factor

The tendency to react to events, things, persons, or groups of persons based on disgust

A, ER, EA, ELS, CEC, PEC

  1. A Agitation, ER Empirical Research, EA Ethical analyzes, ELS Ethics literature synthesis, CEC Clinical ethics consultation, PEC Philosophical, Ethical, and Conceptual analyzes