Kahneman's two thinking systems - Revision history

S174310 at 21:35, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T21:35:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:35, 27 February 2021
Line 18:		Line 18:


	== ~~Intro~~ and relevance ==		== Origin and relevance ==

	Daniel Kahneman is an Israelian-American Nobel prize winning psychologist and have investigated decision-making by humans. From his studies a book and the theory of same name, "Thinking, fast and slow", has emerged<ref name="Kahneman">Kahneman, Daniel. "Thinking, Fast and Slow". Penguin Books, 2011.https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555</ref>. By Kahneman, the central ideas of his theory occurred back in 1969, when he began interacting with Amos Tversky, whom he later initiated a close work-relationship with. In discussions between the two they revealed how they both were far too willing to accept research based on inadequate evidence. From this realization their many conversations, experiments and studies about how decision-making was biased, the theory came to life. The idea gave another view to the, by Kahneman’s evaluation, two broadly accepted idea in 1970’ies. The first was that people are generally rational. The second was that emotions as fear, hatred and affection explained most occasions where deviation from rationality happened.		Daniel Kahneman is an Israelian-American Nobel prize winning psychologist and have investigated decision-making by humans. From his studies a book and the theory of same name, "Thinking, fast and slow", has emerged<ref name="Kahneman">Kahneman, Daniel. "Thinking, Fast and Slow". Penguin Books, 2011.https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555</ref>. By Kahneman, the central ideas of his theory occurred back in 1969, when he began interacting with Amos Tversky, whom he later initiated a close work-relationship with. In discussions between the two they revealed how they both were far too willing to accept research based on inadequate evidence. From this realization their many conversations, experiments and studies about how decision-making was biased, the theory came to life. The idea gave another view to the, by Kahneman’s evaluation, two broadly accepted idea in 1970’ies. The first was that people are generally rational. The second was that emotions as fear, hatred and affection explained most occasions where deviation from rationality happened.
Line 32:		Line 32:


	== ~~Big idea~~ ==		== The theoretical framework of the two thinking system ==

	Daniel Kahneman describes the decision-making in the human brain by two systems, the fast-thinking system and the slow thinking system. These two also goes by the names system 1 and system 2 respectively. The two systems represent their separate way of analyzing and evaluating all possible choices. These choices can vary greatly in complexity, from simple as taking another step, to solving hardly advanced equations by hand. The complexity in the decision-making is essential for the understanding of the two systems.		Daniel Kahneman describes the decision-making in the human brain by two systems, the fast-thinking system and the slow thinking system. These two also goes by the names system 1 and system 2 respectively. The two systems represent their separate way of analyzing and evaluating all possible choices. These choices can vary greatly in complexity, from simple as taking another step, to solving hardly advanced equations by hand. The complexity in the decision-making is essential for the understanding of the two systems.
Line 72:		Line 72:
	With the new way of exploring and evaluating the rationality of decision-making, Kahneman’s research and development changed the scope of how choices was made inside and outside of project management.		With the new way of exploring and evaluating the rationality of decision-making, Kahneman’s research and development changed the scope of how choices was made inside and outside of project management.

	==~~The use~~ of the two thinking system==		==Application of the two thinking system==

	As mentioned earlier, uncertainty is very common within all decisions and the managing of these. The risk involved in the portfolio, program or project can determine if it becomes a success or if it fails. Without risk and uncertainty management the needed understanding and preventive initiatives can be developed.		As mentioned earlier, uncertainty is very common within all decisions and the managing of these. The risk involved in the portfolio, program or project can determine if it becomes a success or if it fails. Without risk and uncertainty management the needed understanding and preventive initiatives can be developed.
Line 91:		Line 91:


	== Limitations and ~~thoughts~~ ==		== Limitations and reflections in the theoretical and applied framework ==

	When looking with a critical eye on the two thinking system, a few thoughts arise.		When looking with a critical eye on the two thinking system, a few thoughts arise.

S174310 at 21:33, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T21:33:43Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:33, 27 February 2021
Line 102:		Line 102:


	~~Kahneman, Daniel. "~~Thinking, Fast and Slow"~~. Penguin Books, 2011~~.		'''Thinking, Fast and Slow''' <ref name="Kahneman" />.

	Kahneman's view on the the two thinking systems is presented with examples of his methods and experiments. The development of the system and the cognitive biases used is described to elaborate the way the systems interacts. The used biases and effects these have on the decision-making for the individual is explained to use in real life examples. With Kahneman's focus, actual decision and comparison to real life decisions is also available for further investigation of the systems in field work.		Kahneman's view on the the two thinking systems is presented with examples of his methods and experiments. The development of the system and the cognitive biases used is described to elaborate the way the systems interacts. The used biases and effects these have on the decision-making for the individual is explained to use in real life examples. With Kahneman's focus, actual decision and comparison to real life decisions is also available for further investigation of the systems in field work.

S174310 at 21:32, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T21:32:16Z

S174310 at 21:19, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T21:19:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:19, 27 February 2021
Line 84:		Line 84:
	Even though it is not a specific tool it can be used to support specific tools or understand complex decision-making both for the individual and the masses.		Even though it is not a specific tool it can be used to support specific tools or understand complex decision-making both for the individual and the masses.

	One example could be in the creation of a risk matrix and where the different risk is located. A project manager would likely give more attention to uncertainty in decision-making with the understanding of how the two thinking system affects the way we interpret information and decide in general. The project manager could change the attitude towards risk in a project and thereby the prioritizing. If a lot of the key performance indicator is based on how people, both inside and outside the project, reacts to aim of the project, the manager would favor a more conservative attitude towards risk with the knowledge of the cognitive biases and everyday heuristics.		One example could be in the creation of a risk matrix<ref>Wikipedia. "Risk matrix". 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_matrix</ref> and where the different risk is located. A project manager would likely give more attention to uncertainty in decision-making with the understanding of how the two thinking system affects the way we interpret information and decide in general. The project manager could change the attitude towards risk in a project and thereby the prioritizing. If a lot of the key performance indicator is based on how people, both inside and outside the project, reacts to aim of the project, the manager would favor a more conservative attitude towards risk with the knowledge of the cognitive biases and everyday heuristics.

	key references chapter 2 “Standard for Risk Management in Portfolios, Programs, and Projects” –		key references chapter 2 “Standard for Risk Management in Portfolios, Programs, and Projects” –

S174310 at 21:15, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T21:15:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:15, 27 February 2021
Line 76:		Line 76:
	As mentioned earlier, uncertainty is very common within all decisions and the managing of these. The risk involved in the portfolio, program or project can determine if it becomes a success or if it fails. Without risk and uncertainty management the needed understanding and preventive initiatives can be developed.		As mentioned earlier, uncertainty is very common within all decisions and the managing of these. The risk involved in the portfolio, program or project can determine if it becomes a success or if it fails. Without risk and uncertainty management the needed understanding and preventive initiatives can be developed.

	When starting a new project, one of the first thing to look for after the project definition is the uncertainty inside and outside the project framework. This could result in some risk in many different areas, with different perspectives. When conduction a cause and effect diagram to initialize the system thinking the theory of Kahneman also helps to understand the measures of how the different aspects interlink (ref ~~– mudlling thorugh book~~, ~~system thinking~~, ~~cause and effect diagram)~~. This could be both enhancing and reduce the interdependencies. Another one of these uncertainty areas is the people involved.		When starting a new project, one of the first thing to look for after the project definition is the uncertainty inside and outside the project framework. This could result in some risk in many different areas, with different perspectives. When conduction a cause and effect diagram to initialize the system thinking the theory of Kahneman also helps to understand the measures of how the different aspects interlink <ref>Züst and Troxler, Rainer and Peter. "No More Muddling Through" p 61-63. Springer, 2006 </ref>.

			This could be both enhancing and reduce the interdependencies. Another one of these uncertainty areas is the people involved.
	This could be all types of stakeholders with different perspectives on the project, both the customer reactions, employee investment and sponsor satisfaction. No need to say that all these uncertainties can vary greatly from stakeholder to stakeholder.		This could be all types of stakeholders with different perspectives on the project, both the customer reactions, employee investment and sponsor satisfaction. No need to say that all these uncertainties can vary greatly from stakeholder to stakeholder.
	For a project manager the prioritizing, assessment and prevention of these risks are very important to ensure the success of the project, which is why an extended understanding of the uncertainty aspect is welcomed.		For a project manager the prioritizing, assessment and prevention of these risks are very important to ensure the success of the project, which is why an extended understanding of the uncertainty aspect is welcomed.

S174310 at 21:04, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T21:04:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:04, 27 February 2021
Line 20:		Line 20:
	== Intro and relevance ==		== Intro and relevance ==

	Daniel Kahneman is an Israelian-American Nobel prize winning psychologist and have investigated decision-making by humans. From his studies a book and the theory of same name, "Thinking, fast and slow", has emerged<ref>Kahneman, Daniel. "Thinking, Fast and Slow". Penguin Books, 2011.https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555</ref>. By Kahneman, the central ideas of his theory occurred back in 1969, when he began interacting with Amos Tversky, whom he later initiated a close work-relationship with. In discussions between the two they revealed how they both were far too willing to accept research based on inadequate evidence. From this realization their many conversations, experiments and studies about how decision-making was biased, the theory came to life. The idea gave another view to the, by Kahneman’s evaluation, two broadly accepted idea in 1970’ies. The first was that people are generally rational. The second was that emotions as fear, hatred and affection explained most occasions where deviation from rationality happened.		Daniel Kahneman is an Israelian-American Nobel prize winning psychologist and have investigated decision-making by humans. From his studies a book and the theory of same name, "Thinking, fast and slow", has emerged<ref name="Kahneman">Kahneman, Daniel. "Thinking, Fast and Slow". Penguin Books, 2011.https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555</ref>. By Kahneman, the central ideas of his theory occurred back in 1969, when he began interacting with Amos Tversky, whom he later initiated a close work-relationship with. In discussions between the two they revealed how they both were far too willing to accept research based on inadequate evidence. From this realization their many conversations, experiments and studies about how decision-making was biased, the theory came to life. The idea gave another view to the, by Kahneman’s evaluation, two broadly accepted idea in 1970’ies. The first was that people are generally rational. The second was that emotions as fear, hatred and affection explained most occasions where deviation from rationality happened.

	To investigate the understanding of uncertainty Kahneman’s two thinking systems and his work on cognitive biases will be explored and described theoretically and with examples throughout the following.		To investigate the understanding of uncertainty Kahneman’s two thinking systems and his work on cognitive biases will be explored and described theoretically and with examples throughout the following.
Line 57:		Line 57:
	As cognitive biases are used many times a day it is inevitably that we somehow make mistakes in the way we perceive information. More important is it to recognize the need for these heuristics and the way they are helping us and allow us to get through the day without brain overload from every little information throughout the day.		As cognitive biases are used many times a day it is inevitably that we somehow make mistakes in the way we perceive information. More important is it to recognize the need for these heuristics and the way they are helping us and allow us to get through the day without brain overload from every little information throughout the day.

	When discussing the relationship between the two systems another two terms are being introduced by Kahneman~~[https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-~~Kahneman/~~dp/0374533555]~~. First, the concept of cognitive ease, which is described by as a way to ease the person into thinking that your proposed idea is true.		When discussing the relationship between the two systems another two terms are being introduced by Kahneman <ref name="Kahneman" />. First, the concept of cognitive ease, which is described by as a way to ease the person into thinking that your proposed idea is true.
	Kahneman gives the following example:		Kahneman gives the following example:

S174310 at 21:02, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T21:02:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:02, 27 February 2021
Line 40:		Line 40:
	The differentiation of the systems is essential in understanding how these works together when delegating and solving the tasks at hand between them and thereby Kahneman’s theory.		The differentiation of the systems is essential in understanding how these works together when delegating and solving the tasks at hand between them and thereby Kahneman’s theory.
	To dig a bit more into the interdependencies of the two systems, the balance between them reveals a very uneven relation.		To dig a bit more into the interdependencies of the two systems, the balance between them reveals a very uneven relation.
	System 1 accounts for approx. 98 % of our daily decisions and system 2 only accounts for approx. 2 % [<ref name="one" />. This uneven balance gives rise to the thought that we aren’t rational as human beings. Few people without knowledge of Kahneman’s studies at hand would probably insist that they take more than 2 % rational and though through decisions a day. This flaw is somehow explained by the interlinkage of the systems. When system 1 gets a task as input, it is processed with fast search for a reasonable answer. If this answer seems plausible and is often seen before from experience it is accepted by the system 2 without giving the subject slower thinking. Only when the task is found to be to complex or needs more attention system 2 is fully activated to analyze and evaluated more comprehensively.		System 1 accounts for approx. 98 % of our daily decisions and system 2 only accounts for approx. 2 % <ref name="one" />. This uneven balance gives rise to the thought that we aren’t rational as human beings. Few people without knowledge of Kahneman’s studies at hand would probably insist that they take more than 2 % rational and though through decisions a day. This flaw is somehow explained by the interlinkage of the systems. When system 1 gets a task as input, it is processed with fast search for a reasonable answer. If this answer seems plausible and is often seen before from experience it is accepted by the system 2 without giving the subject slower thinking. Only when the task is found to be to complex or needs more attention system 2 is fully activated to analyze and evaluated more comprehensively.

	When looking further into the interactions of the systems Kahneman also described the term cognitive biases.		When looking further into the interactions of the systems Kahneman also described the term cognitive biases.
Line 47:		Line 47:


	Confirmation bias [https://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2014/05/22/landing-pages-cognitive-biases] is when searching for the answers one may expect. This means that we are more likely to reject an answer if it goes against our first impulse.		Confirmation bias <ref name="bias">Shewan, Dan. "5 Cognitive Biases & How to Overcome Them On Your Landing Pages". WordStream, 2018. https://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2014/05/22/landing-pages-cognitive-biases</ref> is when searching for the answers one may expect. This means that we are more likely to reject an answer if it goes against our first impulse.

	The confirmation biases could easily lead to systemic errors inside a company if the usual way of interpreting a given task and the outcome is done without any indicators of performance. When left without acceptable indicators one may be more selective about the research to fit the expected answer and actively seek information that confirms initial thought.		The confirmation biases could easily lead to systemic errors inside a company if the usual way of interpreting a given task and the outcome is done without any indicators of performance. When left without acceptable indicators one may be more selective about the research to fit the expected answer and actively seek information that confirms initial thought.

	Another common bias is the Anchoring Effect ~~[https:~~/~~/www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2014/05/22/landing-pages-cognitive-biases]~~. By the anchoring effect one is prone to focus on a single aspect and exclude other aspects. This could be when management only focus on the cost of a product and doing all possible to maintain or decrease cost neglecting areas as security, quality, time etc. This could happen both in the way we interpret uncertainty inside and outside the scope of a project or company.		Another common bias is the Anchoring Effect <ref name="bias" />. By the anchoring effect one is prone to focus on a single aspect and exclude other aspects. This could be when management only focus on the cost of a product and doing all possible to maintain or decrease cost neglecting areas as security, quality, time etc. This could happen both in the way we interpret uncertainty inside and outside the scope of a project or company.

	The ambiguity effect ~~[https:~~/~~/www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2014/05/22/landing-pages-cognitive-biases)~~ is also common within the decision-making. When assessing a task or decision one will often favor the choice with a known outcome instead of taking a chance on a choice with unknown probabilities. This could lead to opportunities being missed without the prober foundation of evidence and evaluation of the initiative.		The ambiguity effect <ref name="bias" /> is also common within the decision-making. When assessing a task or decision one will often favor the choice with a known outcome instead of taking a chance on a choice with unknown probabilities. This could lead to opportunities being missed without the prober foundation of evidence and evaluation of the initiative.

	As cognitive biases are used many times a day it is inevitably that we somehow make mistakes in the way we perceive information. More important is it to recognize the need for these heuristics and the way they are helping us and allow us to get through the day without brain overload from every little information throughout the day.		As cognitive biases are used many times a day it is inevitably that we somehow make mistakes in the way we perceive information. More important is it to recognize the need for these heuristics and the way they are helping us and allow us to get through the day without brain overload from every little information throughout the day.

S174310 at 20:57, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T20:57:57Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:57, 27 February 2021
Line 40:		Line 40:
	The differentiation of the systems is essential in understanding how these works together when delegating and solving the tasks at hand between them and thereby Kahneman’s theory.		The differentiation of the systems is essential in understanding how these works together when delegating and solving the tasks at hand between them and thereby Kahneman’s theory.
	To dig a bit more into the interdependencies of the two systems, the balance between them reveals a very uneven relation.		To dig a bit more into the interdependencies of the two systems, the balance between them reveals a very uneven relation.
	System 1 accounts for approx. 98 % of our daily decisions and system 2 only accounts for approx. 2 % [~~https:~~/~~/suebehaviouraldesign.com/kahneman-fast-slow-thinking/]~~. This uneven balance gives rise to the thought that we aren’t rational as human beings. Few people without knowledge of Kahneman’s studies at hand would probably insist that they take more than 2 % rational and though through decisions a day. This flaw is somehow explained by the interlinkage of the systems. When system 1 gets a task as input, it is processed with fast search for a reasonable answer. If this answer seems plausible and is often seen before from experience it is accepted by the system 2 without giving the subject slower thinking. Only when the task is found to be to complex or needs more attention system 2 is fully activated to analyze and evaluated more comprehensively.		System 1 accounts for approx. 98 % of our daily decisions and system 2 only accounts for approx. 2 % [<ref name="one" />. This uneven balance gives rise to the thought that we aren’t rational as human beings. Few people without knowledge of Kahneman’s studies at hand would probably insist that they take more than 2 % rational and though through decisions a day. This flaw is somehow explained by the interlinkage of the systems. When system 1 gets a task as input, it is processed with fast search for a reasonable answer. If this answer seems plausible and is often seen before from experience it is accepted by the system 2 without giving the subject slower thinking. Only when the task is found to be to complex or needs more attention system 2 is fully activated to analyze and evaluated more comprehensively.

	When looking further into the interactions of the systems Kahneman also described the term cognitive biases.		When looking further into the interactions of the systems Kahneman also described the term cognitive biases.

S174310 at 20:55, 27 February 2021

2021-02-27T20:55:47Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:55, 27 February 2021
Line 13:		Line 13:


	Kahneman also argues that system 2 is brought to work when some decision is out of scope for system 1. This is supported by the estimation that system 1 is used for approx. 98 % of our decisions and system 2 is only used for approx. 2 % <ref>Groenewegen, Astrid. ''Kahneman Fast And Slow Thinking Explained''. Behavioural Science. https://suebehaviouraldesign.com/kahneman-fast-slow-thinking/#system1-2 </ref>. This uneven balance implies that by this logic, humans are irrational by nature and that system 1 is used for not important decisions and low effort situations.		Kahneman also argues that system 2 is brought to work when some decision is out of scope for system 1. This is supported by the estimation that system 1 is used for approx. 98 % of our decisions and system 2 is only used for approx. 2 % <ref name="one">Groenewegen, Astrid. ''Kahneman Fast And Slow Thinking Explained''. Behavioural Science. https://suebehaviouraldesign.com/kahneman-fast-slow-thinking/#system1-2 </ref>. This uneven balance implies that by this logic, humans are irrational by nature and that system 1 is used for not important decisions and low effort situations.

	Kahneman's theory also have some limitations as the two thinking system to some extend is unsupported or at least not well documented. The challenge of letting the theory standing alone is also one point where Kahneman’s isolated experiments are somehow flawed. This was made clear as the errors in Kahneman's early work of the theory, with small sample size and “watching-eyes effect” should be taking into consideration when using the systems for decision-making <ref>Engber, Daniel. ''The irony effect''. Slate Group, 2016. https://slate.com/technology/2016/12/kahneman-and-tversky-researched-the-science-of-error-and-still-made-errors.html</ref>.		Kahneman's theory also have some limitations as the two thinking system to some extend is unsupported or at least not well documented. The challenge of letting the theory standing alone is also one point where Kahneman’s isolated experiments are somehow flawed. This was made clear as the errors in Kahneman's early work of the theory, with small sample size and “watching-eyes effect” should be taking into consideration when using the systems for decision-making <ref>Engber, Daniel. ''The irony effect''. Slate Group, 2016. https://slate.com/technology/2016/12/kahneman-and-tversky-researched-the-science-of-error-and-still-made-errors.html</ref>.
Line 35:		Line 35:

	Daniel Kahneman describes the decision-making in the human brain by two systems, the fast-thinking system and the slow thinking system. These two also goes by the names system 1 and system 2 respectively. The two systems represent their separate way of analyzing and evaluating all possible choices. These choices can vary greatly in complexity, from simple as taking another step, to solving hardly advanced equations by hand. The complexity in the decision-making is essential for the understanding of the two systems.		Daniel Kahneman describes the decision-making in the human brain by two systems, the fast-thinking system and the slow thinking system. These two also goes by the names system 1 and system 2 respectively. The two systems represent their separate way of analyzing and evaluating all possible choices. These choices can vary greatly in complexity, from simple as taking another step, to solving hardly advanced equations by hand. The complexity in the decision-making is essential for the understanding of the two systems.
	As we as humans unconsciously on averages have 35.000 decisions to make everyday<ref~~>Groenewegen, Astrid. ''Kahneman Fast And Slow Thinking Explained''. Behavioural Science. https:~~/~~/suebehaviouraldesign.com/kahneman-fast-slow-thinking/#system1-2 </ref~~>, it sounds reasonable that we aren't able to make informed and rational decisions in every task, this would be too high of a workload for our brain and take way to long.		As we as humans unconsciously on averages have 35.000 decisions to make everyday<ref name="one" />, it sounds reasonable that we aren't able to make informed and rational decisions in every task, this would be too high of a workload for our brain and take way to long.
	System 1 is used for all fast decisions and impressions based on earlier experiences and the biases accumulated in our mind. Furthermore system 1 is effortless and happens by automation without us noticing when the impression, decision or uncertainty is introduced.		System 1 is used for all fast decisions and impressions based on earlier experiences and the biases accumulated in our mind. Furthermore system 1 is effortless and happens by automation without us noticing when the impression, decision or uncertainty is introduced.
	System 2 is contrarily used for the more complex tasks when system 1 isn't able to take a sound and fast decision due to lack experiences or specific challenges with demanding effort needed.		System 2 is contrarily used for the more complex tasks when system 1 isn't able to take a sound and fast decision due to lack experiences or specific challenges with demanding effort needed.

S174310: /* Big idea */

2021-02-27T20:53:22Z

Big idea

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:53, 27 February 2021
Line 71:		Line 71:

	With the new way of exploring and evaluating the rationality of decision-making, Kahneman’s research and development changed the scope of how choices was made inside and outside of project management.		With the new way of exploring and evaluating the rationality of decision-making, Kahneman’s research and development changed the scope of how choices was made inside and outside of project management.




	==The use of the two thinking system==		==The use of the two thinking system==

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:32, 27 February 2021
Line 24:		Line 24:
	To investigate the understanding of uncertainty Kahneman’s two thinking systems and his work on cognitive biases will be explored and described theoretically and with examples throughout the following.		To investigate the understanding of uncertainty Kahneman’s two thinking systems and his work on cognitive biases will be explored and described theoretically and with examples throughout the following.

	When managing projects, programs or portfolios, uncertainty is certain for all levels of management<ref>Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2019)."Standard for Risk Management in Portfolios, Programs, and Projects". Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI) P. 7-11. Retrieved from		When managing projects, programs or portfolios, uncertainty is certain for all levels of management<ref name="risk">Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2019)."Standard for Risk Management in Portfolios, Programs, and Projects". Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI) P. 7-12. Retrieved from
	https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpSRMPPP01/standard-risk-management/standard-risk-managemen</ref> . Ideally all projects risk and uncertainty need to be evaluated, sometimes with risk anticipating tools and other times with the understanding of the pitfalls and challenges in the decision-making phase as a foundation for further handling or engagement of the team.		https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpSRMPPP01/standard-risk-management/standard-risk-managemen</ref> . Ideally all projects risk and uncertainty need to be evaluated, sometimes with risk anticipating tools and other times with the understanding of the pitfalls and challenges in the decision-making phase as a foundation for further handling or engagement of the team.
	Uncertainty shows in many different ways, some easier to quantify than others.		Uncertainty shows in many different ways, some easier to quantify than others.
Line 84:		Line 84:
	Even though it is not a specific tool it can be used to support specific tools or understand complex decision-making both for the individual and the masses.		Even though it is not a specific tool it can be used to support specific tools or understand complex decision-making both for the individual and the masses.

	One example could be in the creation of a risk matrix<ref>Wikipedia. "Risk matrix". 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_matrix</ref> and where the different risk is located. A project manager would likely give more attention to uncertainty in decision-making with the understanding of how the two thinking system affects the way we interpret information and decide in general. The project manager could change the attitude towards risk in a project and thereby the prioritizing. If a lot of the key performance indicator is based on how people, both inside and outside the project, reacts to aim of the project, the manager would favor a more conservative attitude towards risk with the knowledge of the cognitive biases and everyday heuristics.		One example could be in the creation of a risk matrix<ref>Wikipedia. "Risk matrix". 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_matrix</ref> and where the different risk is located. A project manager would likely give more attention to uncertainty in decision-making with the understanding of how the two thinking system affects the way we interpret information and decide in general. The project manager could change the attitude towards risk<ref name="risk2">Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI). (2019)."Standard for Risk Management in Portfolios, Programs, and Projects". Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI) P. 8-9. Retrieved from
			https://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpSRMPPP01/standard-risk-management/standard-risk-managemen</ref> in a project and thereby the prioritizing. If a lot of the key performance indicator is based on how people, both inside and outside the project, reacts to aim of the project, the manager would favor a more conservative attitude towards risk with the knowledge of the cognitive biases and everyday heuristics.
	~~key references chapter 2 “Standard for Risk Management in Portfolios, Programs, and Projects” –~~

	It could also affect the preventive initiatives by implementing the balance between the fast and slow thinking system in favor of the wanted outcome. By using the concept of cognitive ease a certain attitude to uncertainty can be primed and create new possibilities within a project.		It could also affect the preventive initiatives by implementing the balance between the fast and slow thinking system in favor of the wanted outcome. By using the concept of cognitive ease a certain attitude to uncertainty can be primed and create new possibilities within a project.
Line 95:		Line 94:

	When looking with a critical eye on the two thinking system, a few thoughts arise.		When looking with a critical eye on the two thinking system, a few thoughts arise.
	In the experiments regarding the closed environments, it was clear that the altering of single attributes showed a change in the perception of the information presented. If these experiments are representative to the reality is a bit harder to confirm. It could be argued that the context and other attributes all influencing the decision and enhance of reduce the decision in general.		In the experiments regarding the closed environments, it was clear that the altering of single attributes showed a change in the perception of the information presented. If these experiments are representative to the reality is a bit harder to confirm. It could be argued that the context and other attributes all influencing the decision and enhance of reduce the decision in general. This dual behavioral reasoning has been questioned as it lacks applicability and validity, challenging the accuracy of the simplified two thinking system<ref>Grayot, James. "Dual Process Theories in Behavioral Economics and Neuroeconomics: a Critical Review". Springer, 2019</ref>.

	In portfolio, program and project management the two thinking system can be used in a lot of places concerning people and perception of information. But as the theory mainly are able to contribute to the general understanding uncertainty and to support other specific management tools, it can easily be overlooked and neglected. Furthermore, it is hard to see that the two thinking system could be the only applied theory as not all uncertainty is measurable and explainable with the theory.		In portfolio, program and project management the two thinking system can be used in a lot of places concerning people and perception of information. But as the theory mainly are able to contribute to the general understanding uncertainty and to support other specific management tools, it can easily be overlooked and neglected. Furthermore, it is hard to see that the two thinking system could be the only applied theory as not all uncertainty is measurable and explainable with the theory.