Summer 2025 SOWK 588 Week 03 - Using Metacognition to Check Biases

A presentation at Heritage University in June 2025 by Jacob Campbell and is tagged with Heritage University, MSW Program, SOWK 588

Slide showing a head with a brain thinking about another brain in an ellipse. Text: 'Summer 2025, SOWK 588, Week 03, Using Metacognition to Check Biases.' Presenter: Jacob Campbell, Ph.D. LICSW, Heritage University.

**Object**: Presentation slide **Action**: Displays agenda and objectives **Context**: Week three plan **Text**:**Agenda**:- Engage in activities that illustrate metacognitive processes and thinking styles.- Explore cognitive reflection and the difference between intuitive and analytical reasoning.- Reflect on the impact of cognitive dissonance and bias in policy analysis.- Apply systems thinking concepts to examine limitations of conventional problem-solving.**Learning Objectives**:- Differentiate between System 1 and System 2 thinking and their influence on policy analysis and decision-making.- Identify common forms of cognitive dissonance and their impact.- Recognize cognitive traps and their potential impact.- Apply systems thinking to reframe problem-solving and anticipate policy intervention consequences.

A presentation slide features text prompts about metacognition and thinking styles. It suggests drawing a graphical representation to consider cognitive speed, emotion, and motivation under pressure.

A man and woman in traditional attire stand smiling beside a wooden barrel in a floral, mountainous setting. Text: 'COGNITIVE REFLECTION TEST: SYSTEM 1 VS 2 THINKING. If John can drink one barrel of water in 6 days, and Mary can drink one barrel of water in 12 days, how long would it take them to drink one barrel of water together? (Toplak et al. 2014)'

A cartoon student points at a classroom ranking board listing 'Jerry' as 3rd. Text asks: 'Jerry received both the 15th highest and 15th lowest mark. How many students are in the class?'

Two men shake hands while exchanging money. One man holds a pig in a farm setting. Text reads: 'Cognitive Reflection Test: System 1 vs 2 Thinking. A man buys a pig for $60, sells it for $70, buys it back for $80, and sells it finally for $90. How much has he made?'

Diagram shows two systems labeled 'System 1' and 'System 2'. System 1 has a direct arrow from A to B; System 2 has a tangled path. Text discusses cognition speed benefits, challenges, and policy implications.

Text slide titled 'Cognitive Dissonance'; it defines it as an internal dilemma caused by conflicting beliefs or actions, and lists factors like public views, ideology, and self-esteem.

A presentation slide with two sections. The left defines 'Cognitive Dissonance' and presents discussion questions. The right lists related ideas like beliefs, actions, and influences on views and self-esteem.

A presentation slide features a web page preview reporting that 'Eight artificial dyes will be phased out of US food supply, Health Secretary RFK Jr. says,' alongside the phrase 'WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO CHECK OUR BIASES.'

A man aggressively confronts a boy in a tense setting. The background appears industrial. Text reads 'SCARED STRAIGHT 1999' on a plain brown background to the right.

Text on a presentation slide reads: **Left side:**'SCARED STRAIGHT PROGRAMS AS A STAND-ALONE STRATEGY ARE NOT EFFECTIVE'**Right side:**'These randomized trials, conducted over a 25-year period in eight different jurisdictions, provide evidence that 'Scared Straight' and other 'juvenile awareness' programs are not effective as a stand-alone crime prevention strategy. More importantly, they provide empirical evidence under experimental conditions - that these programs likely increase the odds that children exposed to them will commit offenses in future. Despite the variability in the type of intervention used, ranging from harsh, confrontational interactions to tours of the facility, converge on the same result: an increase in criminality in the experimental group when compared to a no-treatment control. Doing nothing would have been better than exposing juveniles to the program.' (Petrosino et al., 2013, p. 31, emphasis my own)

Slide displaying five bullet points about interventions. It discusses outcomes of addressing symptoms, achieving short-term gains, and producing unintended consequences. Source cited: 'Stroh, 2015, Chapter 1.'

The slide features a text block stating: 'THINKING OF THE WHOLE AS AN INTERCONNECTED SET OF ELEMENTS ORGANIZED IN A WAY THAT IT UNDERSTANDS THE CONNECTIONS SO AS TO ACHIEVE A DESIRED PURPOSE.' - (Stroh, 2015)

The image displays a table contrasting 'Conventional Thinking' with 'Systems Thinking,' highlighting differences in problem perception, responsibility, policy impact, optimization, and initiative management. It emphasizes change through behavioral influence and systemic relationships.

An iceberg diagram illustrates organizational learning. The top, 'Events,' triggers 'React/Firefight.' Below, 'Trends & Patterns' prompt 'Anticipate/Forecast.' Deepest, 'Systems Structure' includes pressures and dynamics fostering change. Text: 'Leverage Learning,' 'Questions,' 'Focus,' and 'Action or Response.' Adapted from Stroh (2015).

A presentation slide lists cognitive traps divided into three categories: 'Downsides of Defending Against Dissonance,' 'Mood-Driven Mistakes,' and 'Mental Missteps,' highlighting various biases and effects people encounter.

Dr. Jacob Campbell

17 slides

Description

Week three is a synchronous class week, with class taking place on Saturday (06/14/25). In reading Edin and Shaefer (2016), students will have the opportunity to learn about the challenges faced by those who live on $2 per day, and there will be a forum for them to relate to rural and migrant communities. In Linquiti (2022), he focuses on understanding cognitive dissonance and its effect on biases. There are forums for students to consider their way of thinking and reflect on the textbook content. During class we will continue to consider thinking styles and biases. Students will also be introduced to system thinking. The agenda for the in-person class includes:

Engage in activities that illustrate metacognitive processes and thinking styles.
Explore cognitive reflection and the difference between intuitive and analytical reasoning.
Reflect on the impact of cognitive dissonance and bias in policy analysis.
Apply systems thinking concepts to examine the limitations of conventional problem-solving.

The learning objectives this week include:

Differentiate between System 1 and System 2 thinking and identify how each influences policy analysis and decision-making.
Identify common forms of cognitive dissonance and describe how dissonance can cause bias.
Recognize common cognitive traps and reflect on their potential impact.
Apply principles of systems thinking to reframe conventional problem-solving approaches and anticipate unintended consequences in policy interventions.
Share relevant experiences and challenges faced by people in our community.
Engage in critical thinking related to our thinking styles.
Define cognitive dissonance and describe how trying to avoid it may create bias in policy analysis.
Explain how the speed of cognition, the nature of an analyst’s motivating objective, and the affective content of cognition can have adverse impacts on the quality of policy analysis.