The bias you were talking about Lady Pyro, is actually the "Halo effect"
Oh but there's also wikipedia of course....the list of social and decision bias is HUGE.
Eriq...enjoy
SOCIAL BIAS
Actor–observer bias &
Fundamental attribution error
Your tendency to overattribute someone else's negative behaviour to their personality, and underattribute it to their situation (and opposite for positive behaviour). The opposite goes when explaining your own behaviour; here's the tendency to overattribute negative behaviour / events to the situation, and positive to your person.
So if you see someone yelling on the phone, don't immediately think it's a horrible person: take into account their personal situation; maybe their mother just died.
Dunning–Kruger effects
Complex effect which causes unskilled people to be unable to recognise their unskilledness, and skilled people to underestimate their skill because they think others have similar understanding. So unskilled people have a sense of illusory superiority, while skilled people have a sense of illusory being subpar.
Egocentric bias
Most likely a combination of a few heuristics; it results in thinking that you're more responsible for a group effort outcome than others would think you are, both positive (Self-serving bias) and negative outcomes (due to the availability heuristic).
Forer / Barnum effect
Interpreting general descriptions as being specific for you; as in fortune telling, horoscopes and the like. These descriptions apply to a wide range of people though.
False consensus effect
People usually overestimate the degree to which others agree with them. So if you're confidently throwing something highly subjective into a group, don't be surprised if everybody is gazing at you like “no...”
Halo effect
Tendency for a person's positive or negative traits to contaminate other area's of the perception. See example Lady Pyro and I named above.
Herd instinct effect
People are likely to adopt the opinions and follow the behaviors of the majority to feel safer and to avoid conflict. In some people there's a devil's advocacy effect.
Illusion of asymmetric insight
People think they know more about their peers, than their peers know about them.
Illusion of transparency
People overestimate other's ability of knowing them, and also overestimate their ability to know others.
Superiority bias
Overestimating one's desirable qualities, and underestimating undesirable qualities, relative to other people.
Ingroup bias
The tendency for people to give preferential treatment to others they perceive to be members of their own groups.
Just-world phenomenon
The tendency for people to believe that the world is just and therefore people "get what they deserve."
Outgroup homogeneity bias
Individuals see members of their own group as being relatively more varied than members of other groups.
Projection bias
The tendency to unconsciously assume that others (or one's future selves) share one's current emotional states, thoughts and values.
Self-serving bias
The tendency to claim more responsibility for successes than failures. It may also manifest itself as a tendency for people to evaluate ambiguous information in a way beneficial to their interests (see also group-serving bias).
Self-fulfilling prophecy (also called "behavioral confirmation effect")
The tendency to engage in behaviors that elicit results which will (consciously or not) confirm existing attitudes.
System justification
The tendency to defend and bolster the status quo. Existing social, economic, and political arrangements tend to be preferred, and alternatives disparaged sometimes even at the expense of individual and collective self-interest. (Related to the status quo bias.)
Trait ascription bias
the tendency for people to view themselves as relatively variable in terms of personality, behavior and mood while viewing others as much more predictable.
Ultimate attribution error
similar to the fundamental attribution error, in this error a person is likely to make an internal attribution to an entire group instead of the individuals within the group.
DEICISON & BEHAVIOURAL BIAS
Bandwagon effect
the tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. Related to groupthink and herd behavior.
Base rate fallacy
the tendency to ignore available statistical data in favor of particulars.
Bias blind spot
the tendency not to compensate for one's own cognitive biases.
Choice-supportive bias
the tendency to remember one's choices as better than they actually were.
Confirmation bias
the tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions.
Congruence bias
the tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, in contrast to tests of possible alternative hypotheses.
Contrast effect
the enhancement or diminishing of a weight or other measurement when compared with a recently observed contrasting object.
Denomination effect
the tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts (e.g. coins) rather than large amounts (e.g. bills).[2]
Distinction bias
the tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them simultaneously than when evaluating them separately.[3]
Endowment effect
"the fact that people often demand much more to give up an object than they would be willing to pay to acquire it".[4]
Experimenter's or Expectation bias
the tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations.
Extraordinarity bias
the tendency to value an object more than others in the same category as a result of an extraordinarity of that object that does not, in itself, change the value.
Focusing effect
the tendency to place too much importance on one aspect of an event; causes error in accurately predicting the utility of a future outcome.
Framing
using an approach or description of the situation or issue that is too narrow. Also framing effectdrawing different conclusions based on how data is presented.
Hyperbolic discounting
the tendency for people to have a stronger preference for more immediate payoffs relative to later payoffs, where the tendency increases the closer to the present both payoffs are.
Illusion of control
the tendency to believe that outcomes can be controlled, or at least influenced, when they clearly cannot.
Impact bias
the tendency to overestimate the length or the intensity of the impact of future feeling states.
Information bias
the tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect action.
Interloper effect
the tendency to value third party consultation as objective, confirming, and without motive. Also consultation paradox, the conclusion that solutions proposed by existing personnel within an organization are less likely to receive support than from those recruited for that purpose.
Irrational escalation
the phenomenon where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong.
Just-world phenomenon
the tendency to rationalize an inexplicable injustice by searching for things that the victim might have done to deserve it.
Loss aversion
"the disutility of giving up an object is greater than the utility associated with acquiring it".(see also sunk cost effects and Endowment effect).
Mere exposure effect
the tendency to express undue liking for things merely because of familiarity with them.
Money illusion
the tendency to concentrate on the nominal (face value) of money rather than its value in terms of purchasing power.
Moral credential effect
the tendency of a track record of non-prejudice to increase subsequent prejudice.
Need for Closure
the need to reach a verdict in important matters; to have an answer and to escape the feeling of doubt and uncertainty. The personal context (time or social pressure) might increase this bias.
Negativity bias
the tendency to pay more attention and give more weight to negative than positive experiences or other kinds of information.
Neglect of probability
the tendency to completely disregard probability when making a decision under uncertainty.
Normalcy bias
the refusal to plan for, or react to, a disaster which has never happened before.
Omission bias
the tendency to judge harmful actions as worse, or less moral, than equally harmful omissions (inactions).
Outcome bias
the tendency to judge a decision by its eventual outcome instead of based on the quality of the decision at the time it was made.
Planning fallacy
the tendency to underestimate task-completion times.
Post-purchase rationalization
the tendency to persuade oneself through rational argument that a purchase was a good value.
Pseudocertainty effect
the tendency to make risk-averse choices if the expected outcome is positive, but make risk-seeking choices to avoid negative outcomes.
Reactance
the urge to do the opposite of what someone wants you to do out of a need to resist a perceived attempt to constrain your freedom of choice.
Restraint bias
the tendency to overestimate one's ability to show restraint in the face of temptation.
Selective perception
the tendency for expectations to affect perception.
Semmelweis reflex
the tendency to reject new evidence that contradicts an established paradigm.
Status quo bias
the tendency to like things to stay relatively the same (see also loss aversion, endowment effect, and system justification).
Von Restorff effect
the tendency for an item that "stands out like a sore thumb" to be more likely to be remembered than other items.
Wishful thinking
the formation of beliefs and the making of decisions according to what is pleasing to imagine instead of by appeal to evidence or rationality.
Zero-risk bias
preference for reducing a small risk to zero over a greater reduction in a larger risk.
PROBABILITY & BELIEF BIAS
Many of these biases are often studied for how they affect business and economic decisions and how they affect experimental research.
Ambiguity effect
the tendency to avoid options for which missing information makes the probability seem "unknown."
Anchoring effect
the tendency to rely too heavily, or "anchor," on a past reference or on one trait or piece of information when making decisions (also called "insufficient adjustment").
Attentional bias
the tendency to neglect relevant data when making judgments of a correlation or association.
Authority bias
the tendency to value an ambiguous stimulus (e.g., an art performance) according to the opinion of someone who is seen as an authority on the topic.
Availability heuristic
estimating what is more likely by what is more available in memory, which is biased toward vivid, unusual, or emotionally charged examples.
Availability cascade
a self-reinforcing process in which a collective belief gains more and more plausibility through its increasing repetition in public discourse (or "repeat something long enough and it will become true").
Belief bias
an effect where someone's evaluation of the logical strength of an argument is biased by the believability of the conclusion.
Clustering illusion
the tendency to see patterns where actually none exist.
Capability bias
the tendency to believe that the closer average performance is to a target, the tighter the distribution of the data set.
Conjunction fallacy
the tendency to assume that specific conditions are more probable than general ones.
Disposition effect
the tendency to sell assets that have increased in value but hold assets that have decreased in value.
Gambler's fallacy
the tendency to think that future probabilities are altered by past events, when in reality they are unchanged. Results from an erroneous conceptualization of the Law of large numbers. For example, "I've flipped heads with this coin five times consecutively, so the chance of tails coming out on the sixth flip is much greater than heads."
Hawthorne effect
the tendency to perform or perceive differently when one knows they are being observed.
Hindsight bias
sometimes called the "I-knew-it-all-along" effect, the tendency to see past events as being predictable.
Illusory correlation
beliefs that inaccurately suppose a relationship between a certain type of action and an effect.
Neglect of prior base rates effect
the tendency to neglect known odds when reevaluating odds in light of weak evidence.
Observer-expectancy effect
when a researcher expects a given result and therefore unconsciously manipulates an experiment or misinterprets data in order to find it (see also subject-expectancy effect).
Optimism bias
the tendency to be over-optimistic about the outcome of planned actions.
Ostrich effect
ignoring an obvious (negative) situation.
Overconfidence effect
excessive confidence in one's own answers to questions. For example, for certain types of questions, answers that people rate as "99% certain" turn out to be wrong 40% of the time.
Positive outcome bias
the tendency to overestimate the probability of good things happening to them (see also wishful thinking, optimism bias, and valence effect).
Pareidolia
a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) is perceived as significant, e.g., seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon, and hearing hidden messages on records played in reverse.
Pessimism bias
the tendency to be over-pessimistic about the outcome of planned actions.
Primacy effect
the tendency to weigh initial events more than subsequent events.
Recency effect
the tendency to weigh recent events more than earlier events (see also peak-end rule).
Disregard of regression toward the mean
the tendency to expect extreme performance to continue.
Stereotyping
expecting a member of a group to have certain characteristics without having actual information about that individual.
Subadditivity effect
the tendency to judge probability of the whole to be less than the probabilities of the parts.
Subjective validation
perception that something is true if a subject's belief demands it to be true. Also assigns perceived connections between coincidences.
Survivorship bias
the tendency to concentrate on the people or things that "survived" some process and ignoring those that didn't, or arguing that a strategy is effective given the winners, while ignoring the large number of losers.
Well travelled road effect
underestimation of the duration taken to traverse oft-traveled routes and over-estimate the duration taken to traverse less familiar routes.