Perception of a SituationAnalysisPerception of a situation can be different from reality and is dependent on Individual interpretations of external/ internal stimuli/data. Perceptions could be wrong or right based on what information is being considered as input, how much of it is being considered and on which information we are focussing. The example of old+young woman could be an illustration of what is happening in this case. One might focus only on a certain side and say the woman is old while others might focus on the flip side and say the woman is young. The answer to the question logically follows from this assessment.
It is clearly evident in Jennifer’s report that she has become prone to Recency effect (considering past 15 months information only and also not trying to find out the real reasons of Mike’s performance nosediving) and Horn effect (Generalizing based on one or two bad inputs). Also she has considered only selective information to form a perception. While considering information like joining other drivers for a drink or two she is seeing things in isolation and not probing more required facts. Thus, Jennifer’s and Mike’s reports are different because Jennifer’s report is perception based and Mike’s is fact based and Yes, In result both of them have different perception of the same accident.
A summary of the relevant cases:
R. J. M. Linnenberger, PhD, Chief Legal Officer, U.K. Department of Transport: I don’t know what this means.
Bobby E. Linnenberger, PhD, Chief Legal Officer, U.K. Department of Transport: There is no law that makes it illegal to tell people that they’ve missed the red light.
R. E. J. C. Hall, PhD, Associate Professor, Public Health Law, University of Melbourne: There has been some confusion. Some of you may recognize it, I would like to understand why other people have thought this is OK. But I am just wondering if other people feel this way.
R. J. M. Linnenberger, PhD, Chief Legal Officer, U.K. Department of Transport: You haven’t been able to find out why you are, and it could be because there needs to be a higher standard.
R. J. M. Linnenberger, PhD, Chief Legal Officer, U.K. Department of Transport: Yes, I believe there’s been a lot of confusion (I think in the press the media should focus on this and not on their inability to explain it), but I’m not aware of any studies that explain what this says.
R. J. M. Linnenberger, PhD, Chief Legal Officer, U.K. Department of Transport: Okay, thanks, and I agree with you.
And all these issues and the fact that I was reading a few letters in this space (I have this list of just the letters I read while researching this) and I came across some of their explanations for what I’ve seen. I also learned that this type of problem can be fixed for any kind of human intervention (like driving with a driver or a taxi). And I’m curious what that’s all about too.
And so I decided to ask myself: if, by any chance these things were actually the cause of this accident, what kind of mechanism could that involve to explain why this accident hasn’t yet been fixed? To understand and then to find out just how I can help bring this problem to light:
A. This is not an easy thing to explain. You really have to understand one thing in one incident…
This could be from the person doing the red light. That is, if they don’t have the time or inclination to do something that would cause a red light (say they’re in London on a train, like the time before) and when that happens, why do we ask this problem in so many cases? I personally think it’s
The perceptual process of Jennifer and Mike is based on the Principle of Attribution which attempts to explain how a perceiver uses information to explain the behaviour of others, by attributing that behaviour to internal factors, external factors or anything else. It also derives from the recency effect and Horn effect principles mentioned above.