My instinctive meaning of “impression” is more what we mean when we say “first impression,” meaning the System 1 reaction. I believe that Katja’s intention here is that impression means your own considered System 2 reaction before taking into account the opinions of others, to avoid anchoring and separate the beliefs you came to on your own from those you got by factoring in the beliefs of others.
I can see value in keeping track of impressions in both senses, First impressions are a potentially valuable thing people put a lot of weight on, that has highly uncertain accuracy that likely varies a lot based on situation and user. System 2 reactions (“second impressions?”) also seem valuable, if they can be successfully isolated. In some cases they can and I’ll even be explicit about this and say something like “my own fair value was 20%, but given your fair value, I now think 40%” and tracking that 20% value’s accuracy seems good.
One worry I instinctively have is that we’re still incorporating a lot of other people’s beliefs and models when we do our initial estimate. There’s no alternative to that. So, when I give my 20% estimate that includes all sorts of estimates and beliefs I’ve gotten from other people about similar or logically related questions in the past. Often in some sense I have a truly unanchored belief that’s different from that, too. Another thing that happens is I think something like “20%, but my model of you says you’ll think 60%, so my current belief is 40%,” and now things are quite muddled.
The more of these “anticipation of the wisdom of others” steps you go through, the more accurate your impression record likely becomes, but at some point it also becomes less useful. This seems like a big problem?
My instinctive meaning of “impression” is more what we mean when we say “first impression,” meaning the System 1 reaction. I believe that Katja’s intention here is that impression means your own considered System 2 reaction before taking into account the opinions of others, to avoid anchoring and separate the beliefs you came to on your own from those you got by factoring in the beliefs of others.
I can see value in keeping track of impressions in both senses, First impressions are a potentially valuable thing people put a lot of weight on, that has highly uncertain accuracy that likely varies a lot based on situation and user. System 2 reactions (“second impressions?”) also seem valuable, if they can be successfully isolated. In some cases they can and I’ll even be explicit about this and say something like “my own fair value was 20%, but given your fair value, I now think 40%” and tracking that 20% value’s accuracy seems good.
One worry I instinctively have is that we’re still incorporating a lot of other people’s beliefs and models when we do our initial estimate. There’s no alternative to that. So, when I give my 20% estimate that includes all sorts of estimates and beliefs I’ve gotten from other people about similar or logically related questions in the past. Often in some sense I have a truly unanchored belief that’s different from that, too. Another thing that happens is I think something like “20%, but my model of you says you’ll think 60%, so my current belief is 40%,” and now things are quite muddled.
The more of these “anticipation of the wisdom of others” steps you go through, the more accurate your impression record likely becomes, but at some point it also becomes less useful. This seems like a big problem?