Author Topic: Apophenia - Seeing patterns when there's none  (Read 3032 times)

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1531
  • Thanked: 581 times
  • Gender: Male
Apophenia - Seeing patterns when there's none
« on: November 06, 2014, 12:22:17 AM »
Apophenia /æpo-fi-nia/ is the experience of seeing patterns or connections in random or meaningless data.

The term is attributed to Klaus Conrad by Peter Brugger, who defined it as the "unmotivated seeing of connections" accompanied by a "specific experience of an abnormal meaningfulness", but it has come to represent the human tendency to seek patterns in random information in general, such as with gambling and paranormal phenomena.

In 1958, Klaus Conrad published a monograph titled Die beginnende Schizophrenie. Versuch einer Gestaltanalyse des Wahns ("The onset of schizophrenia. Attempt to shape analysis of delusion", not yet translated or published in the English language),[1] in which he described in groundbreaking detail the prodromal mood and earliest stages of schizophrenia. He coined the word "Apophänie" to characterize the onset of delusional thinking in psychosis. This neologism is translated as "apophany", from the Greek apo [away from] + phaenein [to show], to reflect the fact that the schizophrenic initially experiences delusion as revelation. In contrast to epiphany, however, apophany does not provide insight into the true nature of reality or its interconnectedness, but is a "process of repetitively and monotonously experiencing abnormal meanings in the entire surrounding experiential field", which are entirely self-referential, solipsistic and paranoid: "being observed, spoken about, the object of eavesdropping, followed by strangers". In short, "apophenia" is a misnomer that has taken on a bastardized meaning never intended by Conrad when he coined the neologism "apophany".

In 2008, Michael Shermer coined the word "patternicity", defining it as "the tendency to find meaningful patterns in meaningless noise". In The Believing Brain (2011), Shermer says that we have "the tendency to infuse patterns with meaning, intention, and agency", which Shermer calls "agenticity".

In 2011, parapsychologist David Luke proposed that apophenia is one end of a spectrum and that the opposite behaviour, the tendency to attribute chance probability to apparently (assuming that there exist relation that one can't currently explain) patterned or related data, can be called "randomania". Luke indicates that this often happens in the hand waving away of everyday phenomena, such as apparent dream precognition, and that this occurs even if research suggests that the phenomena may be genuine, however such researches are often questioned (for instance by anomalistic psychologists).

Xavier Waterstone says:
I frequent the casino very seldomly; having gambled on only one occasion three years ago, my presence at Melbourne’s Crown nowadays is an affair of analysis and amusement. Many a scenario on the casino floor exemplifies the phenomenon of apophenia. My personal favourite is the roulette wheel. Roulette is without fail the epithet of apophenic stupidity – an electronic display beside each wheel displays a list of the most recent numbers spun, and the casino has pre-printed cards on which I observed people religiously marking down the numbers as they appear.

Confident they’ve compiled a long enough list, these people then draw patterns from the data and typically place bets on those numbers which have appeared with the lowest frequency, on the premise that those numbers’ ‘time is up’ and they’re more likely to be spun next. Evidently, pattern thinking is at work here. Their intuition is that in the long run the dispersion of numbers rolled will revert back to the mean (that is the under-rolled numbers should come up more often to equalise the frequency distribution) Along those same lines of logic, newspapers will publish how frequently each lotto number has come up since the inception of the game.



The clear flaw in this way of thinking is that each turn of the roulette wheel and each draw of lotto is an independent event which is not contingent upon previous outcomes. Picture a European roulette wheel with 37 slots (zero to thirty-six). Now let us say that the number 28 has come up the last four spins. Statistically, there is a 0.00005% or 1 in 1.87 million chance of this occurring. If I were to promise a  20:1 payout that 28 wouldn’t come up next spin – there would be no shortage of takers. Why? Because we are generally hard-wired to rely on pattern thinking in our evaluative reasoning and decision making process – “28 has come up four times in a row; there’s no way it could come up again – that would be…almost…impossible” and so the 20:1 bet is oft taken because it seems commonsensical.

But of course, because the result of the next spin is an independent outcome, it pays no heed to the outcomes of historical spins. Therefore there is exactly a 1 in 37 or 2.7% chance of 28 coming up in any given spin. So taking my offer of a 20:1 payout is a terrible bet . If you bet one dollar,  of the 37 equally probably outcomes, you’d get back or ‘win’ $20 in one of them, but lose your dollar in the other 36. Thus the mathematical expectation is that for every dollar you bet, you would expect to lose 43¢ – clearly no-one with half a brain would take such a bet.

Therein apophenia rears its head – the card-marking roulette players are making decisions based on patterns. Patterns which have been lifted from unsystematic (random) and meaningless information on the past spins of the wheel. Yet many gamblers in such games seem to think they have the house beat because they possess some exceptional aptitude. Delusions of grandeur.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2014, 06:10:20 AM by kav »


 

Mike

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 557
  • Thanked: 22 times
Re: Apophenia - Seeing patterns when there's none
« Reply #1 on: November 06, 2014, 03:34:53 PM »
Good post. And very true.
 

Dane

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Thanked: 109 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Apophenia - Seeing patterns when there's none
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2014, 08:00:45 AM »
Yes, very true. It goes for all of us.  We don´t have to be  lunatics in the full moon to grasp it. Just look at some cloud. Inevitably it reminds us of something or someone. Or look at the electronic reader board on the casino! We see some pattern or other, don´t we? And our limited ability to transcend TIME binds ud to the following spin.
 

dobbelsteen

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1203
  • Thanked: 261 times
Re: Apophenia - Seeing patterns when there's none
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2014, 01:35:40 PM »
From my pointview the writer doesn`t know, how a real rouletteplayer takes his decisions. A player  wagers on an event that will occur in the next coming spins. Four consecutive numbers have a chance of 37^4. The chance for 6 consecutive numbers is 37^6. With a very very small risk  on a lost, he can  bet first 36 numbers with one unit and  second 36^2 units.

I know this is a very stupid odd. This principle can only  be played on the chances with less possibilites such as the ECs.
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3013
  • Thanked: 798 times
Re: Apophenia - Seeing patterns when there's none
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2015, 09:58:37 AM »
Yup he is 100% correct.  The key being that the 4 spins had already taken place.  Its almost like a magic trick the way he slips that in there.  Some people believe that its .027 each spin of the wheel for all 5 numbers and it ALMOST looks like he said that because the point he's making is about the supposed futility of tracking numbers!  That's where I had Apophenia!! LOL.  He himself points out the statistical rarity of the event which shows he understands about equal distribution.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2015, 10:04:37 AM by Reyth »