<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Anchoring Bias on Ante Kapetanovic</title><link>https://antekapetanovic.com/tags/anchoring-bias/</link><description>Recent content in Anchoring Bias on Ante Kapetanovic</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://antekapetanovic.com/tags/anchoring-bias/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Anchoring Bias in LLM-as-a-Judge Systems</title><link>https://antekapetanovic.com/blog/anchoring-bias-llm-judge/</link><pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://antekapetanovic.com/blog/anchoring-bias-llm-judge/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;In &lt;a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124"&gt;a 1974 experiment&lt;/a&gt;, Tversky and Kahneman used a wheel of fortune rigged to stop at either 10 or 65. After seeing the number, participants of the study was asked to estimate the percentage of African countries in the United Nations. Participants who got 10 gave a median estimate of 25%, whereas those that got 65 estimated 45%.&lt;/p&gt;&#10;&lt;p&gt;The wheel had nothing to do with the question, yet its number pulled the estimates toward it. This phenomenon is known in the literature as the &lt;a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_effect"&gt;anchoring effect&lt;/a&gt;. It described situations where earlier valus become a reference point for a later judgment, even when it offers no useful information.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>