Confident In Making Friends
Friendship is a relationship of mutual affection between two or more
people. Friendship is a stronger form of interpersonal bond than an
association. Friendship has been studied in academic fields such as sociology,
social psychology, anthropology, and philosophy. Various academic theories of
friendship have been proposed, including social exchange theory, equity theory,
relational dialectics, and attachment styles. A World Happiness Database study
found that people with close friendships are happier.
Although there are many forms of friendship, some of which may vary from
place to place, certain characteristics are present in many types of friendship.
Such characteristics include affection, sympathy, empathy, honesty, altruism,
mutual understanding and compassion, enjoyment of each other's company, trust,
and the ability to be oneself, express one's feelings, and make mistakes without
fear of judgment from the friend.
While there is no practical limit on what types of people can form a
friendship, friends tend to share common backgrounds, occupations, or interests,
and have similar demographics.
confidence is
generally described as a state of being certain either that a hypothesis
or prediction is correct or that a chosen course
of action is the best or most effective self confidence is having confidence in
oneself. Arrogance or hubris is this comparison, is having unmerited confidence
believing something or someone is capable or correct when they are
not. Overconfidence or presumptuousness is excessive belief in someone or
something succeeding, without any regard for failure. confidence
can be a self fulfilling prophecy as those without it may fail or not try
because they lack it and those with it may succeed because they have it
rather than because of an innate ability.
Self-confidence does not necessarily
imply 'self-belief' or a belief in one's ability to succeed. For instance, one
may be inept at a particular sport or activity, but remain 'confident' in one's
demeanor, simply because one does not place a great deal of emphasis on the
outcome of the activity. When one does not dwell on negative consequences one
can be more 'self-confident' because one is worrying far less about failure or
the disapproval of others following potential failure. One is then more likely
to focus on the actual situation which means that enjoyment and success in that
situation is also more probable. Belief in one's abilities to perform an
activity comes through successful experience and may add to, or consolidate, a
general sense of self-confidence. Studies have also found a link between high
levels of confidence and wages. Seemingly, those who self-report they were
confident earlier in schooling, earned better wages and were promoted more
quickly over the life course.
Confidence in others
Main
article: trust (social science)
People may have confidence in
other people or forces beyond their control. For instance, one might have
confidence in the police to protect them, or might have confidence that a
sports team will win a game. Faith and trust are synonyms of confidence when
used in this sense.
Possible
Explanation
It is suggested that the
confidence bias can be explained by a noisy conversion of objective evidence
(observation) into subjective estimates (judgment), whereas noise is defined as
the mixing of memories during the storing (observing/learning) and retrieval
process (remembering/judgment). The information theoretics logic behind this
explanation is very similar to the mechanism that can also lead to the
conservation bias, and holds that we mix true and false evidence during storage
and retrieval of evidence to and from our memories. The confidence bias results
because as judges we "look inside our own memory" (evaluate our confidence) and
find evidence that is more extreme than when we retrieve evidence for our
judgements (which are conservative due to mixing of extreme values during
retrieval). This explanation is very simple and straightforward, but
nevertheless sufficient mechanism to generate both, overconfidence (in
situations where judges are very sure) and underconfidence (in cases when judges
openly state to lack the required knowledge).
people. Friendship is a stronger form of interpersonal bond than an
association. Friendship has been studied in academic fields such as sociology,
social psychology, anthropology, and philosophy. Various academic theories of
friendship have been proposed, including social exchange theory, equity theory,
relational dialectics, and attachment styles. A World Happiness Database study
found that people with close friendships are happier.
Although there are many forms of friendship, some of which may vary from
place to place, certain characteristics are present in many types of friendship.
Such characteristics include affection, sympathy, empathy, honesty, altruism,
mutual understanding and compassion, enjoyment of each other's company, trust,
and the ability to be oneself, express one's feelings, and make mistakes without
fear of judgment from the friend.
While there is no practical limit on what types of people can form a
friendship, friends tend to share common backgrounds, occupations, or interests,
and have similar demographics.
confidence is
generally described as a state of being certain either that a hypothesis
or prediction is correct or that a chosen course
of action is the best or most effective self confidence is having confidence in
oneself. Arrogance or hubris is this comparison, is having unmerited confidence
believing something or someone is capable or correct when they are
not. Overconfidence or presumptuousness is excessive belief in someone or
something succeeding, without any regard for failure. confidence
can be a self fulfilling prophecy as those without it may fail or not try
because they lack it and those with it may succeed because they have it
rather than because of an innate ability.
Self-confidence does not necessarily
imply 'self-belief' or a belief in one's ability to succeed. For instance, one
may be inept at a particular sport or activity, but remain 'confident' in one's
demeanor, simply because one does not place a great deal of emphasis on the
outcome of the activity. When one does not dwell on negative consequences one
can be more 'self-confident' because one is worrying far less about failure or
the disapproval of others following potential failure. One is then more likely
to focus on the actual situation which means that enjoyment and success in that
situation is also more probable. Belief in one's abilities to perform an
activity comes through successful experience and may add to, or consolidate, a
general sense of self-confidence. Studies have also found a link between high
levels of confidence and wages. Seemingly, those who self-report they were
confident earlier in schooling, earned better wages and were promoted more
quickly over the life course.
Confidence in others
Main
article: trust (social science)
People may have confidence in
other people or forces beyond their control. For instance, one might have
confidence in the police to protect them, or might have confidence that a
sports team will win a game. Faith and trust are synonyms of confidence when
used in this sense.
Possible
Explanation
It is suggested that the
confidence bias can be explained by a noisy conversion of objective evidence
(observation) into subjective estimates (judgment), whereas noise is defined as
the mixing of memories during the storing (observing/learning) and retrieval
process (remembering/judgment). The information theoretics logic behind this
explanation is very similar to the mechanism that can also lead to the
conservation bias, and holds that we mix true and false evidence during storage
and retrieval of evidence to and from our memories. The confidence bias results
because as judges we "look inside our own memory" (evaluate our confidence) and
find evidence that is more extreme than when we retrieve evidence for our
judgements (which are conservative due to mixing of extreme values during
retrieval). This explanation is very simple and straightforward, but
nevertheless sufficient mechanism to generate both, overconfidence (in
situations where judges are very sure) and underconfidence (in cases when judges
openly state to lack the required knowledge).
