Answer to this prompt: "Are you engaged in a project at the moment that you think will improve your reasoning? What is it? What outcome are you pursuing, and how do you think the improved reasoning will help achieve it. Please be specific, and explain how you identified a need for improving your reasoning. What insights from ameliorative psychology might help you in this task?" General Guidelines: Your Think Piece will be evaluated on several bases. First, your piece must be handed in on time. Second, sentences must be well-formed, and paragraphs well-organized. Third, you must state a position you will defend, and you must explicitly and clearly describe the evidence that you claim supports your position. When you are asked to offer and develop an example, you should do your best to make it a novel example. As a general note, for your Think Piece I won’t be asking you what you hope, dream, or wish, is true. I will ask what you believe, and why. In short, you must convincingly develop your argument and you should do so in part by appealing to the material presented in the course. Finally, your conclusion must summarize what you have argued, and why. You do not have to supply a bibliography for the evidence you cite, though you can if you like. But the source of your evidence should be clear in the body of the Think Piece, if it isn’t supplied in a bibliography. Make sure you define the technical terminology you use in your think piece. Terms like “absent data”, “overconfidence bias”, “hindsight bias”, or even just "heuristic" or “bias” have precise meanings in the research you are studying in this class. Sometimes these meanings overlap with what you would intuitively think the term means (and sometimes not!), but the technical meaning that concerns us in the class is always more precise, and that’s the one that should concern you in you writing. So — be clear as to what you think the term means. You can always do this most effectively by defining the term explicitly.