I’ve been mulling over something at the intersection of my interests psychology and smart contracts. When we’re deep in proofreading or auditing code, especially for something as high-stakes as a smart contract, it’s easy to assume our focus and logic are flawless. But I keep wondering how our own mental shortcuts might be working against us.
For instance, I’ve read about confirmation bias, where you might unconsciously look for evidence that supports your initial assumption about the code being correct, rather than actively hunting for flaws. Or the Einstellung effect, where your familiarity with a common pattern might blind you to a novel error sitting right there.
I’m curious if anyone has practical strategies for mitigating these biases during a review. Do you use specific frameworks, or perhaps a partner review system designed to challenge first impressions? How do you structure your process to keep your brain from tricking you into missing a critical bug? I’d love to hear what’s worked in your experience.