The research has identified that Perry’s main arguments are that: hindsight bias is widespread in society. it is almost unavoidable because of its cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational sources. and it produces negative effects on the ability of people to be a critical thinker and decision maker. The strengths of Perry’s article are its effective use of sarcasm and humor to describe the commonness of hindsight bias, clear organization and flow of ideas, and use of an authoritative source, while its weaknesses are poor use of direct quotations, overdependence on Carey as dominant source of information, and lack of exploitation of hindsight bias as an urgent social, economic, and political issue. One of the weaknesses of Perry’s article is her ineffective use of direct quotations. Her main audiences are ordinary people, so the concepts of cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational sources are not that easy to understand. Perry uses direct citations for explanations, which does not improve the understanding of these factors. For instance, she says that cognitive inputs mean that …people selectively recall information consistent with what they now know to be true and engage in sense-making to impose meaning on their own knowledge. Perry should have explained sense-making and what it means to impose meaning. She can give examples or compare and contrast scenarios to describe what cognitive inputs mean. Metacognitive input is another hard concept to comprehend: the ease with which a past outcome is understood may be misattributed to its assumed prior likelihood. Instead of directly quoting this, metacognitive can be explained as understanding that what happened in the past may be incorrectly connected to a previous hypothesis or guess. Her article shows that directly citing sources is not enough. Perry should have explained them in her own terms too.