The process of judging some problem situation on the basis of its similarity with one encountered earlier, is known as

The correct answer is B) Heuristics of representativeness. Kahneman and Tversky (1974) described this as judging a situation by how closely it resembles a prototype or a case already stored in memory. When a new problem looks like one we have seen before, we assume it will behave the same way, and we often ignore base rates and sample size.

• A) Anchoring heuristics: Here the judgement is pulled towards an initial reference value, such as the first figure put on the table in a negotiation. The question is about resemblance to a past case, not a starting number.
• C) Adjustment heuristics: This follows anchoring. You start from an anchor and move away from it, usually too little. Matching with an earlier case plays no part.
• D) Availability: This judges frequency or probability by how easily examples come to mind, such as overestimating plane crashes after a widely reported one. The basis is ease of recall, not similarity.

This sits under the cognitive biases part of Ethics (GS IV), where administrators are warned against deciding a file by matching it to a precedent without checking the facts of the present case.

Trap: Candidates confuse availability with representativeness because both feel like "memory-based" shortcuts. Ask whether the mind is matching a pattern (representativeness) or recalling how easily something comes up (availability).