Cognitive Biases and Influence: I

Cognitive biases affect how we acquire, interpret, and process information. When we make decisions, they cause systematic deviations from rationality. Although cognitive biases enable us to address issues more rapidly than we could using strict logic, they can cause us to make epically bad decisions. These properties make cognitive biases useful as tools of influence, especially when the goal of the influencer is not what others might regard as objectively justifiable on rational grounds.

Familiarity with this use of cognitive biases helps limit the incidence of abuses. Here's Part I of a catalog of influencing techniques that exploit cognitive biases.

Outcome Bias

The Outcome Bias is the tendency to evaluate a proposition based not on its general validity, but instead on a known outcome in one or more specific instances. For example, we might not adopt a particular technological solution if we believe that it failed in some previous application, even in the absence of a sound argument that the current proposal would yield analogous results.

To limit the effects of Outcome Bias, require that advocates restrict their arguments to the application at hand, without reference to past outcomes. If people want to use such data, require that they demonstrate applicability on strict logical grounds.

Cascade effects

Some cognitive biases belong to a grouping that can be called cascade effects, in which an idea propagates largely because members of a group observe its adoption by other members of the group. Two of these phenomena are the Availability Cascade and the Bandwagon Effect. Groupthink, the Abilene Paradox, and Peer Pressure can also be understood in terms of cascade effects. Influencers who wish to exploit cascade effects might seek to influence "thought leaders" first, and then use their endorsements to persuade others.

To determine Familiarity with the use of
cognitive biases as tools of
influence helps limit the
incidence of abuseswhether cascade effects are in play, track the sequence of conversions among adopters of the advocated proposition. If the early adopters are thought leaders, but are not the authors of the proposition, it's possible that the authors are employing cascade effects.

Dunning-Kruger Effect

The Dunning-Kruger Effect is the tendency to err in assessing either our own competence, or the competence of others. [Kruger 1999] The more expert we are, the greater is our awareness of our own limitations; the less expert we are, the more likely we are to rely on our assessment of others' demeanor as a proxy for competence. For example, if people seem to lack confidence, we tend to question their competence. And the more complete is our grasp of a complex situation, the less confident we tend to appear when we express ourselves about it.

People who consciously exploit this effect might tend to project extreme confidence when they engage in discussions. They know that confidence makes their arguments seem more valid.

We'll continue next time with Part II of this catalog.  Next in this series  Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

For more about the Dunning-Kruger Effect, see "The Paradox of Confidence," Point Lookout for January 7, 2009; "How to Reject Expert Opinion: II," Point Lookout for January 4, 2012; "Devious Political Tactics: More from the Field Manual," Point Lookout for August 29, 2012; "Overconfidence at Work," Point Lookout for April 15, 2015; "Wishful Thinking and Perception: II," Point Lookout for November 4, 2015; "Wishful Significance: II," Point Lookout for December 23, 2015; "The Paradox of Carefully Chosen Words," Point Lookout for November 16, 2016; and "Risk Acceptance: One Path," Point Lookout for March 3, 2021.

Footnotes

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Effective Communication at Work:

You and I

In tense discussions, the language we use often contributes to the tension. If we can transform the statements we make about each other into statements about ourselves, we can eliminate an important source of tension and stress.

Why Dogs Make the Best Teammates

Dogs make great teammates. It's in their constitutions. We can learn a lot from dogs about being good teammates.

Chronic Peer Interrupters: III

People who habitually interrupt others in meetings must be fairly common, because I'm often asked about what to do about them. And you can find lots of tips on the Web, too. Some tips work well, some generally don't. Here are my thoughts about four more.

Facts, Opinions, Estimates, and Desires

One reason why resource allocation debates can become so difficult is confusion about the differences among facts, opinions, estimates, and desires. Clarifying their differences can reduce the length and intensity of resource allocation debates.

The Risks of Rehearsals

Rehearsing a conversation can be constructive. But when we're anxious about it, we can imagine how it would unfold in ways that bias our perceptions. We risk deluding ourselves about possible outcomes, and we might even experience stress unnecessarily.

See also Effective Communication at Work, Critical Thinking at Work and Cognitive Biases at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming October 12: Downscoping Under Pressure: II

We sometimes "downscope" projects to bring them back on budget and schedule when they're headed for overruns. Downscoping doesn't always work. Cognitive biases like the sunk cost effect and confirmation bias can distort decisions about how to downscope. Available here and by RSS on October 12.

And on October 19: Bullying by Proxy: I

The form of workplace bullying perhaps most often observed involves a bully and a target. Other forms are less obvious. One of these, bullying by proxy, is especially difficult to control, because it so easily evades most anti-bullying policies. Available here and by RSS on October 19.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrensDaBMTItJCwaKsgNner@ChacCrQTBGMzBwhIqYTXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info