In this blog post, I will not discuss these topics at any length (although if you\u2019re insatiably curious, I\u2019ll reveal my position on them), but rather beg the question: how do we know which information to believe?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
You may think it\u2019s by somehow recognizing truths <\/em>and rejecting false information.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s just that we humans are not very good at doing that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We very often reject information, even though it\u2019s true.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And we accept information, even though it\u2019s false.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And we all do it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Every. Single. Person. Does this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n You.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Aunt Peggie.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Our view of the world is skewed, in some way or another. We\u2019ve all built our personal understanding of the world on a mix of truths and falsehoods. Hopefully mostly truths, but still\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n In essence, we all look at the world through partly broken glasses. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Disconcerting as that realization may be, I think that simply being aware that our glasses are partly broken<\/em> will make it easier to fix them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The purpose of this blog post is to alert you to your broken glasses, give ideas about how to fix them, and also how to go about helping others with their glasses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n So, why do we reject some information that\u2019s true, and accept falsehoods?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Well, that has to do with how we acquire knowledge. How do we get to know what we know?<\/p>\n\n\n\n To answer that question, we must go back to our pre-historic hunter-gatherer days, which is where we\u2019ve spent 99% of human history.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During that time, we discovered things ourselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n How to make fire. An axe. A wheel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And then we\u2019d tell our group: \u201dLook, here\u2019s how to make fire!\u201d<\/em> Through verbal transmission of information, and very hands-on, we taught our friends and family what we had learned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And fast-forwarding through history, then we invented writing \u2013 and information could then be transferred not only geographically from one corner of the earth to another, but through time. So now, we can read things that people wrote thousands of years ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Today, we stand on the shoulders of giants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The accumulated knowledge of mankind is at our disposal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And the accumulated crazy ideas of mankind are also<\/em> literally at our fingertips, one click away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, we\u2019re constantly having to decide whether to accept or reject new information. Assess whether it\u2019s useful and true, and whether it\u2019s worth the effort to assimilate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And be wary of, or aware of, the risk of accepting false information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Judging whether a new piece of information is fact – or fake.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is where cognitive biases<\/em> come in, and mess things up big time. These biases arose early on in our evolutionary history as a way for us to take mental shortcuts, make quick decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Not having to spend time questioning and analyzing novel information, but simply taking a new piece of knowledge from a trusted person for granted, and also, not being fooled by someone from the rivalling tribe. The archeological record tells us that many early hominids died violent deaths, presumably during skirmishes with other tribes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In other words, in prehistoric times, there was a compelling reason to trust members of one\u2019s own tribe, as well as assume that strangers were lying bastards literally out to get you.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We are biased to thinking that information from familiar people is true, and information from strangers is false.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n And sometimes, those biases result in grave errors of judgment, and this is especially likely to occur if that new piece of knowledge is complex, new, or if we perceive that it\u2019s dangerous. In such cases, these cognitive biases make us irrational, and ineffective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A certain pandemic comes to mind, for instance \u2013 this new, complex threat has really illustrated the extent of the problem with cognitive biases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And the way I see it, the way our brains work, those judgment errors tend to exacerbate, or even perhaps cause, major conflicts. Whether it\u2019s about politics, religion, and who is the best James Bond actor. Or about whether the climate crisis is overstated, whether Biden really was elected, and how best to train animals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And in fact, there are two ways that we\u2019re getting it wrong. Two types of biases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, this is the legacy we carry in our evolutionary backpack: trust our tribe, and assume that strangers are lying bastards who are out to get us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Now, I know what you\u2019re thinking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cNo, no, no, no, no no. No sirree. Not me. I\u2019m a well-educated, modern human. I carefully weigh any novel information on its own merit, discern the fact from the fake, and make informed decisions.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Sorry to break it to you, but you\u2019re a hunter-gatherer wearing a thin veneer of civilization, and you\u2019re wrong about a bunch of things because of these ancient biases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Your glasses are broken \u2013 and so are mine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The way to fix those glasses is to become aware of one\u2019s biases. So let\u2019s take a closer look, shall we?<\/p>\n\n\n\n First of all, novel ideas may induce anxiety or even anger, simply because they\u2019re unfamiliar.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n For instance, one guy brought these donuts to work, to share with his colleagues. He sliced them, as if they were bread, and shared the picture below on Instagram.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The post got viral, and many people expressed annoyance at the unorthodox donut serving in the comment\u2019s section.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I find that last one particularly interesting. \u201cI don\u2019t even know you\u201d.<\/em> As if he were a stranger. And although many of these comments were meant jokingly, we do tend to dismiss or even attack ideas that are new, or that come from strangers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Again, this is part of our prehistoric heritage. New things could be dangerous. Familiar things are proven safe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n Cognitive dissonance<\/strong> occurs when we\u2019re in a situation involving conflicting attitudes, beliefs or behaviors. This produces a feeling of mental discomfort, which we typically handle by trying to change one of those attitudes, beliefs or behaviours to reduce that discomfort and restore balance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For example, when people smoke and they know that smoking causes cancer, they are in a state of cognitive dissonance. So, they might try to reduce the dissonance by saying things like \u201cI\u2019d rather have a short, pleasant life than a long boring one\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And of course, people get into cognitive dissonance if they lovingly correct their dog using leash pops, and then learn that using leash corrections can cause them neck injuries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Now, the research on dissonance shows that changing behaviour is difficult, it\u2019s easier to change one\u2019s attitude. To make the chosen alternative, whether it\u2019s smoking or leash correcting the dog, a more attractive alternative than the one we didn\u2019t choose. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This whole idea of accepting that maybe some of our knowledge is wrong or incomplete, and that we need to change our opinion or mindset to incorporate new information, is downright painful \u2013 and so we often avoid it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n Then we have the Semmelweis reflex<\/strong>: the tendency to reject new evidence that contradicts the current paradigm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This cognitive bias was named after the Hungarian doctor Semmelweis who discovered that hand washing was a way to prevent infection, back in the 1840s. The medical community at the time wasn\u2019t ready for that because it was believed that sicknesses were caused by bad air, so his ideas didn\u2019t get the attention they deserved.<\/p>\n\n\n The Semmelweiss effect, how we tend to reject new findings that contradict our paradigm<\/em>, is very powerful. We might be slightly hesitant to take in novel information that contradicts some insignificant part of our previous knowledge, but we\u2019re extremely averse to accepting information that turns our entire paradigm up-side-down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For instance, Darwin was ridiculed for decades before his theory of evolution was slowly accepted by the scientific community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I remember reading about a study where they put people with really strong political views in an fMRI camera, monitoring their brain activity. As part of the experiment, the researchers would challenge those views. And the brain reactions were really strong, producing an increased activity in what\u2019s referred to as the default mode network<\/em>\u2014a set of interconnected structures in the brain associated with self-representation and disengagement from the external world. When these emotional structures are activated, people become less likely to change their minds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When we feel threatened, anxious, we\u2019re less likely to change our minds \u2013 our body reacts as if we\u2019re under physical attack.<\/em> In other words, emotion plays a role in cognition, how we decide what is true and what is not true.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Incidentally, that study also found that we\u2019re more likely to adjust non-political beliefs than political beliefs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n Then there\u2019s the backfire effect<\/strong>. The reaction to disconfirming evidence by strengthening one\u2019s previous beliefs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, sometimes when we try to convince someone that our view is the correct one, the end result is that they\u2019re even more convinced that they<\/em> are right. The conversation actually makes things worse<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is important since it affects both our ability to change other people\u2019s opinion, as well as our ability to process new and challenging information rationally ourselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the animal training world, we\u2019ll often hear people who use shock collars say things like \u201dNo, actually, electric collars are great, they\u2019re not painful at all. The stimulation is just information, it just gets the animal focused\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n If we try to talk to them, we\u2019ll often see this type of backfire effect. They often become even more convinced that those collars are safe \u2013 and of course cognitive dissonance is triggered too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n And then we have reactance<\/strong> – the urge to do the opposite of what someone wants us to do, perhaps out of a need to resist a perceived attempt to constrain our freedom of choice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One example might be a parent admonishing their teenager that \u201cyou\u2019re too young to drink alcohol\u201d<\/em>\u2026 That prohibition just makes illicit drinking all the more exciting – and probable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And of course, people using reverse psychology<\/strong> are playing on reactance, attempting to influence someone to choose the opposite of what they request. Saying to a child: \u201cYou really shouldn\u2019t eat that broccoli, it\u2019s terrible\u201d<\/em>, hoping for a reactance response.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, to summarize, not only are we likely to reject true information when delivered from strangers, but having a conversation with someone with an opposite view can easily polarize our own views and make us even more convinced that our beliefs \u2013 even when mistaken – are correct. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Before we get to what to do about that, let\u2019s have a look at the other types of biases, and check out some mechanisms that cause us to mistakenly accept<\/em> information that we should<\/em> reject.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For starters, there\u2019s anchoring bias.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Think of us all as being attached to an anchor, which is the first information that we learned on a particular subject.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The anchor is our existing knowledge puzzle, and we tend to stick to it<\/em>, regardless of whether it\u2019s true.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For instance, we tend to judge other people based on the first impression that they made.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We tend to stay with the religion that we were brought up with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And we tend to interact with animals the way our parents did. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Due to the anchoring effect, we stick with what we first<\/em> learned \u2013 regardless of whether it\u2019s true or not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n There\u2019s the bandwagon effect.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Our propensity to join the majority<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If everybody else thinks using a choke chain is great, then it\u2019s likely that we do too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s difficult and uncomfortable to not join the bandwagon, instead of jumping on board being the person who says \u201cNo thanks, I\u2019m not going that way. I won\u2019t join you.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Many of my students have lived through being the only person in a stable saying \u201cI\u2019m going to try positive reinforcement to train my horses\u201d<\/em>. I admire them immensely for this, because not only is it uncomfortable not to get on the bandwagon with everyone else, but the discomfort can turn really painful, because the people on the bandwagon will typically criticize our choice not to get on it.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n A double whammy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n The availability cascade<\/strong> is when a new, often simple, idea takes hold in a social group, as a collective belief.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is when people\u2019s need for social acceptance, and the apparent sophistication of a new insight overwhelm their critical thinking. Seeing a new idea expressed by multiple people in our social group can rinse away any reluctance or hesitance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like buying lots of toilet paper in the first few weeks of the Corona pandemic, perhaps, without really thinking it over. Since everyone else did it, we did too.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n Closely related to this is tribal epistemology<\/strong> \u2013 when new Information is evaluated based not on how well it is supported by the available evidence, but on whether it supports the tribe\u2019s values and goals and whether it is vouchsafed by the tribal leaders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This is where we\u2019ll see in-group favouritism, and how we become loyal to the organizations that we associate with, no matter what they\u2019re saying \u2013 or doing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Apparently, we tend to judge the merit of a political bill not on the actual ideas or wording, but on which party we think wrote the bill<\/em>. For instance, Israeli Jews evaluated an actual Israeli-authored peace plan less favorably when it was attributed to the Palestinians than when it was attributed to their own government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n There\u2019s also authority bias.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n We tend to believe people who have authority, regardless of whether what they say is true or not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That authority may come about because of higher education, a fancy title, fame, or wearing some badge of office, like military insignia – or a veterinarian\u2019s coat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I remember experiencing the effect of authority bias, first hand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I was a travel guide in France and Portugal, so during the excursion days I would lecture about local botany, animal life, food and politics, and in the evenings, when I started doing small talk around the dinner table, all the conversations around me would stop, and people would lean in and listen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It was disconcerting \u2013 and exhilarating.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Now, I got a lot of attention in that situation, not because I had something that terribly interesting to say during dinner, but because in the general context, I had authority.<\/p>\n\n\n Authority bias can get really scary, and dangerous. As I said, it\u2019s exhilarating to get that kind of attention, and many people risk getting warped and carried away by the adulation of the crowd.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Just think of the mind-boggling ass-kissing inflating the megalomaniac egos of some semi-illiterate, crude, misogynic, greedy bullies \u2013 just on account of them being famous politicians. It scares me no end.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And no, not saying any names. This is not that kind of blog post.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n There\u2019s the illusory truth effect.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Essentially, hear something enough times, and we\u2019ll start believing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Is Tokyo the capital of Japan? – Yes, sounds familiar.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Is Baku the capital of Azerbaijan? – Yeah, maybe, rings a bell.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Is there a God? – Yeah, I\u2019ve heard that before.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Should we yank the leash when walking the dog? – Yeah, seen it a hundred times.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s familiar<\/em>, and so we believe it, regardless of whether it\u2019s true or not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I find this very problematic in today\u2019s Social Media climate, simply that so many unsubstantiated claims are made so often<\/em> that we can no longer distinguish between true statements and familiar statements \u2013 the latter implies the former through the illusory truth effect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n Then there\u2019s confirmation bias.<\/strong> The way we pay attention to information that confirms and supports what we know, what we already believe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We\u2019ll fit new puzzle pieces into our existing knowledge puzzle, even if the pieces don\u2019t quite fit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If we even bother to pay attention to contradictory evidence, we might ignore it, or not believe it, or somehow reframe it to support our original belief. Our memory will focus on the small detail that supports the original belief \u2013 and we may forget the rest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ***<\/p>\n\n\n\n OK; that\u2019s a few of the mechanisms or biases that explain why we tend to accept things we hear often enough and from people we know, like, and trust \u2013 even though maybe we should reject those ideas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Depositphotos_52599703_xl-2015-1024x619.jpg\")
![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Depositphotos_8966619_xl-2015-195x300.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Depositphotos_155920816_xl-2015-1024x648.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Depositphotos_313865706_xl-2015-1024x683.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n\n
Type 1 biases \u2013 incorrectly rejecting true information.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide8-1024x576.jpg\")
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide9-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"Wash](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Picture5.gif\")
![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Darwin-223x300.jpg\")
![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide11-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"Diagram,](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide12-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"Diagram\n\nDescription](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide13-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nType 2 biases \u2013 mistakenly accepting false information<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide1-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"Diagram\n\nDescription](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide2-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide3-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide4-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide5-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Karolina-travel-guide-185x300.jpg\")
![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide6-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"Graphical](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide7-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
![\"Dunning-Kruger](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide14-1024x576.jpg\")
![\"Diagram\n\nDescription](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide15-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"A](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/Slide16-1024x576.jpg\")
![\"Diagram\n\nDescription](\"https:\/\/illis.se\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/08\/curse-of-knowledge-1024x576.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n