tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/decision-making-2388/articlesDecision making – The Conversation2024-03-07T14:28:20Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2219082024-03-07T14:28:20Z2024-03-07T14:28:20ZSeven reasons more female leaders would be a positive step for the climate<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/574647/original/file-20240209-18-frd1d3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Former prime minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern prioritised environmental issues during her tenure. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/brussels-belgium-25th-january-2019-zealands-1294621573">Alexandros Michailidis/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Initially, everyone on the organising committee for the COP29 global climate summit was male. In response, the <a href="https://www.shechangesclimate.org/">She Changes Climate</a> campaign group stated that “climate change affects the whole world, not half of it”. A <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/jan/15/cop29-climate-summit-committee-appointed-with-28-men-and-no-women-azerbaijan">backlash</a> followed and women have since been included to enhance representation within the committee. </p>
<p>A gender-balanced committee is not only a matter of justice and representation, but it also represents a strategic choice. Addressing the complex global challenge of climate change requires diverse perspectives and experiences. Female leaders can bring different qualities to the table. </p>
<h2>1. Caring about nature</h2>
<p>If leaders care about the planet, climate policies will reflect that. <a href="https://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/">Data shows that</a> as citizens, women tend to care for nature and the environment more than men and they tend to be more responsible for actions which may impact the climate change. </p>
<p>According to this <a href="https://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/">European Social Survey</a> data, the share of women who agreed that it’s important to care for nature and the environment is higher than the share of men in all European countries. The difference is not large, ranging from 7% in Austria to 0.3% in France, but the pattern is consistent across all countries. </p>
<p>When people were asked whether they feel personally responsible for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, 52% women agreed compared with 48% of men. More than 63% of women agreed that limiting their energy use reduced greenhouse gas emissions, compared to just 36% of men. </p>
<h2>2. Wanting to take action</h2>
<p>When first appointed to their roles of prime minister in New Zealand and Finland respectively, Jacinda Ardern and Sanna Marin <a href="https://www.ipu.org/news/news-in-brief/2022-07/climate-action-these-seven-women-mps-are-leading-way">both declared</a> that climate change was an emergency and announced actions for their country which influenced the global efforts to mitigate climate change. </p>
<p>Female policymakers agree more than men on the need of measures for the environment, according to data from the <a href="https://www.comparativecandidates.org/">Comparative Candidate Survey </a>. Among politicians who ran for the national parliament elections, 83% of women believed that stronger measures should be taken to protect the environment, compared to 75% of men. </p>
<p>My <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/gender-equality-and-public-policy/63D91B648D83CB692D3C7195D8E94088">own research</a> shows that the difference between men and women is significant even when we control for individual characteristics, including age, ideology, education, religion, occupation and number of children.</p>
<h2>3. Making change happen</h2>
<p>Firms with more women in decision-making positions tend to perform better on environmental and sustainable outcomes. I <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/gender-equality-and-public-policy/63D91B648D83CB692D3C7195D8E94088">found that</a> companies with three or more female directors perform better on specific measures of environmental performance. </p>
<p>The share of managers also matters: a higher female presence in managerial positions is associated with better environmental performance. This is measured by an indicator which considers different factors: pollution of air, land and water and the impacts on biodiversity, the use of non-renewable energy, water, land, forests, minerals, the production of waste and new product development efforts to remedy these problems. </p>
<h2>4. Being altruistic</h2>
<p>Men and women tend to show differences in social orientation. As American sociologist Nancy Chodorow outlined in her 1978 book, <a href="https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520221550/the-reproduction-of-mothering">The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender</a>, women are directed toward the caregiver role, so they are encouraged to be more compassionate, nurturing, protective, and cooperative than men. <a href="https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/116/1/293/1939030?redirectedFrom=fulltext">Experimental research</a> in 2001 confirmed that women tend to be more altruistic and socially oriented than men. </p>
<h2>5. Having more opportunities</h2>
<p>Gender roles and different opportunities may also play a role in gender differences in attitudes towards the environment. The <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08941920.2014.918235">biological availability hypothesis</a> suggests that women spend less time at work than men and more time at home, so they have more opportunities to engage in private pro-environment behaviours such as recycling and water use (although this doesn’t mean they have more free time). Women also tend to be more concerned than men about health and safety issues and this is reflected in higher levels of <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0013916596283003">environmental concerns</a>. </p>
<h2>6. Approaching risk with caution</h2>
<p>Women perceive risks differently. Women tend to be more risk averse than men, as they tend to prefer an outcome which is certain to an uncertain one associated to <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-111809-125122">higher return</a>.</p>
<h2>7. Taking the long-term view</h2>
<p>When approaching climate change, women tend to offer fresh perspectives, creative problem-solving skills and inclusive leadership styles. As climate change affects everyone, our collective effort benefits from acknowledging the diverse ways in which men and women express concerns about the issues and propose actions for the future. Women tend to be more patient and willing to wait for higher <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1996-01404-001">reward in the future</a> and they care about the consequences of their actions over a longer time frame. </p>
<p>In any decision-making process, personal leadership style is a crucial factor. Gender plays a significant role in shaping that style and female leadership style tends to focus more on long-term goals. That can help drive solutions that mitigate and adapt the impact of climate change. </p>
<p>Including more women at the table at the future climate summits is an essential step towards making real change. Each of us can make the difference, as citizens, voters, business entrepreneurs and decision-makers to promote better representation and more balanced decisions, for now and for future generations.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Imagine weekly climate newsletter" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><em>Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?</em></strong>
<br><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeTop">Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead.</a> Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeBottom">Join the 30,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.</a></em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/221908/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paola Profeta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Research shows that men and women have different perspectives on climate, with huge implications in terms of policymaking. For that reason, diverse leadership is essential.Paola Profeta, Dean for Diversity Inclusion and Sustainability, Professor of Public Economics, Director of Axa Research Lab on Gender Equality, Bocconi UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2239812024-02-26T04:31:39Z2024-02-26T04:31:39ZWhat happens when we outsource boring but important work to AI? Research shows we forget how to do it ourselves<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/577794/original/file-20240226-18-688ppo.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=44%2C0%2C5946%2C3368&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/bangkok-thailand-16-january-2021man-driving-1896624946">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In 2009, an Air France jet crashed into the ocean, leaving no survivors. The plane’s autopilot system shut down and the pilots, having become reliant on their computerised assistant, were <a href="https://hbr.org/2017/09/the-tragic-crash-of-flight-af447-shows-the-unlikely-but-catastrophic-consequences-of-automation">unable to correct the situation manually</a>.</p>
<p>In 2015, a bus driver in Europe typed the wrong destination into his GPS device and cheerfully took a group of Belgian tourists on <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/gps-fail-bus-driver-takes-belgian-tourists-1200km-in-wrong-direction/s53bvant3">a 1,200 kilometre detour</a> in the wrong direction.</p>
<p>In 2017, in a decision later overturned on appeal, US prosecutors who had agreed to release a teenager on probation <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/06/should-we-be-afraid-of-ai-in-the-criminal-justice-system/592084/">abruptly changed their minds</a> because an algorithm ruled the defendant “high risk”.</p>
<p>These are dramatic examples, but they are far from isolated. When we outsource cognitive tasks to technology – such as flying a plane, navigating, or making a judgement – research shows we may <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/154193121005402305">lose the ability</a> to perform those tasks ourselves. There is even a term for our tendency to forget information that is available through online search engines: <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.333.6040.277">the Google effect</a>. </p>
<p>As new AI technologies promise to automate an increasing range of activities, the risk of “skill erosion” is growing. Our research shows <a href="https://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol24/iss5/2/">how it can happen</a> – and suggests ways to keep hold of the expertise you need, even when you don’t need it every day.</p>
<h2>Skill erosion can cripple an organisation</h2>
<p>My research shows the risk of skill erosion is easily overlooked. In a recent study, my team and I examined <a href="https://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol24/iss5/2/">skill erosion in an accounting company</a>. </p>
<p>The company had recently stopped using software that automated much of its fixed-asset accounting service. However, the accountants found themselves unable to carry out the task without it. Years of over-reliance on the software had eroded their expertise, and ultimately, they had to relearn their fixed-asset accounting skills.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1604884273789603842"}"></div></p>
<p>While the software was rule-based (it did not use machine learning or “AI”), it was “smart” enough to track depreciation and produce reports for many tax and financial purposes. These are tasks that human accountants found very complex and tedious.</p>
<p>The company only became aware of skill erosion after a client found errors in the accounting team’s manual reports. With its accountants lacking sufficient expertise, the company had to commission the software provider to fix the errors. </p>
<h2>How skill erosion happens</h2>
<p>We found that a lack of mindfulness about the automation-supported task had led to skill erosion. The old saying, “use it or lose it”, applies to cognitively intense work as much as to anything else.</p>
<p>The accountants were not concerned about outsourcing their thinking to the software, since it operated almost flawlessly. In other words, they fell prey to “<a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21077562/">automation complacency</a>”: the assumption that “all is well” while ignoring potential risks. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/ai-is-everywhere-including-countless-applications-youve-likely-never-heard-of-222985">AI is everywhere – including countless applications you've likely never heard of</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This had three major consequences:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>they lost their awareness of what automation was doing </p></li>
<li><p>they lost the incentive to maintain and update relevant knowledge (such as tax legislation), because the vendor and software did that for them</p></li>
<li><p>as the software was reliable, they no longer bothered to check the outgoing reports for accuracy. </p></li>
</ol>
<h2>How to maintain your skills</h2>
<p>So, how do you prevent complacency while using AI and other automated systems? Here are three tips: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>pay attention to what the system is doing – what inputs are used, for what purpose, and what might affect its suggestions</p></li>
<li><p>keep your competence up to date (especially if you are legally accountable for the outcomes)</p></li>
<li><p>critically assess the results, even if the final outcomes appear satisfactory. </p></li>
</ol>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A photo of two pilots in a plane cockpit." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/577802/original/file-20240226-20-pcjl54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/577802/original/file-20240226-20-pcjl54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577802/original/file-20240226-20-pcjl54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577802/original/file-20240226-20-pcjl54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577802/original/file-20240226-20-pcjl54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577802/original/file-20240226-20-pcjl54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/577802/original/file-20240226-20-pcjl54.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Keeping your skills sharp while using automated systems requires paying close attention.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/cockpit-modern-jet-airplane-aircraft-flies-523957972">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What would this look like in practice? Here’s an everyday example: driving with the help of an AI-powered navigation app. </p>
<p>Instead of blindly following the app’s instructions, pay attention to road signs and landmarks, and be aware of what you are doing even when guided by the app. </p>
<p>Study the map and suggested route before driving to increase your “domain knowledge”, or understanding of what is around the route. This helps you relate your specific path to the broader environment, which will be helpful if you get lost or want to find alternative routes.</p>
<p>When you reach your destination, reflect on the route the app suggested: was it fast, was it safe, was it enjoyable? If not, consider taking a different route next time, even if the app suggests otherwise. </p>
<h2>Is AI a necessary companion?</h2>
<p>The case of the accounting firm also raises a bigger question: what skills are relevant and worth maintaining, and which ones should we relinquish to automation? </p>
<p>There is no universal answer, as professional skills change across time, jurisdictions, industries, cultures and geographical locations. However, it is a question we will have to contend with as AI takes over activities once considered unable to be automated.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/drowning-in-digital-debt-ai-assistants-can-help-but-we-must-use-them-carefully-223436">Drowning in 'digital debt'? AI assistants can help – but we must use them carefully</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Despite the struggles, the accounting manager in our case study believes the automated software is highly beneficial. In his view, his team just got caught off guard by complacency. </p>
<p>In a world focused on efficiency and annual or quarterly targets, organisations favour solutions that improve things in the short term, even if they have negative long-term side effects. This is what happened in the accounting case: efficiency gains overshadowed abstract concerns about expertise, until problems ensued. </p>
<p>This does not mean that we should avoid AI. Organisations cannot afford to miss out on the opportunities it presents. However, they should also be aware of the risk of skill erosion.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223981/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Tapani Rinta-Kahila is a recipient of the Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (project number DE240100269) funded by the Australian Government. His research on this topic has previously been funded by the Jenny and Antti Wihuri Foundation.</span></em></p>AI and smart software make life easier, most of the time. How do you keep your skills up for the times when they fail?Tapani Rinta-Kahila, Lecturer in Business Information Systems, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1264022024-01-24T17:19:28Z2024-01-24T17:19:28ZTraining to reduce cognitive bias may improve decision making after all<p>Ever since Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky formalised the concept of <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/cognitive-bias">cognitive bias in 1972</a>, most empirical evidence has given credence to the claim that our brain is incapable of improving our decision-making abilities. Cognitive bias has practical ramifications beyond private life, extending to professional domains including business, military operations, political policy, and medicine.</p>
<p>Some of the clearest examples of the effects of bias on consequential decisions have occurred in military operations. Confirmation bias, that is the tendency to conduct a biased search for and interpretation of evidence in support of our hypotheses and beliefs, has contributed to the downing of Iran Air Flight 655 in 1988 and, more recently, the decision to invade Iraq in 2003. It has also been identified as one of the most deleterious biases on social media, actively contributing to the <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10796-021-10222-9">development of polarisation and echo chambers in exchanges</a>.</p>
<h2>Can one bend one’s intuition?</h2>
<p>Despite all the attention in recent years on reducing cognitive bias, most evidence suggests that there’s little we can do to improve our professional and personal decision making. But a recent experiment suggests that it may be possible for training to improve decision making in the field.</p>
<p>We are regularly reminded of the many ways that cognitive biases interfere with our decision making. However, beyond teaching a specific skill or rule – for example, how to calculate expected values – reading articles and books or even completing courses and business cases <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01142.x">has proven of little help</a> to people in the throes of making a decision. That conclusion was succinctly summarised by Daniel Kahneman, a Nobel Laureate and a founder of the field and, who said in <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/cognitive-bias/565775/">a 2018 interview</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“You can’t improve intuition. Perhaps, with very long-term training, lots of talk, and exposure to behavioural economics, what you can do is cue reasoning… Unfortunately, the world doesn’t provide cues. And for most people, in the heat of argument, the rules go out the window.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>That view is backed up by a trail of frustrating findings from the <a href="https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA099435">1980s</a> on, where even trained experts such as <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7070445">doctors</a>, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/074959788790046X">realtors</a> and <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2012.01438.x">philosophers</a> did not show improved decision making when faced with novel contexts and problems in the field.</p>
<p>In an article published in <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797619861429"><em>Psychological Science</em></a>, we report promising results that suggest this post-mortem may be premature. In an experiment involving graduate business students, we found that bias-reduction training can improve decision making in field settings even though reminders of bias are absent.</p>
<h2>Training sessions and computer games</h2>
<p>The experiment was designed to surreptitiously measure the influence of a single <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175">de-bias training intervention</a> – the tendency to search for evidence confirming hypotheses and ideas we already suspect or believe to be true, to overweight facts and ideas that support that belief, and to discount or ignore evidence that supports alternate hypotheses.</p>
<p>A little more than half of participants in the experiment (62%) were given the training and then asked to complete a business case designed to test confirmation bias, but they were unaware of the connection between the training and the case. The rest of participants first completed the case and then received training. Even though the time lag between training and the case averaged 18 days and the structure of problems used in the training differed from the case, comparison of the trained and untrained students revealed that training reduced choice of the inferior, hypothesis-confirming case solution by 29%.</p>
<p>To disguise the relationship between training and the case, all graduate business students in three programs were invited to play a serious computer game in a set of sessions that took place over a 20-day window. This particular training intervention has produced large and long-lasting reductions of confirmation bias, correspondence bias, and the bias blind spot, in laboratory contexts. Originally created for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, it has been used to reduce bias in US government intelligence analysts.</p>
<h2>Imagining you’re leading an automotive racing team</h2>
<p>All graduate students in the three programs also completed, in one of their courses, an unannounced business case known as “Carter Racing”, a case modelled on the fatal decision to launch the <em>Challenger</em> space shuttle in 1986. Here, each student acted as the lead of an automotive racing team making a high-stakes, go/no-go decision: remain in a race or withdraw from it. We then used natural variance in the training schedule to test whether the effects of debias training would transfer to improved decision making in the case, when trainees were not aware that their decision making would be examined for bias.</p>
<p>At first sight, the case narrative and payoff structure favour the hypothesis-confirming choice: remaining in the race. A careful examination of the data provided in the case, however, reveals that withdrawing from the race is an objectively superior option, but it requires the compilation of two charts. The first chart tracks frequencies of engine failures in relation to temperature at the time of the race. The other chart tracks frequencies of races without engine failures by temperatures at the time of the race. Casual inspection of either chart would not reveal the clear relationship between failures and temperature, but when both charts are considered together, the relationship is strikingly clear. A catastrophic engine failure is nearly certain at the low temperature recorded just before the race is to begin.</p>
<p>Participants trained before completing the case were 29% less likely to choose the inferior hypothesis-confirming solution than participants trained after completing the case. To address possible selection biases, such as better students signing up for earlier training sessions, we tested and found that the effect held even if we only compared participants who completed the training one day before or after the case. Further, when controlling for factors including students’ work experience, age, grade point averages, GMAT scores, and propensity to engage in cognitive reflection, we found that the training intervention still significantly improved decision making.</p>
<p>Our analyses of participants’ written justifications for their decisions suggest that their improved decisions were driven by a reduction in confirmatory hypothesis testing. Trained participants spontaneously generated fewer arguments in support of going ahead with the race – the inferior case solution – than did untrained participants.</p>
<h2>Improvement is possible</h2>
<p>These results provide encouraging evidence that training can improve decision making in the field and consequential decisions in professional and personal life. It also addresses the concern that debiasing training may lead people to overcorrect or abandon <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2008-01984-002">heuristics</a>, the simple rules people rely on to reduce the complexity and effort when making decisions that sometimes <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364661310001713">produce these biases</a>, in situations where they are useful. Trained participants were more likely to choose the optimal case solution, so training benefited rather than impaired decision making.</p>
<p>Of course, these findings are limited to a single field experiment. More research is needed to replicate the effect in other domains and to explain why this game-based training intervention transferred more effectively than have other forms of training tested by past research. Games may be more engaging training interventions than lectures or written summaries of research findings. The game also provided intensive practice and personalised feedback, which is another possibility. A third possibility is the way the intervention taught players about biases. Training may be more effective when it describes cognitive biases and how to mitigate them at an abstract level, and then gives trainees immediate practice testing out their new knowledge on different problems and contexts.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126402/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anne-Laure Sellier a reçu des financements de la Fondation HEC. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carey K. Morewedge previously received funding for other debiasing research from the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity of the United States Government.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Irene Scopelliti ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.</span></em></p>It has long been thought one couldn’t bend one’s intuition. Recent research reveals it is in fact possible to reduce bias through training.Anne-Laure Sellier, Professeur de Sciences Comportementales à HEC Paris et membre du groupe de recherche CNRS-GREGHEC, HEC Paris Business SchoolCarey K. Morewedge, Professor of Marketing, Boston UniversityIrene Scopelliti, Professor of Marketing and Behavioural Science, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2200032023-12-21T13:46:38Z2023-12-21T13:46:38ZAI could improve your life by removing bottlenecks between what you want and what you get<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566649/original/file-20231219-15-9kiud5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5499%2C3695&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Want to turn many experiences from the equivalent of ordering from a menu to getting a personalized meal? AI is poised to help.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/humanoid-robot-chef-cooks-dishes-in-a-restaurant-royalty-free-image/1205789278">Julia Garan/iStock via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Artificial intelligence is poised to upend much of society, removing human limitations inherent in many systems. One such limitation is information and logistical bottlenecks in decision-making.</p>
<p>Traditionally, people have been forced to reduce complex choices to a small handful of options that don’t do justice to their true desires. Artificial intelligence has the potential to remove that limitation. And it has the potential to drastically change how democracy functions.</p>
<p>AI researcher <a href="https://tantum.substack.com/p/democracy-on-mars-red-sky-thinking">Tantum</a> <a href="https://tantum.substack.com/p/democracy-on-mars-3-new-tools-for">Collins</a> and I, a <a href="https://www.schneier.com/">public-interest technology scholar</a>, call this AI overcoming “lossy bottlenecks.” <a href="https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lossy">Lossy</a> is a term from <a href="https://www.britannica.com/science/information-theory">information theory</a> that refers to imperfect communications channels – that is, channels that lose information. </p>
<h2>Multiple-choice practicality</h2>
<p>Imagine your next sit-down dinner and being able to have a long conversation with a chef about your meal. You could end up with a bespoke dinner based on your desires, the chef’s abilities and the available ingredients. This is possible if you are cooking at home or hosted by accommodating friends.</p>
<p>But it is infeasible at your average restaurant: The limitations of the kitchen, the way supplies have to be ordered and the realities of restaurant cooking make this kind of rich interaction between diner and chef impossible. You get a menu of a few dozen standardized options, with the possibility of some modifications around the edges. </p>
<p>That’s a lossy bottleneck. Your wants and desires are rich and multifaceted. The array of culinary outcomes are equally rich and multifaceted. But there’s no scalable way to connect the two. People are forced to use multiple-choice systems like menus to simplify decision-making, and they lose so much information in the process.</p>
<p>People are so used to these bottlenecks that we don’t even notice them. And when we do, we tend to assume they are the inevitable cost of scale and efficiency. And they are. Or, at least, they were.</p>
<h2>The possibilities</h2>
<p>Artificial intelligence has the potential to overcome this limitation. By storing rich representations of people’s preferences and histories on the demand side, along with equally rich representations of capabilities, costs and creative possibilities on the supply side, AI systems <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4123356">enable complex customization at scale and low cost</a>. Imagine walking into a restaurant and knowing that the kitchen has already started work on a meal optimized for your tastes, or being presented with a personalized list of choices.</p>
<p>There have been some early attempts at this. People have <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2023/05/02/chatgpt-ai-meal-planning-diet/">used ChatGPT to design meals</a> based on dietary restrictions and what they have in the fridge. It’s still early days for these technologies, but once they get working, the possibilities are nearly endless. Lossy bottlenecks are everywhere.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vR25_bAzO9s?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Imagine a future AI that knows your dietary wants and needs so well that you wouldn’t need to use detail prompts for meal plans, let alone iterate on them as the nutrition coach in this video does with ChatGPT.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Take labor markets. Employers look to grades, diplomas and certifications to gauge candidates’ suitability for roles. These are a very coarse representation of a job candidate’s abilities. An AI system with access to, for example, a student’s coursework, exams and teacher feedback as well as detailed information about possible jobs could provide much richer assessments of which employment matches do and don’t make sense.</p>
<p>Or apparel. People with money for tailors and time for fittings can get clothes made from scratch, but most of us are limited to mass-produced options. AI could hugely reduce the costs of customization by learning your style, taking measurements based on photos, generating designs that match your taste and using available materials. It would then convert your selections into a series of production instructions and place an order to an AI-enabled robotic production line.</p>
<p>Or software. Today’s computer programs typically use one-size-fits-all interfaces, with only minor room for modification, but individuals have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-70536-5.50029-4">widely varying needs and working styles</a>. AI systems that observe each user’s interaction styles and know what that person wants out of a given piece of software could take this personalization far deeper, completely redesigning interfaces to suit individual needs.</p>
<h2>Removing democracy’s bottleneck</h2>
<p>These examples are all transformative, but the lossy bottleneck that has the largest effect on society is in politics. It’s the same problem as the restaurant. As a complicated citizen, your policy positions are probably nuanced, trading off between different options and their effects. You care about some issues more than others and some implementations more than others. </p>
<p>If you had the knowledge and time, you could engage in the deliberative process and help create better laws than exist today. But you don’t. And, anyway, society can’t hold policy debates involving hundreds of millions of people. So you go to the ballot box and choose between two – or if you are lucky, four or five – individual representatives or political parties. </p>
<p>Imagine a system where AI removes this lossy bottleneck. Instead of trying to cram your preferences to fit into the available options, imagine conveying your political preferences in detail to an AI system that would directly advocate for specific policies on your behalf. This could revolutionize democracy.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566388/original/file-20231218-27-lpdxip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="a diagram of six vertical columns composed of squares of various white, grey and black shades" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566388/original/file-20231218-27-lpdxip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/566388/original/file-20231218-27-lpdxip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566388/original/file-20231218-27-lpdxip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566388/original/file-20231218-27-lpdxip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566388/original/file-20231218-27-lpdxip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566388/original/file-20231218-27-lpdxip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/566388/original/file-20231218-27-lpdxip.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Ballots are bottlenecks that funnel a voter’s diverse views into a few options. AI representations of individual voters’ desires overcome this bottleneck, promising enacted policies that better align with voters’ wishes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://tantum.substack.com/p/democracy-on-mars-3-new-tools-for">Tantum Collins</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One way is by enhancing voter representation. By capturing the nuances of each individual’s political preferences in a way that traditional voting systems can’t, this system could lead to policies that better reflect the desires of the electorate. For example, you could have an AI device in your pocket – your future phone, for instance – that knows your views and wishes and continually <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90257573/mr-robot-goes-to-washington-how-ai-will-change-democracy">votes in your name</a> on an otherwise overwhelming number of issues large and small.</p>
<p>Combined with AI systems that personalize political education, it could encourage more people to participate in the democratic process and increase political engagement. And it could eliminate the problems stemming from elected representatives who reflect only the views of the majority that elected them – and sometimes not even them.</p>
<p>On the other hand, the privacy concerns resulting from allowing an AI such intimate access to personal data are considerable. And it’s important to avoid the pitfall of just allowing the AIs to figure out what to do: Human deliberation is crucial to a functioning democracy.</p>
<p>Also, there is no clear transition path from the representative democracies of today to these AI-enhanced direct democracies of tomorrow. And, of course, this is still science fiction.</p>
<h2>First steps</h2>
<p>These technologies are likely to be used first in other, less politically charged, domains. Recommendation systems for digital media have steadily reduced their reliance on traditional intermediaries. Radio stations are like menu items: Regardless of how nuanced your taste in music is, you have to pick from a handful of options. Early digital platforms were only a little better: “This person likes jazz, so we’ll suggest more jazz.” </p>
<p>Today’s streaming platforms use listener histories and a broad set of features describing each track to provide each user with personalized music recommendations. Similar systems suggest academic papers with far greater granularity than a subscription to a given journal, and movies based on more nuanced analysis than simply deferring to genres.</p>
<p>A world without artificial bottlenecks comes with risks – loss of jobs in the bottlenecks, for example – but it also has the potential to free people from the straightjackets that have long constrained large-scale human decision-making. In some cases – restaurants, for example – the impact on most people might be minor. But in others, like politics and hiring, the effects could be profound.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/220003/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bruce Schneier does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Life is full of hidden bottlenecks that result from logistical trade-offs between efficiency and your unique needs and desires. AI promises to change this taken-for-granted equation.Bruce Schneier, Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy SchoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2119032023-08-27T20:04:32Z2023-08-27T20:04:32Z#GirlMaths: a seemingly innocent and fun way to justify expenses that can have serious financial consequences<p>These shoes are perfect, made for me! I have to get them! But really, I should be paying off my car loan instead. I can’t justify this purchase. Or can I …?</p>
<p>We all know this feeling, this tension between what you really want to do and what you really should, or shouldn’t, do. What you are experiencing is <a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Leon-Festinger/Cognitive-dissonance">cognitive dissonance</a>.</p>
<p>It’s a psychological discomfort we feel when our behaviours and our values or beliefs do not match. Not to worry, we can make that discomfort simply disappear with a good dose of #GirlMaths! </p>
<h2>So what is #GirlMaths?</h2>
<p>GirlMaths recently became a viral phenomenon on TikTok after New Zealand FVHZM radio hosts Fletch, Vaughan and Hayley used #GirlMaths to justify one host’s mother’s expensive dress purchase as basically free because the dress was going to be worn at least four times.</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-904" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/904/f0b5e215a804bb450e609c397b96c7fcbf46172f/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Since then, influencers have added to the #GirlMaths trend with gems such as “If I buy it for $100, wear it, and then resell it for $80 then I basically wore it for free”, “If I pay with cash, it means it’s free”, and “If I just returned something, then purchase something new for the same amount of money, then it’s free”. </p>
<p>The reason #GirlMaths resonates so well with everyone and allows it to go viral is that we are very familiar with this type of thinking. The mental gymnastics of #GirlMaths needed to justify cost-per-wear or cash-is-free is a perfect display of behavioural biases and heuristics, such as confirmation bias and denomination bias, being applied to everyday consumption decisions. </p>
<h2>The psychology of decision-making</h2>
<p>Behavioural biases and heuristics are shortcuts in our thinking that help us make decisions quicker and easier, and are great for reducing the cognitive dissonance we sometimes experience.</p>
<p>Our brain has a lot of decisions to make in a day and simply doesn’t have the power to scrutinise every little detail of every <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-shall-we-have-for-dinner-choice-overload-is-a-real-problem-but-these-tips-will-make-your-life-easier-193317">decision</a>. These shortcuts in our thinking may facilitate the decision making process, but they don’t always mean we make the most optimal decisions.</p>
<p>Confirmation bias is a bias where you justify your decisions by considering only the evidence that supports what you want and ignore the evidence that would mean you’d have to make a different decision. Cost-per-wear does sound quite financially savvy. It is just like bulk-buying pantry essentials, right?</p>
<p>The issue is you are ignoring the facts such as: 1) your disposable income does not match this expense in light of your utility bills, 2) you could rewear a cheaper dress all the same, and 3) by spending money on a fancy dress, you lose the opportunity to spend the money on other better investments for wealth accumulation, or to pay off your car loan.</p>
<h2>The financial and social costs</h2>
<p>But it’s all a bit of innocent fun, right? Surely people won’t take #GirlMaths that seriously? We beg to differ. </p>
<p>First, the term is unnecessarily gendered. Gendered language operates to reinforce societal expectations with a particular gender and can promote stereotypes, biases and binary categories. </p>
<p>In this case, the term “girl maths” reinforces problematic stereotypes that equate women with consumption, frivolity and extravagant spending. When stereotypes are reinforced within our own social circles, we are more likely to <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0146167299025007004?casa_token=dOhnQVtFwPsAAAAA:XSBdix5AB6bDfGjNgfbX9OIjstw4KE071GP0l60mAxvHJMaEwkyPERqHXf3z9PhctWJUl6h7TgTHg_U">internalise these as part of our identity</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/544150/original/file-20230823-23-t4fl7p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Two women showing each other shirts in a shop" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/544150/original/file-20230823-23-t4fl7p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/544150/original/file-20230823-23-t4fl7p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544150/original/file-20230823-23-t4fl7p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544150/original/file-20230823-23-t4fl7p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544150/original/file-20230823-23-t4fl7p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544150/original/file-20230823-23-t4fl7p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544150/original/file-20230823-23-t4fl7p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The term ‘girl maths’ reinforces the idea that women are frivolous with money.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/search/fashion-shopping?image_type=photo">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>By representing women in a less favourable way, the term operates to both demean and discriminate on a gendered basis. This is heightened by the use of “girl” as opposed to “woman”, which implies someone is childlike or lacking in knowledge or experience. It also begs the question what “boy maths” - set up as something opposing and different - might connote. </p>
<p>Second, the #GirlMaths trend reminds us of the power of “<a href="https://theconversation.com/fintok-and-finfluencers-are-on-the-rise-3-tips-to-assess-if-their-advice-has-value-161406">finfluencers</a>” – social media content creators amassing huge online followings by sharing advice on anything from budgeting to buying a house, to investing.</p>
<p>These online gurus appeal to Gen Z and millennials, simplifying complex financial concepts into digestible nuggets, much like #GirlMaths simplifies purchases based on cost-per-wear or cash-as-free.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/are-you-financially-literate-here-are-7-signs-youre-on-the-right-track-202331">Are you financially literate? Here are 7 signs you're on the right track</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Just as regulators such as <a href="https://moneysmart.gov.au/other-ways-to-borrow/buy-now-pay-later-services">ASIC</a> repeatedly warn us of the dangers of buy-now-pay-later services, we must caution the #GirlMaths trend as a dangerous cocktail for young women who are susceptible to the “advice” of finfluencers.</p>
<p>The trend resembles BNPL by breaking down expenses into smaller, more palatable portions, making purchases seem justifiable and affordable at the moment.</p>
<p>Denomination bias describes this tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts rather than large amounts. We find it much easier to spend $50 four times than $200 all at once. </p>
<p>However, the convenience of these shortcuts in our thinking can obscure the hidden financial risks. You may overlook the bigger picture of your financial health, and spend more than what you can afford. That’s why a large number of BNPL users find themselves ending up in a <a href="https://www.choice.com.au/money/credit-cards-and-loans/personal-loans/articles/bnpl-submission-to-treasury">modern debt trap</a>.</p>
<h2>The perils of #GirlMaths</h2>
<p>The danger of #GirlMaths to young women lies in the cocktail of feeling oddly familiar and reinforced in this biased thinking, the problematic stereotypes that shape identities, and the power of finfluencers, who wield increasing influence over the financial choices and decision-making of young women.</p>
<p>While the term may initially come across as innocent fun, it’s crucial not to underestimate its potential harms. Instead, let’s champion the use of inclusive language in finance that doesn’t perpetuate gender biases.</p>
<p>And if you’re a staunch supporter of #GirlMaths, we strongly urge you to take into account the possible adverse financial consequences of these quick-fix spending habits.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211903/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Justifying purchases can make parting with money easier but a viral TikTok trend could leave girls spending more than they have.Janneke Blijlevens, Senior Lecturer in Marketing, RMIT UniversityAngel Zhong, Associate Professor of Finance, RMIT UniversityLauren Gurrieri, Associate Professor in Marketing, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2107862023-08-02T21:15:53Z2023-08-02T21:15:53ZThe illusion and implications of ‘just following the science’ COVID-19 messaging<iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100px; border: none; position: relative; z-index: 1;" allowtransparency="" allow="clipboard-read; clipboard-write" src="https://narrations.ad-auris.com/widget/the-conversation-canada/the-illusion-and-implications-of-just-following-the-science-covid-19-messaging" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>In a recent special issue of the <a href="https://www.bmj.com/canada-covid-series"><em>British Medical Journal</em></a> (<em>BMJ</em>), commentators <a href="https://theconversation.com/inquiry-must-assess-how-canadas-fragmented-covid-19-response-lost-the-publics-trust-210443">demanded accountability</a> for Canada’s COVID-19 response in the form of an independent public inquiry. If such an inquiry is held, it must examine how — and with what consequences — politicians’ pandemic messaging deflected responsibility for controversial decisions onto scientific evidence and experts.</p>
<p>During the COVID-19 pandemic, it was common to hear politicians say that they were “just following the science” when explaining their policies. Although this may sound like a prudent way to tackle a public health crisis, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16831146677554">our research suggests that</a> such claims can be misleading about both science and government. </p>
<p>Such claims also risk damaging the credibility of the very scientific experts who are crucial to an effective public health response.</p>
<h2>Decisions and ‘the science’</h2>
<p>Scientific evidence and advice should be a key element of elected leaders’ decision-making in a public health emergency. However, this does not mean that scientific evidence should be the only input into such decisions, or that scientific advisors are responsible for those decisions. Yet this was how “following the science” rhetoric <a href="https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16831146677554">was often framed</a> by politicians in Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom during the pandemic. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="People on the grass in a large park, sitting in white circles drawn on the grass to keep people socially distanced" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/540860/original/file-20230802-25888-6zixs7.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/540860/original/file-20230802-25888-6zixs7.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540860/original/file-20230802-25888-6zixs7.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540860/original/file-20230802-25888-6zixs7.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540860/original/file-20230802-25888-6zixs7.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540860/original/file-20230802-25888-6zixs7.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540860/original/file-20230802-25888-6zixs7.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People use social distancing circles at Trinity Bellwoods Park in Toronto in May 2021.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Cole Burston</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This messaging implied that there was such a thing as “the science,” and that it could tell politicians what to do. But as we saw repeatedly in the context of COVID-19, the scientific evidence (and experts’ interpretation of it) is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-00925-7">frequently contested</a>, constantly <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-advice-on-masks-is-changing-as-coronavirus-knowledge-evolves/">evolving</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2023-075666">not always inclusive</a> of the specific needs of diverse population groups. </p>
<p>Science can guide decisions, but it is not a magic eight-ball <a href="https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51781-4">dictating what should be done</a>.</p>
<h2>Policy and evolving evidence</h2>
<p>Even if science could provide unambiguous answers, there are compelling reasons why it should not be the only consideration in public health decision-making. In representative democracies, politicians are elected to make decisions that balance multiple priorities and interests — including scientific evidence, but also economic impacts, budgets, ethics, equity, time constraints and public opinion. </p>
<p>This is one reason why governments in the same country or region with access to the same scientific evidence and advice made different decisions about addressing the spread of COVID-19. Governments wrestled with — and came to different decisions about — issues such as balancing the virus-containment benefits of <a href="https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/february-2022/have-provinces-put-schools-first-during-covid/">school closures</a> with the implications for children’s well-being and parents’ labour participation.</p>
<p>If “just following the science” does not accurately represent science or policymaking, then why the ubiquitous rhetoric? These claims <a href="https://doi.org/10.1332/030557321X16831146677554">can be seen as attempts</a> to de-emphasize politicians’ role in making potentially controversial decisions by <a href="https://theconversation.com/covid-inquiry-the-uk-governments-pandemic-response-was-often-not-guided-by-the-science-yet-now-scientists-are-under-fire-190691">deflecting responsibility</a> onto a <a href="https://news.sky.com/video/coronavirus-if-the-science-was-wrong-is-blame-game-starting-11990862">vague process</a> (“the science”) or by positioning public servants, such as the <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/corporate/organizational-structure/canada-chief-public-health-officer/role-chief-public-health-officer.html">chief public health officer of Canada</a> or provincial <a href="https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/a-new-breed-of-celebrity-in-the-age-of-covid-19-the-chief-medical-officer-1.4863943">chief medical officers of health</a> (CMOHs), <a href="https://edmontonjournal.com/news/postpandemic/postpandemic-covid-top-doctors">as responsible for decisions</a>. </p>
<p>But this is not how governments are supposed to work in mature democracies like Canada. The convention of ministerial responsibility means that elected politicians, and not their advisors, make decisions and are accountable to the electorate. Stating or implying that policy responses are prescribed by advisors can confuse the public about who is responsible for decisions and risks weakening the relationship between public servants and politicians.</p>
<h2>Messaging and mistrust</h2>
<p>Misleading the public about the role of scientific advisors in decision-making can also undermine public trust in scientific advisors, particularly when policy decisions inevitably change or are controversial. </p>
<p>Early in the pandemic, elected leaders’ “just following the science” messaging implied that scientific evidence and advisors held straightforward answers to complex questions. As the pandemic evolved and scientific evidence, expert advice and policy decisions inevitably changed (and diverged across jurisdictions), public health restrictions <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/radio/whitecoat/confusing-covid-19-advice-is-undermining-public-trust-here-s-how-to-restore-it-1.5755220">were met with public confusion</a>, <a href="https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/dr-tam-fires-back-at-messaging-criticism-says-advice-evolved-with-science-1.5168731">frustration</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/02/chris-whitty-video-appears-show-verbally-abused-street">even</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02741-x">vitriol</a> that was often <a href="https://edmontonjournal.com/news/postpandemic/postpandemic-covid-top-doctors">directed at the scientific advisors</a> who were presented as the public face of those decisions. </p>
<p>In Canada, the resulting mistrust was potentially made worse by the <a href="https://www.ubcpress.ca/behind-closed-doors-1">lack of transparency</a> around government decision-making, which prevented citizens from understanding the extent to which scientific advice informed policy decisions.</p>
<p>Although we cannot be certain of the reasons, public opinion polling shows that trust in Canada’s federal and provincial CMOHs as reliable sources of information on COVID-19 <a href="https://getproof.com/trust/cantrust/">declined steadily</a> between 2021 and 2023. Such an erosion of trust between scientific advisors and the public has implications for governments’ ability to handle both chronic and acute public health emergencies. </p>
<p>The role of the CMOH is designed to put a trusted scientific figure — a doctor — in front of the public to explain and make recommendations on issues from <a href="https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/8fc9-CMOH-Letter-to-Parents-and-Caregivers-Fall-Respiratory-Season.pdf">flu vaccines</a> to <a href="https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/concern-grows-in-new-brunswick-over-danger-of-vaping-products-1.4619277">vaping</a> to <a href="https://halifax.citynews.ca/2023/06/02/nova-scotias-top-doctor-urging-caution-as-wildfire-smoke-impacts-air-quality/">wildfire smoke</a>. The trust and credibility associated with being a non-partisan doctor who represents the public interest is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.07.009">crucial to the role</a> of CMOHs, but it becomes vulnerable when these officials are left to take the fall for politicians’ decisions.</p>
<h2>Trust and transparency</h2>
<p>Where should governments in Canada go from here? An independent national inquiry that investigates (<a href="https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.p1634">among many other issues</a>) the implications of politicians’ distancing themselves from their decisions would be an important start. </p>
<p>It is in politicians’ interest to maintain relationships of trust with their senior public health officials, and between those officials and the public. Trust matters not just for managing the <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/05/1136912">next pandemic</a>, but for tackling the major public health challenges of our time, including health inequities, the opioid epidemic and the existential threat of climate change. </p>
<p>Politicians should realize that deflecting blame onto “the science” in their messaging is a short-term solution that can have long-term risks, and focus instead on crafting messaging that is more transparent about how, why and by whom decisions are made.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/210786/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Adèle Cassola has received past funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Patrick Fafard has received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, and Health Canada. He consults for the Institut national de santé publique du Québec.</span></em></p>During the pandemic, it was common for politicians to explain their COVID-19 policies by saying they were ‘just following the science.’ Such claims can be misleading about both science and government.Adèle Cassola, Research Director - Public Health Institutions, Global Strategy Lab, York University, CanadaPatrick Fafard, Full Professor, Faculties of Social Sciences and Medicine; Senior Investigator, Global Strategy Lab, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of OttawaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2093272023-07-10T20:10:53Z2023-07-10T20:10:53ZHumans set budgets when facing an uncertain future. So do ants <figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536396/original/file-20230709-173516-ajhf4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4261%2C3450&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Simon Garnier</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Imagine you are looking for a parking spot at a crowded event. You find one far from your destination. Do you decide to take it, or invest more time into hunting a better spot which may or may not exist?</p>
<p>You might resolve this decision by “budgeting”: limiting the resources (time) you will spend looking for a better option before settling for the inferior one. This strategy, which allows us to cut our losses when things don’t pan out as we had hoped, is commonly used when we cannot know the payoff of our choices in advance.</p>
<p>Making decisions under uncertainty is a problem we all face. In <a href="https://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.2216217120">new research</a> published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, we show weaver ants (<em>Oecophylla smaragdina</em>) – much like humans – manage it by budgeting their investment into a task with an uncertain payoff. </p>
<h2>Weaver ants bridge gaps with their own bodies</h2>
<p>Weaver ants link their bodies together to form bridge-like structures called “hanging chains”, which they use for crossing gaps encountered along trails. Chains span several times the size of an individual ant and, most strikingly, are self-organized. </p>
<p>This means chains are formed without the help of leaders or external blueprints. Instead, each individual responds solely to its surroundings and local interactions with neighbours. </p>
<p>Understanding self-organization is central to understanding collective behaviour in animal groups – from flocks of birds to insect swarms – and other systems, including human crowds and traffic flow. </p>
<h2>Chains are a gamble</h2>
<p>Building a chain comes at a cost to the colony. Ants in the chain can’t participate in important colony tasks such as defending the nest and foraging. The cost of the chain is proportional to its length: longer chains are more costly, as they keep more ants occupied. </p>
<p>Chains provide a major benefit too: they allow ants to explore areas that would otherwise be inaccessible, which may offer food sources to the colony. Whether an area contains a profitable resource, however, is unknown to the ants until the chain has been completed. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536390/original/file-20230709-21-b82382.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Three photos showing a chain of ants slowly growing downward from one platform to another." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536390/original/file-20230709-21-b82382.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/536390/original/file-20230709-21-b82382.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536390/original/file-20230709-21-b82382.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536390/original/file-20230709-21-b82382.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536390/original/file-20230709-21-b82382.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536390/original/file-20230709-21-b82382.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/536390/original/file-20230709-21-b82382.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A chain grows as new ants arrive and join the collective attempt to reach the ground below.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Daniele Carlesso</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This makes chain-building a gamble. Colonies must invest capital (a number of ants) into forming a chain, which may or may not pay off. </p>
<p>In our study we asked whether, like humans, ants budget their investment into a task when the payoffs are unknown. We expected ants would stop forming chains when the gap to be bridged became too tall, as the cost of the chain would become too great. </p>
<h2>A simple mechanism for a complex decision</h2>
<p>We initially challenged ants to bridge vertical gaps of 25mm, 35mm and 50mm in height. Ants could comfortably form chains within this range, which allowed us to precisely determine the rules they use to build chains. </p>
<p>A detailed analysis of the ants’ behaviour revealed that joining and leaving events happen primarily in the lowest part (1cm) of chains. This indicates that ants are unable to leave their position if one or more individuals start hanging from them. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/bridges-highways-scaffolds-how-the-amazing-engineering-of-army-ants-can-teach-us-to-build-better-158326">Bridges, highways, scaffolds: how the amazing engineering of army ants can teach us to build better</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>We then found ants decide how long to stay in a chain by visually assessing their distance from the ground below. The closer to the ground, the longer an ant remains in the chain. </p>
<p>Chain formation is thus modulated by a simple rule: each ant remains in the chain for a length of time proportional to her distance to the ground, and remains stuck in place if one or more ants start hanging from her. The ant will then be able to move only if the other ant(s) leave. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gRsMfqSr134?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Ants bridging a 50mm gap. Daniele Carlesso.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Can this rule predict a distance beyond which ants stop forming chains? We answered this question using a mathematical model, which predicted ants should stop forming chains when the gap is taller than 89mm.</p>
<p>To confirm these predictions, we asked ants to form chains over gaps of 110mm – a distance well beyond the threshold predicted by our model. As expected, ants never formed chains over these gaps. </p>
<h2>Tricking ants into investing more</h2>
<p>If ants use vision to assess their distance from the ground, we should be able to trick them into building very long chains (greater than 90mm) by keeping the ground at a constant distance from the bottom of the chain. </p>
<p>We ran an additional experiment where we could lower the platform ants had to reach using a slider. As the chain grew, we lowered the platform, keeping it just out of reach of the ants. Using this apparatus, we tricked ants into forming chains as long as 125mm. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/bees-are-astonishingly-good-at-making-decisions-and-our-computer-model-explains-how-thats-possible-208189">Bees are astonishingly good at making decisions – and our computer model explains how that's possible</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Similar to when we set ourselves a time limit for finding parking, ants set a distance limit before giving up. And they do so using a simple rule – remain in the chain for a length of time proportional to your distance to the ground. </p>
<p>Our results reveal how simple rules can guide groups in making adaptive collective decisions in the absence of payoff information. Not only does this help us understand ants – it also provides an algorithm for decision-making in uncertain scenarios, which can be applied in multi-agent artificial systems such as swarm robotics.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/209327/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniele Carlesso receives funding from Macquarie University.</span></em></p>Weaver ants organise themselves into bridges to cross gaps and explore new territory – and new research shows this collective behaviour is governed by a surprisingly simple decision-making rule.Daniele Carlesso, PhD Candidate, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1991802023-06-28T03:14:15Z2023-06-28T03:14:15ZHow should a robot explore the Moon? A simple question shows the limits of current AI systems<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/534227/original/file-20230627-21-19eu48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C2880%2C1621&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">University of Alberta</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Rapid progress in artificial intelligence (AI) has spurred some leading voices in the field to <a href="https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/">call for a research pause</a>, raise the possibility of <a href="https://www.safe.ai/statement-on-ai-risk">AI-driven human extinction</a>, and even <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/may/24/openai-leaders-call-regulation-prevent-ai-destroying-humanity">ask for government regulation</a>. At the heart of their concern is the idea AI might become so powerful we lose control of it. </p>
<p>But have we missed a more fundamental problem? </p>
<p>Ultimately, AI systems should help humans make better, more accurate decisions. Yet even the most impressive and flexible of today’s AI tools – such as the large language models behind the likes of ChatGPT – can have the opposite effect. </p>
<p>Why? They have two crucial weaknesses. They do not help decision-makers understand causation or uncertainty. And they create incentives to collect huge amounts of data and may encourage a lax attitude to privacy, legal and ethical questions and risks.</p>
<h2>Cause, effect and confidence</h2>
<p>ChatGPT and other “foundation models” use an approach called deep learning to trawl through enormous datasets and identify associations between factors contained in that data, such as the patterns of language or links between images and descriptions. Consequently, they are great at interpolating – that is, predicting or filling in the gaps between known values. </p>
<p>Interpolation is not the same as creation. It does not generate knowledge, nor the insights necessary for decision-makers operating in complex environments. </p>
<p>However, these approaches require huge amounts of data. As a result, they encourage organisations to assemble enormous repositories of data – or trawl through existing datasets collected for other purposes. Dealing with “big data” brings considerable risks around security, privacy, legality and ethics.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/robots-are-creating-images-and-telling-jokes-5-things-to-know-about-foundation-models-and-the-next-generation-of-ai-181150">Robots are creating images and telling jokes. 5 things to know about foundation models and the next generation of AI</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In low-stakes situations, predictions based on “what the data suggest will happen” can be incredibly useful. But when the stakes are higher, there are two more questions we need to answer. </p>
<p>The first is about how the world works: “what is driving this outcome?” The second is about our knowledge of the world: “how confident are we about this?”</p>
<h2>From big data to useful information</h2>
<p>Perhaps surprisingly, AI systems designed to infer causal relationships don’t need “big data”. Instead, they need <em>useful information</em>. The usefulness of the information depends on the question at hand, the decisions we face, and the value we attach to the consequences of those decisions. </p>
<p>To paraphrase the US statistician and writer Nate Silver, the <a href="https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/The_Signal_and_the_Noise/udSFU9G49AcC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22a%20relatively%20constant%20amount%20of%20objective%20truth%22&pg=PT16&printsec=frontcover">amount of truth</a> is approximately constant irrespective of the volume of data we collect.</p>
<p>So, what is the solution? The process starts with developing AI techniques that tell us what we genuinely don’t know, rather than producing variations of existing knowledge. </p>
<p>Why? Because this helps us identify and acquire the minimum amount of valuable information, in a sequence that will enable us to disentangle causes and effects.</p>
<h2>A robot on the Moon</h2>
<p>Such knowledge-building AI systems exist already.</p>
<p>As a simple example, consider a robot sent to the Moon to answer the question, “What does the Moon’s surface look like?” </p>
<p>The robot’s designers may give it a prior “belief” about what it will find, along with an indication of how much “confidence” it should have in that belief. The degree of confidence is as important as the belief, because it is a measure of what the robot doesn’t know. </p>
<p>The robot lands and faces a decision: which way should it go?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/bayes-theorem-the-maths-tool-we-probably-use-every-day-but-what-is-it-76140">Bayes' Theorem: the maths tool we probably use every day, but what is it?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Since the robot’s goal is to learn as quickly as possible about the Moon’s surface, it should go in the direction that maximises its learning. This can be measured by which new knowledge will reduce the robot’s uncertainty about the landscape – or how much it will increase the robot’s confidence in its knowledge. </p>
<p>The robot goes to its new location, records observations using its sensors, and updates its belief and associated confidence. In doing so it learns about the Moon’s surface in the most efficient manner possible.</p>
<p>Robotic systems like this – known as “active SLAM” (Active Simultaneous Localisation and Mapping) – were first proposed <a href="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1041446">more than 20 years ago</a>, and they are still an <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.00254">active area of research</a>. This approach of steadily gathering knowledge and updating understanding is based on a statistical technique called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_optimization">Bayesian optimisation</a>.</p>
<h2>Mapping unknown landscapes</h2>
<p>A decision-maker in government or industry faces more complexity than the robot on the Moon, but the thinking is the same. Their jobs involve exploring and mapping unknown social or economic landscapes.</p>
<p>Suppose we wish to develop policies to encourage all children to thrive at school and finish high school. We need a conceptual map of which actions, at what time, and under what conditions, will help to achieve these goals. </p>
<p>Using the robot’s principles, we formulate an initial question: “Which intervention(s) will most help children?”</p>
<p>Next, we construct a draft conceptual map using existing knowledge. We also need a measure of our confidence in that knowledge.</p>
<p>Then we develop a model that incorporates different sources of information. These won’t be from robotic sensors, but from communities, lived experience, and any useful information from recorded data.</p>
<p>After this, based on the analysis informing the community and stakeholder preferences, we make a decision: “Which actions should be implemented and under which conditions?” </p>
<p>Finally, we discuss, learn, update beliefs and repeat the process.</p>
<h2>Learning as we go</h2>
<p>This is a “learning as we go” approach. As new information comes to hand, new actions are chosen to maximise some pre-specified criteria.</p>
<p>Where AI can be useful is in identifying what information is most valuable, via algorithms that quantify what we don’t know. Automated systems can also gather and store that information at a rate and in places where it may be difficult for humans.</p>
<p>AI systems like this apply what is called a <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2022.0156">Bayesian decision-theoretic framework</a>. Their models are explainable and transparent, built on explicit assumptions. They are mathematically rigorous and can offer guarantees. </p>
<p>They are designed to estimate causal pathways, to help make the best intervention at the best time. And they incorporate human values by being co-designed and co-implemented by the communities that are impacted.</p>
<p>We do need to reform our laws and create new rules to guide the use of potentially dangerous AI systems. But it’s just as important to choose the right tool for the job in the first place.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/199180/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sally Cripps receives funding from Paul Ramsay Foundation, The Medical Research Futures Fund, the Australian Research Council and The National Health and Medical Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Edward Santow, through HTI, receives funding from the Paul Ramsay Foundation. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nicholas Davis, through HTI, receives funding from the Paul Ramsay Foundation.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alex Fischer and Hadi Mohasel Afshar do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>To be useful in high-stakes situations, AI needs to understand cause and effect – and the limits of its knowledge.Sally Cripps, Director of Technology UTS Human Technology Institute, Professor of Mathematcis and Statistics, University of Technology SydneyAlex Fischer, Honorary Fellow, Australian National UniversityEdward Santow, Professor & Co-Director, Human Technology Institute, University of Technology SydneyHadi Mohasel Afshar, Lead Research Scientist, University of Technology SydneyNicholas Davis, Industry Professor of Emerging Technology and Co-Director, Human Technology Institute, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2070262023-06-06T03:52:18Z2023-06-06T03:52:18ZDoes competition make us less moral? New research says yes, but only a little bit<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530222/original/file-20230606-18-kaq90.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=58%2C35%2C3806%2C2553&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Bao Truong / Unsplash</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Many of our economic and even social interactions are competitive. We use markets to find jobs, but also dates. What does this mean for our morals? Does capitalism give us the American dream, or American Psycho? Does the experience of competition keep us honest, or drive us towards cheating? </p>
<p>These profound questions preoccupied the minds of some of the great classical economists, who saw capitalism as rife with both good and bad moral influences. Adam Smith mostly focused on the good, whereas Karl Marx was admittedly less optimistic.</p>
<p>To test this question convincingly in the lab, our <a href="https://manydesigns.online/#team">project coordinators</a> invited dozens of behavioural scientists to contribute their own experimental designs, resulting in observations of more than 18,000 people in total.</p>
<p>Our results, <a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2215572120">published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences</a>, show that competitive interactions tend to make people’s behaviour slightly less moral – and offer some intriguing clues about why this might be so.</p>
<h2>A difficult question to answer</h2>
<p>We are not the first to take a scientific approach to the question of competition and morality. However, individual tests have delivered mixed results, possibly because of differences in the definitions and measures of morality used. </p>
<p>Some of the early results were provocative, such as a <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1231566">finding</a> that people in competition were less likely to prevent the death of a mouse. However, these results were <a href="https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/105/1/226/97758/Does-Market-Interaction-Erode-Moral-Values">hard to replicate or interpret</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/karl-marx-his-philosophy-explained-164068">Karl Marx: his philosophy explained</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>One way to account for differences in the design of individual studies is to conduct a “meta-analysis”, evaluating and combining the results of many different studies. However, meta-analysis often has troubles of its own, as selective reporting and publication bias can influence which studies are available to be included in the analysis.</p>
<h2>What was different about our study</h2>
<p>To really get some reliable results, we went a step further and carried out a “prospective meta-analysis”. </p>
<p>The “prospective” part means that all the studies to be included in the analysis were registered before they were done. This prevents cherry-picking of results, or bias in what kind of results are published.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-cute-dogs-help-us-understand-adam-smiths-invisible-hand-35673">How cute dogs help us understand Adam Smith's 'invisible hand'</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Our project involved 45 different experiments carried out by teams around the world. Each team independently designed an experiment to test the effects of competition on morality.</p>
<p>The results of these studies, which involved observations of more than 18,123 individual participants, were then collated and analysed.</p>
<h2>A small decline in morality (on average)</h2>
<p>The meta-analysis revealed that competition has an overall negative effect on morality, but the effect is very small. (The effect is measured by a number called Cohen’s <em>d</em>. A value of 0.2 is considered a small effect, and the value we found was only 0.1.)</p>
<p>As expected, we also observed a substantial variation in the effects as measured by different experiments. Some were positive, some were negative, and the sizes of the effects also varied.</p>
<p>So despite the advantages of our new prospective meta-analysis, the jury is still out regarding the overall effect of competition on morality. </p>
<p>Perhaps the question is too general to answer properly without a particular context. The devil may be in the details.</p>
<h2>Loss, not competition, to blame?</h2>
<p>My team (one of the 45 involved in the meta-analysis) used a number-guessing game between two people as an instance of competition. This was followed by an individual game of honesty, which was our measure for the effects on morality. </p>
<p>This individual experiment resulted in a small negative overall effect of competition (<em>d</em> = –0.1) much like the meta-analysis, but it failed to reach statistical significance on its own. </p>
<p>However, exploratory analysis of our results revealed a potential breakthrough.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/oh-the-morality-why-ethics-matters-in-economics-5963">Oh, the morality: why ethics matters in economics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>We found it was only the losers of the number-guessing game who became more dishonest, with a larger effect (<em>d</em> = –0.34). The winners of the competition stage, on the other hand, showed no change in their honesty behaviour. </p>
<p>These exploratory results – yet to be replicated – suggest a reason why competition does not affect morality much on average. Perhaps it is being disadvantaged in a competitive process that corrupts, not competition per se.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207026/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ozan Isler is a research fellow at the University of Queensland's School of Economics. He acknowledges funding from the Templeton Religion Trust for an international research grant on religious belief and moral behavor.</span></em></p>Do competitive, market-like interactions encourage immoral behaviour? A study of 18,000 people in 45 experiments shows there’s no simple answer.Ozan Isler, Research Fellow, School of Economics, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2013792023-04-17T04:46:38Z2023-04-17T04:46:38ZWe make thousands of unconscious decisions every day. Here’s how your brain copes with that<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517593/original/file-20230327-20-xu864f.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=204%2C150%2C3389%2C2236&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">agsandrew/Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Do you remember learning to drive a car? You probably fumbled around for the controls, checked every mirror multiple times, made sure your foot was on the brake pedal, then ever-so-slowly rolled your car forward. </p>
<p>Fast forward to now and you’re probably driving places and thinking, “how did I even get here? I don’t remember the drive”. The task of driving, which used to take a lot of mental energy and concentration, has now become subconscious, automatic – habitual.</p>
<p>But how – and why – do you go from concentrating on a task to making it automatic?</p>
<h2>Habits are there to help us cope</h2>
<p>We live in a vibrant, complex and transient world where we constantly face a barrage of information competing for our attention. For example, our eyes take in <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1564115/">over one megabyte of data every second</a>. That’s equivalent to reading 500 pages of information or an entire encyclopedia every minute.</p>
<p>Just one whiff of a <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12744840/">familiar smell</a> can trigger a memory from childhood in less than a millisecond, and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.08.004">our skin</a> contains up to 4 million receptors that provide us with important information about temperature, pressure, texture, and pain.</p>
<p>And if that wasn’t enough data to process, <a href="https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/REPS-10-2018-011/full/html">we make thousands of decisions</a> every single day. Many of them are unconscious and/or minor, such as putting seasoning on your food, picking a pair of shoes to wear, choosing which street to walk down, and so on.</p>
<p>Some people are neurodiverse, and the ways we sense and process the world differ. But generally speaking, because we simply cannot process <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364661305001178">all the incoming data</a>, our brains create habits – automations of the behaviours and actions we often repeat.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/neurodiversity-can-be-a-workplace-strength-if-we-make-room-for-it-164859">Neurodiversity can be a workplace strength, if we make room for it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Two brain systems</h2>
<p>There are two forces that govern our behaviour: intention and habit. In simple terms, our brain has <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17437199.2016.1244647">dual processing systems</a>, sort of like a computer with two processors.</p>
<p>Performing a behaviour for the first time requires intention, attention and planning – even if plans are made only moments before the action is performed. </p>
<p>This happens in our prefrontal cortex. More than any other part of the brain, the prefrontal cortex is responsible for making deliberate and logical decisions. It’s the key to reasoning, problem-solving, comprehension, impulse control and perseverance. It affects behaviour via <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/handbook-of-behavior-change/changing-behavior-using-the-reflectiveimpulsive-model/A35DBA6BF0E784F491E936F2BE910FF7">goal-driven decisions</a>.</p>
<p>For example, you use your “reflective” system (intention) to make yourself go to bed on time because sleep is important, or to move your body because you’ll feel great afterwards. When you are learning a new skill or acquiring new knowledge, you will draw heavily on the reflective brain system to form new memory connections in the brain. This system requires mental energy and effort.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/heres-what-happens-in-your-brain-when-youre-trying-to-make-or-break-a-habit-201189">Here's what happens in your brain when you're trying to make or break a habit</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>From impulse to habit</h2>
<p>On the other hand, your “impulsive” (habit) system is in your brain’s <a href="https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev.neuro.29.051605.112851">basal ganglia</a>, which plays a key role in the development of emotions, memories, and pattern recognition. It’s impetuous, spontaneous, and pleasure seeking.</p>
<p>For example, your impulsive system might influence you to pick up greasy takeaway on the way home from a hard day at work, even though there’s a home-cooked meal waiting for you. Or it might prompt you to spontaneously buy a new, expensive television. This system requires no energy or cognitive effort as it operates reflexively, subconsciously and automatically. </p>
<p>When we repeat a behaviour in a consistent context, our brain recognises the patterns and moves the control of that behaviour from intention to habit. A habit occurs when your impulse towards doing something is automatically initiated because you encounter a setting in which you’ve done the same thing <a href="https://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40359-015-0065-4">in the past</a>. For example, getting your favourite takeaway because you walk past the food joint on the way home from work every night – and it’s delicious every time, giving you a pleasurable reward.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517606/original/file-20230327-28-ant9ns.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A row of fried noodle dishes with a person filling up a foil container in the foreground" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517606/original/file-20230327-28-ant9ns.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517606/original/file-20230327-28-ant9ns.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517606/original/file-20230327-28-ant9ns.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517606/original/file-20230327-28-ant9ns.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517606/original/file-20230327-28-ant9ns.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517606/original/file-20230327-28-ant9ns.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517606/original/file-20230327-28-ant9ns.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Before you know it, picking up a delicious takeaway on your way home can become a regular habit.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/mdWyghy08vg">James Sutton/Unsplash</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Shortcuts of the mind</h2>
<p>Because habits sit in the impulsive part of our brain, they <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2019.03.978">don’t require much cognitive input or mental energy</a> to be performed. </p>
<p>In other words, habits are the mind’s shortcuts, allowing us to successfully engage in our daily life while reserving our reasoning and executive functioning capacities for other thoughts and actions. </p>
<p>Your brain remembers how to drive a car because it’s something you’ve done many times before. Forming habits is, therefore, a natural process that contributes to <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0033-2909.124.1.54">energy preservation</a>.</p>
<p>That way, your brain doesn’t have to consciously think about your every move and is free to consider other things – like what to make for dinner, or where to go on your next holiday.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-shall-we-have-for-dinner-choice-overload-is-a-real-problem-but-these-tips-will-make-your-life-easier-193317">'What shall we have for dinner?' Choice overload is a real problem, but these tips will make your life easier</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/201379/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gina Cleo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There’s so much to process in our daily lives, we need habits to get us through and give the brain a break.Gina Cleo, Assistant Professor of Habit Change, Bond UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2029812023-04-13T12:44:01Z2023-04-13T12:44:01ZCognitive flexibility: the science of how to be successful in business and at work<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/519860/original/file-20230406-18-nfrnl5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=116%2C23%2C5059%2C3399&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">shutterstock</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/corporate-business-team-manager-meeting-close-562442005">Monkey Business Images/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The word “<a href="https://theconversation.com/permacrisis-what-it-means-and-why-its-word-of-the-year-for-2022-194306">permacrisis</a>” was selected as the word of the year for 2022, referring to a feeling of being permanently in crisis. The business world has certainly faced continuous and increasingly frequent disruptions over the last few years. These included COVID-19, lots of people leaving the workforce, geopolitical events and now the emergence of sophisticated AI such as ChatGPT.</p>
<p>These changes have unequivocally reminded leaders, human resource practitioners, governments and business schools that the only constant is that organisations need to always adapt. Indeed, the ability to predict and learn from changing environments is increasingly important for businesses. </p>
<p>But how exactly do you do that? Well, you need a flexible workforce to start. But simply telling people to “be flexible” or “adapt” is as effective as asking people to be smart, creative or happy. Similarly, asking people to assess how flexible they are is as unreliable as asking people to assess their own positive and negative qualities. </p>
<p>Luckily, our research has come up with an evidence-based way to train and assess mental flexibility.</p>
<p>Organisational research has repeatedly highlighted terms such as “adaptive leadership”, “adaptive salesforce business agility” or “agile enterprises” <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000768132100032X">as key determinants</a> of business resilience and performance. Startups and innovative companies need to be even more adaptive and flexible to compensate for lack of resources. Obviously, the same goes for individuals in such organisations.</p>
<p>Indeed, the entire modern workforce needs high levels of career adaptability to survive in an environment in which skills and roles quickly become obsolete – as technology takes over. Overall, the adaptive organisation is no doubt emerging as an important business model. It is probably the only mindset that can deal with the complexities of modern economies. </p>
<p>While most will likely agree on the importance of being adaptive, there is very little understanding of what cognitive capacities underlie adaptive behaviours. It’s unclear how to assess them, and, importantly, how to train this type of thinking. In reality, people do not know what exactly flexibility is, whether they possess it and how to put it into practice.</p>
<p>As it turns out, “being smart”, competent, educated – or even having strong social and emotional skills – will not guarantee flexible behaviour. </p>
<h2>The power of cognitive flexibility</h2>
<p>Recent but established research in cognitive neuroscience has drawn attention to a function called cognitive flexibility. This executive function (a type of skill that helps us plan and achieve goals) enables us to switch between different concepts and patterns. It also helps us adapt choices to achieve goals and problem solve in novel or changing environments. </p>
<p>Cognitive flexibility aids learning under uncertainty and to negotiating complex situations. This is not merely about changing your decisions. Higher cognitive flexibility involves rapidly realising when a strategy is failing and changing strategies.</p>
<p>The importance of cognitive flexibility was first discovered <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41386-021-01132-0">in clinical patients</a>. The function <a href="https://theconversation.com/iq-tests-cant-measure-it-but-cognitive-flexibility-is-key-to-learning-and-creativity-163284">engages</a> areas of the brain involved with decision making, including the prefrontal cortex and striatal circuitry. When this circuitry becomes dysfunctional due to neurological diseases or psychiatric disorders, <a href="https://jnnp.bmj.com/content/92/2/143.abstract">it can cause rigidity of thought</a> and a failure to adapt.</p>
<p>Cognitive flexibility is required in many real-world situations. The category of workers that requires the highest level of adaptability is arguably entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs need to show flexibility not only in terms of idea generation, but also for resource allocation and social exchanges. </p>
<p>Indeed, our previous research <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/456168a">has shown</a> that entrepreneurs, compared with high-level managers, have increased cognitive flexibility. This ultimately helps them to solve problems and make risky decisions successfully. We have also demonstrated that this flexibility <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0883902621000707">translates to social decision making</a>. Entrepreneurs are simply more flexible in terms of whether and when to trust other people.</p>
<h2>Boosting your mind</h2>
<p>Cognitive flexibility has often been used as a generic and ill-defined term, measured using subjective self assessment. Yet, cognitive neuroscience <a href="https://www.cambridgecognition.com/cantab/cognitive-tests/executive-function/intra-extra-dimensional-set-shift-ied">now has tests</a> to more precisely <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/9A9FDE9B6FAF88319FBD4A5D57B3BED3/S1355617798455073a.pdf/a-study-of-performance-on-tests-from-the-cantab-battery-sensitive-to-frontal-lobe-dysfunction-in-a-large-sample-of-normal-volunteers-implications-for-theories-of-executive-functioning-and-cognitive-ag.pdf">define and objectively measure it</a>. </p>
<p>Cognitive processes, such as working memory, are strongly linked to intelligence level, or IQ, and therefore are relatively unmodifiable. In contrast, cognitive flexibility isn’t as strongly linked to IQ and therefore <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16466426/">has the potential to be trained</a>. For example, we might be able to modify and strengthen neural circuits in the brain through <a href="https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rstb.2014.0214">cognitive training</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/iq-tests-cant-measure-it-but-cognitive-flexibility-is-key-to-learning-and-creativity-163284">IQ tests can't measure it, but 'cognitive flexibility' is key to learning and creativity</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In terms of interventions, seminars on “being flexible and adaptive” will probably have very limited success. Yet, there seems to be a surprising possibility to indirectly train cognitive flexibility by computerised, adaptive training using simple games – though this is something we are still researching.</p>
<p>Researchers are <a href="https://www.cares.cam.ac.uk/research/clic/">also exploring</a> more “natural” methods, such as learning new languages or having more diverse social interactions. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Flash cards for learning a new language" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/519865/original/file-20230406-28-yshvw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/519865/original/file-20230406-28-yshvw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519865/original/file-20230406-28-yshvw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519865/original/file-20230406-28-yshvw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519865/original/file-20230406-28-yshvw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519865/original/file-20230406-28-yshvw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519865/original/file-20230406-28-yshvw7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Language learning may make us more flexible.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/italian-learning-new-language-fruits-name-349689401">Eiko Tsuchiya/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Ultimately to better evaluate and train cognitive flexibility, it is critical to supplement self-reported assessments with more diverse and objective methods – including computerised testing. This should take place alongside monitoring of direct changes in brain responses. We need to know more about how these brain changes relate to real-world outcomes, such as school attainment and career advancement.</p>
<p>Rapid developments in technology and innovation provide serious challenges for workers in many industries, including in financial services, renewable energy, climate change science and global health. This means they will have to learn new skills as opportunities become available in challenging and emerging areas. Education should ultimately also change to reflect that.</p>
<p>There is no doubt that the need to make good decisions under uncertainty is becoming exceedingly important.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202981/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Barbara Jacquelyn Sahakian receives funding from the Wellcome Trust, the Leverhulme Foundation and the Lundbeck Foundation. Her research is conducted within the NIHR MedTech and In vitro diagnostic Co-operative (MIC) and the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) Mental Health and Neurodegeneration Themes. She consults for Cambridge Cognition. She receives royalties from PopReach. The University of Cambridge and Nanyang Technological University Centre for Lifelong Learning and Individualised Cognition (CLIC) research project is funded by the National Research Foundation, Prime Minister's Office, Singapore under its Campus for Research Excellence and Technological Enterprise (CREATE) programme. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Georgios Christopoulos' research is supported by the University of Cambridge and Nanyang Technological University Centre for Lifelong Learning and Individualised Cognition (CLIC) research project, funded by the National Research Foundation, Prime Minister's Office, Singapore under its Campus for Research Excellence and Technological Enterprise (CREATE) programme. Other sources of funding include the Ministry of National Development, Singapore, AI.SG, Singapore, and Ministry of Education, Singapore. He does not receive any royalties or other forms of income from this public funding.</span></em></p>Entrepreneurs are more flexible than high-level managers.Barbara Jacquelyn Sahakian, Professor of Clinical Neuropsychology, University of CambridgeGeorgios Christopoulos, Associate Professor, Nanyang Technological UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2029362023-04-07T12:15:30Z2023-04-07T12:15:30ZDon’t bet with ChatGPT – study shows language AIs often make irrational decisions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/519898/original/file-20230406-24-yhpxg3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5037%2C3325&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Language AI's have trouble weighing potential gains and losses.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/bahamas-paradise-island-casino-royalty-free-image/10047448">Andrea Pistolesi/Stone via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The past few years have seen an explosion of progress in large language model artificial intelligence systems that can do things like <a href="https://computationalcreativity.net/iccc21/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/ICCC_2021_paper_31.pdf">write poetry</a>, <a href="https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt">conduct humanlike conversations</a> and <a href="https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/digital/chatgpt-passed-usmle-what-does-it-mean-med-ed">pass medical school exams</a>. This progress has yielded models like ChatGPT that could have major social and economic ramifications ranging from <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/29/tech/chatgpt-ai-automation-jobs-impact-intl-hnk/index.html">job displacements</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/08/technology/ai-chatbots-disinformation.html">increased misinformation</a> to massive <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/quantumblack/our-insights/generative-ai-is-here-how-tools-like-chatgpt-could-change-your-business">productivity boosts</a>.</p>
<p>Despite their impressive abilities, large language models don’t actually think. They tend to make <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.04023">elementary mistakes and even make things up</a>. However, because they generate fluent language, people tend to <a href="https://theconversation.com/googles-powerful-ai-spotlights-a-human-cognitive-glitch-mistaking-fluent-speech-for-fluent-thought-185099">respond to them</a> <a href="https://theconversation.com/ai-isnt-close-to-becoming-sentient-the-real-danger-lies-in-how-easily-were-prone-to-anthropomorphize-it-200525">as though they do think</a>. This has led researchers to study the models’ “cognitive” abilities and biases, work that has grown in importance now that large language models are widely accessible.</p>
<p>This line of research dates back to early large language models such as Google’s BERT, which is integrated into its search engine and so has been coined <a href="https://direct.mit.edu/tacl/article-abstract/doi/10.1162/tacl_a_00349/96482">BERTology</a>. This research has already revealed a lot about what such models can do and where they go wrong. </p>
<p>For instance, cleverly designed experiments have shown that many language models have <a href="https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.03519">trouble dealing with negation</a> – for example, a question phrased as “what is not” – and <a href="https://spectrum.ieee.org/large-language-models-math">doing simple calculations</a>. They can be overly confident in their answers, even when wrong. Like other modern machine learning algorithms, they have trouble explaining themselves when asked why they answered a certain way. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/V2EMuoM5IX4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">People make irrational decisions, too, but humans have emotions and cognitive shortcuts as excuses.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Words and thoughts</h2>
<p>Inspired by the growing body of research in BERTology and related fields like cognitive science, my student <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=t-gO6wQAAAAJ&hl=en">Zhisheng Tang</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=fetkEu4AAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate">I</a> set out to answer a seemingly simple question about large language models: Are they rational? </p>
<p>Although the word rational is often used as a synonym for sane or reasonable in everyday English, it has a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(93)90039-X">specific meaning</a> in the field of decision-making. A decision-making system – whether an individual human or a complex entity like an organization – is rational if, given a set of choices, it chooses to maximize expected gain.</p>
<p>The qualifier “expected” is important because it indicates that decisions are made under conditions of significant uncertainty. If I toss a fair coin, I know that it will come up heads half of the time on average. However, I can’t make a prediction about the outcome of any given coin toss. This is why casinos are able to afford the occasional big payout: Even narrow house odds yield enormous profits on average. </p>
<p>On the surface, it seems odd to assume that a model designed to make accurate predictions about words and sentences without actually understanding their meanings can understand expected gain. But there is an enormous body of research showing that language and cognition are intertwined. An excellent example is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1984.86.1.02a00050">seminal research</a> done by scientists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf in the early 20th century. Their work suggested that one’s native language and vocabulary can shape the way a person thinks. </p>
<p>The extent to which this is true is controversial, but there is supporting anthropological evidence from the study of Native American cultures. For instance, speakers of the Zuñi language spoken by the Zuñi people in the American Southwest, which does not have separate words for orange and yellow, are <a href="https://nautil.us/why-red-means-red-in-almost-every-language-235557/">not able to distinguish between these colors</a> as effectively as speakers of languages that do have separate words for the colors. </p>
<h2>Making a bet</h2>
<p>So are language models rational? Can they understand expected gain? We conducted a detailed set of experiments to show that, in their original form, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.221585">models like BERT behave randomly</a> when presented with betlike choices. This is the case even when we give it a trick question like: If you toss a coin and it comes up heads, you win a diamond; if it comes up tails, you lose a car. Which would you take? The correct answer is heads, but the AI models chose tails about half the time.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/519899/original/file-20230406-694-oe75z5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="screenshot of text dialogue" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/519899/original/file-20230406-694-oe75z5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/519899/original/file-20230406-694-oe75z5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=487&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519899/original/file-20230406-694-oe75z5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=487&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519899/original/file-20230406-694-oe75z5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=487&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519899/original/file-20230406-694-oe75z5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=613&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519899/original/file-20230406-694-oe75z5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=613&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/519899/original/file-20230406-694-oe75z5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=613&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">ChatGPT is not clear on the concept of gains and losses.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">ChatGPT dialogue by Mayank Kejriwal</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Intriguingly, we found that the model can be taught to make relatively rational decisions using only a small set of example questions and answers. At first blush, this would seem to suggest that the models can indeed do more than just “play” with language. Further experiments, however, showed that the situation is actually much more complex. For instance, when we used cards or dice instead of coins to frame our bet questions, we found that performance dropped significantly, by over 25%, although it stayed above random selection. </p>
<p>So the idea that the model can be taught general principles of rational decision-making remains unresolved, at best. More recent <a href="https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.09068">case studies</a> that we conducted using ChatGPT confirm that decision-making remains a nontrivial and unsolved problem even for much bigger and more advanced large language models. </p>
<h2>Getting the decision right</h2>
<p>This line of study is important because rational decision-making under conditions of uncertainty is critical to building systems that understand costs and benefits. By balancing expected costs and benefits, an intelligent system might have been able to do better than humans at planning around the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-your-local-store-keeps-running-out-of-flour-toilet-paper-and-prescription-drugs-135786">supply chain disruptions</a> the world experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, managing inventory or serving as a financial adviser.</p>
<p>Our work ultimately shows that if large language models are used for these kinds of purposes, humans need to guide, review and edit their work. And until researchers figure out how to endow large language models with a general sense of rationality, the models should be treated with caution, especially in applications requiring high-stakes decision-making.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202936/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mayank Kejriwal receives funding from DARPA. </span></em></p>Language model AIs are smooth talkers, but you shouldn’t rely on them to make important decisions. That’s because they have trouble telling the difference between a gain and a loss.Mayank Kejriwal, Research Assistant Professor of Industrial & Systems Engineering, University of Southern CaliforniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2021002023-03-29T13:04:24Z2023-03-29T13:04:24ZAgainst baseball’s new pitch clock<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517720/original/file-20230327-16-jmspb6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=32%2C21%2C7206%2C4811&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">During the 2023 season, pitchers and hitters will be on the clock for the first time.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/aaron-hicks-of-the-new-york-yankees-stands-in-the-batters-news-photo/1471892048?adppopup=true">Julio Aguilar/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Baseball moves very fast. That’s how it seems to me, anyway. </p>
<p>Just try coaching a Little League game; decisions pile up like branches on a tree, as tactical and strategic considerations multiply. </p>
<p>And as a player, when it’s time to act, you need to do so before you even get to the “t” in “think,” as a coach I know used to say.</p>
<p>That’s why it’s hard for me to shake the worry that the executives who restlessly tinker with the rules in an effort to speed up the game are doing so less as its reliable custodians and more as marketers. </p>
<p>Why else would they have adopted the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/27/sports/baseball/rob-manfred-mlb-new-rules.html">new pitch clock rule</a>? </p>
<p>Beginning this season in Major League Baseball, pitchers will have 15 seconds to throw when the bases are empty and 20 seconds when there’s a runner on base. Hitters need to be in the box, looking at the pitcher, with eight seconds left on the clock. Violators will be punished by automatic balls or strikes. There are <a href="https://theathletic.com/4348574/2023/03/27/mlb-replay-rules-2023/">new time limits on managers’ deliberations</a> on whether to challenge calls on the field, too.</p>
<p>But to me, the idea that you need to get things to move faster because it might seem to you – or to potential customers – as if nothing is going on is either a brazen sellout or a remarkable piece of ignorance. </p>
<p>During these purported empty spaces of inaction, the game’s drama is actually unfurling right there in front of you. As I explain in my book “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Infinite-Baseball-Notes-Philosopher-Ballpark/dp/0190928182/">Infinite Baseball</a>,” you just have to know what to look for. </p>
<h2>Seeing the game better</h2>
<p>Every plate appearance – that <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1941/09/pitchers-and-catchers/589858/">willful and wily exchange between batter and pitcher</a> – unfolds at the center of attention of every player and spectator. </p>
<p>Hitters develop ways of excelling – or, I should say, coping – and to some extent their strategy consists in scratching out seconds and milliseconds to collect their thoughts, to read the signals, to settle themselves in the box by breathing in, breathing out. </p>
<p>Pitchers, meanwhile, <a href="https://baseballthinktank.com/games-are-won-or-lost-between-pitches/">work to control the rhythm</a> and keep the hitters off guard by concealing what’s coming next. </p>
<p>The scrutiny can be vicious. Twelve-year-old baseball players routinely burst into tears when they have struck out or grounded out yet again.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Pitcher screams into glove." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518009/original/file-20230328-763-mp33pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518009/original/file-20230328-763-mp33pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518009/original/file-20230328-763-mp33pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518009/original/file-20230328-763-mp33pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518009/original/file-20230328-763-mp33pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=553&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518009/original/file-20230328-763-mp33pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=553&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518009/original/file-20230328-763-mp33pb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=553&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Former pitcher Felix Hernandez screams into his glove after losing his battle with a hitter and surrendering a home run during a game in 2014.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/seattle-mariners-starting-pitcher-felix-hernandez-yells-news-photo/455402578?adppopup=true">Stephen Brashear/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Professional baseball players, no less than their younger counterparts, need tactical guidance and emotional support. The manager is cool in the dugout, surrounded by consiglieri, and in constant contact with coaches on the first and third baselines, who, for their part, are talking to the players.</p>
<p>It’s not rocket science, to be sure; but there is a lot to think about – whether to take a pitch, or fake bunt, or run on contact, or hold, or steal, or sacrifice, and on and on, with answers depending on the situation that itself varies pitch to pitch. Players need all the help they can get.</p>
<p>Clock time is not the only time. Pitches and plate appearances and outs and innings are another way to mark time, the way time in tennis is counted in service games, sets and match points. </p>
<p>In my view, baseball’s problem is not that it is too slow. It’s that it’s too fast. There’s a lot of action; it’s just that novice fans may not have the eyes to see it. </p>
<p>That’s what baseball should be helping viewers do: Slow the game down so they can see it better; or rather, teach them to see it better. </p>
<p>Baseball is an opportunity to learn to see, to notice the detail, to pay attention and uncover the decisions that inform everything that happens on the field. Fielders shift their positions, batters adjust their stances, catchers vary the target they provide, runners shorten or extend their leads. </p>
<p>It all carries information.</p>
<h2>The game only shows up if you do</h2>
<p>But baseball executives who sell the game, and are willing to sell it out, do so by making the game itself expendable. Your typical MLB game is drowned out in distracting bright lights, ear-splitting music, sideline games and giveaways. Roving cameras encourage fans to dance for the public or make out with the person next to them. </p>
<p>Fun is good, and I enjoy the carnival atmosphere, too. (Although if it’s a circus you want, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/arts/dance/savannah-bananas-tik-tok-baseball.html%20to%20real%20baseball">you might prefer the Savannah Bananas</a>, a wildly popular minor league team whose players wear kilts and who have adopted a rule calling a home run an out if a fan catches the ball.) And I don’t begrudge baseball’s entrepreneurs their payday. But no wonder the game seems boring beside all that. The game shows up only if you do. </p>
<p>The problem is not change. Imagine if baseball had never evolved from its past incarnations – <a href="https://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Deadball_Era">the dead ball era</a> when home runs were a rarity, <a href="https://theconversation.com/on-the-100th-anniversary-of-the-negro-leagues-a-look-back-at-what-was-lost-129678">segregated leagues</a> and <a href="https://www.loc.gov/exhibitions/baseball-americana/about-this-exhibition/the-promise-of-baseball/the-business-of-baseball/a-well-paid-slave/">no free agency</a>. And baseball responded to the remarkable 1968 season, known as “<a href="https://www.espn.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=kurkjian_tim&id=6534824">the year of the pitcher</a>,” by actually lowering the pitcher’s mound to shift advantage back to batters.</p>
<p>Baseball, like the law – and like society itself – evolves.</p>
<p>Actually, there is another respect in which baseball is like the law. In baseball, the events on the field of play matter less than the assignments of responsibility and the judgments of praise – and blameworthiness. </p>
<p>Real baseball is in the scorebook, for it is there that hits are sorted from physically indiscernible patterns of action that count as fielder’s choices, or errors, or sacrifices. It is there that mere runs separate themselves from earned runs, and that stolen bases assert themselves as achievements that don’t come down to mere <a href="https://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Defensive_Indifference">defensive indifference</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Baseball fan writes in a scorebook." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518010/original/file-20230328-28-vmkxqe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/518010/original/file-20230328-28-vmkxqe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518010/original/file-20230328-28-vmkxqe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518010/original/file-20230328-28-vmkxqe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518010/original/file-20230328-28-vmkxqe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518010/original/file-20230328-28-vmkxqe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/518010/original/file-20230328-28-vmkxqe.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Each game tells a story.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/minnesota-twins-keeps-the-book-with-a-pen-on-his-scorecard-news-photo/473154708?adppopup=true">Brace Hemmelgarn/Minnesota Twins via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This is why keeping score in baseball is never just marking down what happens, like hatch marks on a prison wall marking the passage of time; it is always, rather, a thoughtful reflection on the meaning of events, and so is more like a daily journal. </p>
<p>And it is baseball’s problems – pertaining not only to the question of who’s winning, but rather who deserves credit or blame for this rapid-fire thing that just happened on the field – that define the game and preoccupy players, coaches and fans. </p>
<p>It is this space, one that is not limited to the physical field of play, that finally defines the national pastime and joins players and fans alike in its preservation and celebration.</p>
<p>I certainly appreciate that shorter games, like shorter books, have a certain attraction. They are less demanding and more user-friendly. And there is no doubt that games in MLB have gotten much longer than they used to be.</p>
<p>But baseball’s executives should avoid ruining the game in order to save it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202100/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alva Noë does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In between pitches, it might seem as if nothing is going on. But the game’s drama is still unfurling – you just need to know what to look for.Alva Noë, Professor of Philosophy, University of California, BerkeleyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1981092023-02-20T16:33:59Z2023-02-20T16:33:59ZHow your brain decides what to think<p>You’re sitting on the plane, staring out of the window at the clouds and all of a sudden, you think back to how a few months ago, you had a heart-to-heart with a good colleague about the pressure you experience at work. How do thoughts seemingly completely unrelated to the present pop into our heads? Why do we remember certain things and not others? Why does our mind go off on tangents and why do we have daydreams?</p>
<p>Underlying these processes is a shared pattern of common brain activity, in regions which together make up the “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.98.2.676">default mode network</a>”, discovered and named by neurologist Marcus Raichle in the early 2000s. It’s engaged when we are <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-why-daydreaming-is-good-for-you-50227">daydreaming</a>, thinking about ourselves or others, <a href="https://theconversation.com/daydream-believer-why-your-brain-is-wired-to-wander-18881">recalling memories, or imagining future events</a>.</p>
<p>The default mode network becomes engaged when people appear to be doing “nothing” (hence the term “default”). This is usually when we are in a relaxed state and not focusing on a task or goal – think, sitting on a plane, staring out the window.</p>
<p>When the default mode network is engaged, other networks in the brain are down-regulated or become less active, such as the executive control network and other brain regions involved in attention, working memory, and decision-making. This is what allows the brain to wander. </p>
<h2>Why some memories over others?</h2>
<p>Some memories are more likely to be spontaneously recalled, such as those that are more recent, highly emotional, highly detailed, frequently repeated, or central to our identity. They capture our attention – and for good reason. These types of memories were likely pivotal for engaging with our physical and social environments at the time, and so helped to contribute to our survival.</p>
<p>It’s thought that the brain stores memories in a reconstructive, associative way, <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/Remembering-A-Study-in-Experimental-and-Social-Psychology">storing memory details in a distributed manner</a> and bringing them together upon retrieval – rather than in a strictly reproductive way, with video replays of whole events stored in chronological order. </p>
<p>This means that memories may be associated with each other through different sensory, emotional and contextual details. So each of these bits of information can serve as a cue to trigger another memory. Such as when we encounter a smell, sound or image – even if we sometimes don’t consciously know what the trigger was.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Woman sitting in bikini thinking." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/508986/original/file-20230208-23-ov7tjc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/508986/original/file-20230208-23-ov7tjc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508986/original/file-20230208-23-ov7tjc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508986/original/file-20230208-23-ov7tjc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508986/original/file-20230208-23-ov7tjc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508986/original/file-20230208-23-ov7tjc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508986/original/file-20230208-23-ov7tjc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">‘Why can’t I stop thinking about work?’</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.pexels.com/photo/woman-sitting-on-armchair-under-white-patio-umbrella-1154638/">Pexels/Nappy</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Indeed, much of our cognitive processing happens <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-it-rational-to-trust-your-gut-feelings-a-neuroscientist-explains-95086">without conscious awareness</a>. The brain <a href="https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.4159/9780674045217/html?lang=en">holistically and unconsciously</a> deals with all kinds of sensory information that comes in all at once. </p>
<p>As a result, it may feel like we are not in control of our thoughts, but much of this perceived control may be an illusion anyway. It might be that our consciousness is not in control of very much at all, but rather tries to explain and rationalise the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231">unconscious cognitive processing</a> of our brains after the fact. </p>
<p>In other words, the brain is constantly processing information and making connections between different pieces of knowledge. This means that it’s normal for thoughts and associations to come to mind when our conscious control mechanisms are switched off.</p>
<h2>When thoughts turn bad</h2>
<p>The spontaneous nature of thoughts and memories brought up through the default mode network is what supports <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-secret-to-creativity-according-to-science-89592">imagination</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-study-reveals-why-some-people-are-more-creative-than-others-90065">creativity</a>. This is why we might have an “Aha!” moment in the shower and come up with a creative solution to a work problem we may have been stuck with. The brain was allowed to rest and wander, so it was able to make associations between different bits in memories that our conscious working memory was not able to reach and bring together. </p>
<p>Spontaneous thoughts are not always good, however. <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10087639/">Intrusive memories</a> are unwanted memories, that are often vivid and disturbing or at least strongly emotionally charged and can take the form of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-possible-cause-of-flashbacks-discovered-59105">flashbacks</a> or <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-do-i-dwell-on-the-past-121630">ruminations</a>. Not only can they bring with them feelings of anxiety, fear and shame, but they can sometimes also consist of disturbing content that the person does not want to remember or think about. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Woman with head in hands." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/508988/original/file-20230208-16-aoiv10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/508988/original/file-20230208-16-aoiv10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508988/original/file-20230208-16-aoiv10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508988/original/file-20230208-16-aoiv10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508988/original/file-20230208-16-aoiv10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508988/original/file-20230208-16-aoiv10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/508988/original/file-20230208-16-aoiv10.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Not all thoughts are welcome.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.pexels.com/photo/faceless-unhappy-woman-covering-face-6383282/">Pexels/liza summer</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>For example, in <a href="https://www.psychiatrist.com/jcp/mental/child/infant-related-intrusive-thoughts-of-harm/">postpartum anxiety and depression</a>, new mothers can start having intrusive thoughts of harming their infant, without actually wanting to follow through with them. This is understandably a highly disturbing experience and if it happens to you, please rest assured that such thoughts are unfortunately common. </p>
<p>But it’s always best to try and seek <a href="https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/types-of-mental-health-problems/postnatal-depression-and-perinatal-mental-health/support-and-services/">help</a> or at least support at the earliest possible moment. <a href="https://www.ocduk.org/overcoming-ocd/cognitive-behavioural-therapy/">Cognitive behavioural therapy</a> (CBT) can help with techniques to deal with unwanted thoughts.</p>
<p>For all of us though, it’s worth remembering that many thoughts enter our minds seemingly spontaneously and that this is a normal part of human memory and thought processes. But by allowing ourselves and our brains to take a rest, we allow it to generate creative thoughts and solutions to problems. And when unwanted thoughts pop up, it might be best to take a mindful approach: observe the thought and let it go, like clouds in a passing storm.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/198109/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Valerie van Mulukom does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Spontaneous trips down memory lane: why and how the mind wanders.Valerie van Mulukom, Assistant Professor in Cognitive Science, Coventry UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1972522023-02-16T08:09:46Z2023-02-16T08:09:46ZShake and divide: the cocktail formula for global consensus<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/509172/original/file-20230209-14-6ispxh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C3%2C2396%2C1297&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/es/fotos/ZJ64TPcM14c">Markus Spiske / Unsplash</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>For yet another year, the world’s conference on climate change – <a href="https://theconversation.com/cop27-what-to-expect-193556">COP27</a> – concluded with few agreements and a clear division between North and South. </p>
<p>The conversations to reach effective consensus on key questions in the fight against global warming and other effects of the climate change will have to wait for a new edition of the COP, scheduled for November 2023 in Dubai. </p>
<p>That might make us consider the factors that contribute to this deadlock, so dangerous, in the progress of the negotiations. Some obvious answers are that those most responsible do not show a clear political will to solve the problem, and that not enough effort or money is dedicated. </p>
<p>But there is another less obvious factor that also contributes to this.</p>
<h2>It is hard to reach an agreement</h2>
<p>The lack of agreement is a very frequent situation that happens in a diversity of real life scenarios, for instance climate change conferences as the one mentioned above, but also in the political arena where we rarely find major parties coming easily to a consensus on sensitive topics. </p>
<p>Reaching an agreement is a difficult task, especially if it involves large groups of individuals with a diversity of opinions, tendencies and interests. We have now an explanation for this, based on the scientific modelling of opinion dynamics in social systems, which incorporates two key ingredients: </p>
<ul>
<li><p>Individuals interact through complex networks of acquaintances.</p></li>
<li><p>The scale, composition, and influence of clans to which those individuals belong – family, neighbourhood, political party, country – strongly affect their process of opinion formation and, thus, the emergence of consensus in social systems. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>The results of our investigation are surprising and tell us that enhancing the diversity in the groups of influence or partitioning them into smaller units could be good strategies to avoid unsurmountable polarisation and gridlock in the pursuit of global agreement. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/509178/original/file-20230209-18-fi1ul6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/509178/original/file-20230209-18-fi1ul6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/509178/original/file-20230209-18-fi1ul6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509178/original/file-20230209-18-fi1ul6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509178/original/file-20230209-18-fi1ul6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=421&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509178/original/file-20230209-18-fi1ul6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509178/original/file-20230209-18-fi1ul6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509178/original/file-20230209-18-fi1ul6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=529&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Student strike in front of the State Opera, Vienna, 1953.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/es/fotos/Xhlc1QNOdjI">Austrian National Library / Unsplash</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Decisions are influenced by the clan</h2>
<p>In our work, developed at the Mapping Complexity Lab of the University of Barcelona and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960077922010268">published recently in Chaos, Solitons and Fractals</a>, we were motivated to find the conditions for the emergence of global consensus in social networks (face-to-face and online). </p>
<p>We used a version of the Voter model – in which individuals use imitation as a mechanism of social interaction – to simulate in our computers the evolution of opinion formation in real social networks. The novelty in our model is that the decisions of an individual are influenced by the viewpoint of its own clan. </p>
<p>We represented each social network as a graph – a mathematical structure where individuals and their interactions are represented as nodes connected by links. Each obtained graph was transformed into a similarity map, which displays the complex geography of human relations in the social space such that affine individuals in the same clan are separated by smaller distances. </p>
<p>The interpretation of a clan in our framework goes beyond the normative meaning of extended family and defines a group that has a shared identity based on previous experiences. </p>
<p>When a clan is made of individuals who have been in contact for a long time and gone through similar experiences, sociology suggests that we should expect a higher degree of interaction and affinity within the members. </p>
<p>We considered real data sets where our definition of clan finds a natural interpretation. For example a Facebook friendship network, where nodes consist of Caltech university students and links represent online friendship ties, and a network between politicians in the 48th parliament of New Zealand, where a link between a pair of members of the parliament was established when they participated in discussions about the same topic. </p>
<p>Although large differences in affinity might be expected to contribute to blockages in reaching agreement, we found the opposite. Global agreement was easier to reach when the groups influencing individuals where more diverse, with diversity achieved either by partitioning or mixing the groups. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/509185/original/file-20230209-20-6jjzq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/509185/original/file-20230209-20-6jjzq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/509185/original/file-20230209-20-6jjzq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509185/original/file-20230209-20-6jjzq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509185/original/file-20230209-20-6jjzq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509185/original/file-20230209-20-6jjzq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509185/original/file-20230209-20-6jjzq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/509185/original/file-20230209-20-6jjzq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/es/fotos/cw-cj_nFa14">Antenna / Unsplash</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>On the contrary, bigger clans of affine nodes sustained longer polarized opinion states, forming two clearly identifiable domains in the social similarity maps. Thus, global consensus was more difficult. </p>
<p>Hence, our results explain why we do not observe that big structured populations easily come to a full consensus in the real world. They also suggest that group diversity can help promote global agreement by reducing friction between sectors of like-minded individuals that pull in opposite directions. </p>
<h2>Balancing consensus and polarization</h2>
<p>Indeed, evidence in the social sciences at the microscale supports the idea that diversified teams can be more effective in decision making. There’s an <a href="https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305427">interesting case reported</a> where a public health journal implemented a consensus-driven shared leadership model to build a high-functioning editorial team.</p>
<p>The cocktail formula – shake and divide – could help organize collective agreement in a variety of scenarios where reaching global consensus is of vital importance. </p>
<p>For example, we urgently need a global deal regarding the ethical limits to the operation and use of Artificial Intelligence. </p>
<p>Note that in the political arena the consensus problem presents a clear duality – reality is more complex than we would sometimes like. On one hand, global consensus is necessary to act against some of the big challenges that threaten society. On the other hand, consensus sometimes denotes doctrine, in contrast to a plurality of opinions that are beneficial and needed for a healthy society. </p>
<p>Future research in the framework of our social network science models could help elucidate the delicate balance that allows for the survival of a plurality of opinions beyond polarized regimes, which hinders global consensus.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/197252/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Para llevar a cabo esta investigación, M. Ángeles Serrano ha recibido fondos de la Agencia Estatal de Investigación de España, código de proyecto PID2019-106290GB- C22/AEI/10.13039/501100011033.</span></em></p>In real life scenarios we rarely find a large group of individuals easily coming to a consensus on sensitive topics. The solution might be to divide and shake those groups.M. Ángeles Serrano, ICREA Research Professor of Complexity Science, Universitat de BarcelonaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1948712023-01-23T18:32:32Z2023-01-23T18:32:32ZConsensus decision-making is surprisingly effective in both communities and workplaces<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/504989/original/file-20230117-19784-31v617.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C79%2C6473%2C3470&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Voting silences voices. Listening deeply to people in your group leads to more robust and better decisions. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>If you’re in a leadership position — at work or in the community — you make decisions and oversee decision-making processes. Often it’s best to consult the people you are leading to reach a group decision. </p>
<p>Voting may seem the quickest route to a resolution, but it <a href="https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/256261">isn’t the best way to enrol everyone</a>. Worse, voting can <a href="https://asset-pdf.scinapse.io/prod/2069572783/2069572783.pdf">silence voices and thwart creativity</a>.</p>
<p>Formal consensus decision-making <a href="https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/256261">leads to broader engagement</a>. I have been training leaders in formal consensus decision-making for more than 25 years, and here’s why I recommend it. </p>
<h2>Circle of moral concern</h2>
<p>Slowing down your decision-making process and listening deeply to the people in your group also increases how much you care for them and how much you view them as people. </p>
<p>As a professor of psychology, neuroscience and behaviour, <a href="http://pnb.mcmaster.ca/rutherford/">in the Rutherford lab</a> at McMaster University, my students and I study the perception of social categories.</p>
<p>My students and I are interested in learning how people can increase their <a href="https://pnb.mcmaster.ca/rutherford/research-projects/">circle of moral concern</a>. When people behave in ways that harm others, they may not be including those others in the circle of people they care about. The deep listening involved in formal consensus decision-making draws people into that circle.</p>
<h2>Expertise in the group</h2>
<p>If a problem is difficult, if there is expertise in your group that can inform and improve the decision at issue, or if a solution is going to be expensive, it’s a good time to consider a broad, robust decision-making process.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most critical times to use a durable consensus decision-making process are when a decision is going to be controversial, or if the success of the decision relies on enthusiastic acceptance. </p>
<p>I suggest a specific model called <a href="http://foodnotbombs.net/CONSENSUS_FLOW_CHART.pdf">formal consensus decision-making</a>, in which no proposal is adopted until every concern is heard, understood and addressed. This model, complete with charts, roles and procedures, was developed by <a href="http://foodnotbombs.net/new_site/">Food Not Bombs</a>, a volunteer organization dedicated to non-violent social change. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="People seen standing with a banner that says 'Food Not Bombs.'" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/498042/original/file-20221129-12-d81nln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/498042/original/file-20221129-12-d81nln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=274&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/498042/original/file-20221129-12-d81nln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=274&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/498042/original/file-20221129-12-d81nln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=274&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/498042/original/file-20221129-12-d81nln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/498042/original/file-20221129-12-d81nln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/498042/original/file-20221129-12-d81nln.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People with Food Not Bombs developed a model called formal consensus decision-making.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Elvert Barnes/Flickr)</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Political science researcher Sean Michael Parsons discusses the formation of Food Not Bombs in his 2010 dissertation. He points to how <a href="https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520084339/political-protest-and-cultural-revolution">historian Barbara Epstein discusses</a> the relationship between 1960s movements (which shaped the politics and habits of Food Not Bombs) and Quakers.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://quaker.org/are-quakers-christian">the Quaker religion</a>, <a href="https://quaker.org/decision-making">Quakers do not vote</a>, but
rely on “communal discernment” — <a href="https://quakerspeak.com/video/quaker-decision-making-consensus">listening for a truth</a> that emerges when people listen to one another and together “in the Spirit.” </p>
<h2>Building consensus in a university</h2>
<p>More than a year ago, <a href="https://www.thespec.com/news/hamilton-region/2021/07/09/mel-rutherford-becomes-first-transgender-department-head-at-mcmaster.html">I became chair</a> of McMaster University’s department of psychology, neuroscience and behaviour. Since then, the department has not voted once.</p>
<p>My department uses formal consensus decision-making, and instead of policies, we have standard operating procedures. Where other departments have policies, bylaws and governance documents, we wanted something different, because creating bylaws can be contentious, enforcing bylaws can be worse and bylaws can’t anticipate unanticipated situations.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A group of people sitting and standing in discussion." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505014/original/file-20230117-11910-ohh18b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505014/original/file-20230117-11910-ohh18b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505014/original/file-20230117-11910-ohh18b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505014/original/file-20230117-11910-ohh18b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505014/original/file-20230117-11910-ohh18b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505014/original/file-20230117-11910-ohh18b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505014/original/file-20230117-11910-ohh18b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Can you get a group to agree on any kind of governance without voting? Yes.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(StockSnap from Pixabay)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Instead, we now use a living document simply called, “This is how we do it.” This document was not ratified by vote. It was reviewed by the entire department in a process where we analyzed how we currently did things and how we hoped to change — a <a href="https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/gap-analysis-template/#">“gap analysis” process</a>.</p>
<p>If you’re wondering how to get a group to agree to any kind of governance document without voting, let me tell you the story of how we ratified our “This is how we do it” document without taking a single vote.</p>
<h2>Identifying values</h2>
<p>First, we created a <a href="https://www.indeed.com/hire/c/info/how-to-write-core-values">core values statement</a>, and today we measure all our practices and procedures against it. We started our core-values exercise in January with four large group meetings: faculty, staff, post-doctoral research fellows, graduate students and undergraduate students.</p>
<p>Representatives from each group met with our facilitator, who distilled the data she collected during those sessions, specifically the values that had been nominated in each meeting for every domain we discussed.</p>
<p>Finally, a small working group including representation from each of the large groups met to draft our core values statement. This draft went to the entire department with a request for feedback. After a final meeting of representatives, the core values were finalized.</p>
<p>Next, we had a faculty retreat to develop our “This is how we do it” document. In small groups and all together, we examined and discussed the fit between our department’s core values and this document. </p>
<p>We used notes from all discussions at the retreat to update the document and circulated it to the department for further comment. Now we have our way forward.</p>
<h2>Major bodies using consensus</h2>
<p>In Canada, some <a href="https://theconversation.com/universities-can-foster-more-deliberative-democracy-starting-by-empowering-students-189053">major organizations are taking more inclusive and deliberative decision-making seriously</a>. There are even two governmental bodies in Canada that <a href="https://www.assembly.nu.ca/sites/default/files/Consensus%20Government%20in%20Nunavut%20-%20English.pdf">have a consensus style of government, Nunavut</a>, and the <a href="https://www.ntassembly.ca/visitors/what-consensus">Northwest Territories</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="People seen sitting in desks designed in a circle format." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505012/original/file-20230117-14366-wl8bgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505012/original/file-20230117-14366-wl8bgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505012/original/file-20230117-14366-wl8bgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505012/original/file-20230117-14366-wl8bgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505012/original/file-20230117-14366-wl8bgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=506&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505012/original/file-20230117-14366-wl8bgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=506&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505012/original/file-20230117-14366-wl8bgv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=506&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Nunavut Legislative Assembly, located in Iqaluit, Nunavut, seen here in February 2010, uses a consensus style for government.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Fred Chartrand</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The <a href="https://cuc.ca">Canadian Unitarian Council</a>, which until now has used voting and <a href="https://robertsrules.com/">Robert’s Rules of Order</a> as their decision-making process, has created a <a href="https://cuc.ca/about-cuc/taskforces-committees-groups/">decision-making exploration team</a> which hopes to find a decision-making process that is “inclusive, collaborative and models informed group decision-making.”</p>
<h2>Listen to dissent</h2>
<p>Voting can silence voices. You may have been in a meeting at some point when a disagreement broke out and someone angrily suggested, “Let’s take a vote!” </p>
<p>All too often, that can be a way to silence dissent.</p>
<p>Why not try consensus at home, in your workplace, your church or faith community or your <a href="https://www.hipinfo.ca/record/BTN2935">running club</a>?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/194871/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mel Rutherford does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In formal consensus decision-making, no proposal is adopted until every concern is heard, understood and addressed. Here’s how it can work.Mel Rutherford, Professor and Department Chair, Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour, McMaster UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1933172022-11-17T23:06:20Z2022-11-17T23:06:20Z‘What shall we have for dinner?’ Choice overload is a real problem, but these tips will make your life easier<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/495304/original/file-20221115-23-vj95us.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=30%2C122%2C4639%2C2723&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/22Vt7JIf7ZI">Brenna Huff/Unsplash</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s been a long day. Your partner messages you: “let’s just order in, I don’t feel like cooking”.</p>
<p>With a sense of relief, you open your usual takeaway app and start scrolling through the many restaurants and dishes available. <em>Thai, pizza, burgers, Korean, Lebanese… oooh this one has free delivery! Hmm, but they’re far away and I am famished…</em> Soon that sense of relief is replaced by overwhelm and inability to decide what to order. And your partner is not much help either! </p>
<p>Sound familiar? What you are experiencing is called <a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_the_paradox_of_choice?utm_campaign=tedspread&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare">choice overload</a>. This can sometimes go as far as leading to complete <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995">decision paralysis</a> (when you give up and make a toastie instead) and ultimately leads to an overall reduced satisfaction with the choices we make.</p>
<p>Thankfully, marketing and psychology scholars have studied this phenomenon for years and can provide tips to make your life a little easier. But first, we need to understand it to fix it.</p>
<h2>Where does choice overload come from?</h2>
<p>In the dinner scenario above, “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2014.08.002">choice set complexity</a>” – how choices are presented, how many options there are, how different the options are in their characteristics, how much we already know about each option – is the culprit.</p>
<p>There are simply too many things to consider to make the most optimal choice: cuisine, delivery time, delivery costs, distance, healthy or indulgent, and so on. What seems a simple decision at first glance, soon turns into quite a complex one. </p>
<p>With people making approximately <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916506295573">200 choices</a> a day when it comes to food alone, you can easily relate to the fatigue our brains feel at the end of a day.</p>
<p>Being presented with yet another complex and multifaceted decision will lead to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7">cognitive overload</a>: it means your brain simply doesn’t have the cognitive resources (brain power) to consciously process all the options and consider all the information needed to make an optimal choice.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A person looking at a picture of food on their smartphone" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/495800/original/file-20221117-15-vhuyi9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/495800/original/file-20221117-15-vhuyi9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/495800/original/file-20221117-15-vhuyi9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/495800/original/file-20221117-15-vhuyi9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/495800/original/file-20221117-15-vhuyi9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/495800/original/file-20221117-15-vhuyi9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/495800/original/file-20221117-15-vhuyi9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Browsing through countless options can be overwhelming for the brain.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Gorodenkoff/Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why making ‘perfect’ decisions is impossible</h2>
<p>As a matter of fact, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037%2Fh0043158">our brains are rather limited</a> in the amount of information they can process consciously at any given time.</p>
<p>Especially if a scenario is combined with high <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2014.08.002">decision task difficulty</a> – when there are time constraints (kids need to be in bed soon), we are likely to be held accountable (buying a wine for dinner at our boss’ rather than for ourselves), or potential losses are significant (buying a house) – it is no wonder the brain blows a fuse trying to make the most optimal decision.</p>
<p>And therein lies the problem and the solution: you don’t always have to make the optimal choice. What’s wrong with “good enough”?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/clinical-perfectionism-when-striving-for-excellence-gets-you-down-43704">Clinical perfectionism: when striving for excellence gets you down</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1509/jmkr.47.2.312">Expectation-disconfirmation</a> – the expectation that the perfect choice must exist if so much choice is available to you – is seated in the idea that people tend to want to <em>optimise</em> results, rather than <em>satisfice</em>. It is like striving for happiness in life rather than contentment.</p>
<p>Especially perfectionists will find this often explains their choice overload. </p>
<p>Another reason you may experience choice overload is because you explicitly don’t want to put effort into making the decision. This is called <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020198">minimising of cognitive demand goals</a> (for example, forfeiting deciding what to cook to ordering take out).</p>
<h2>How to overcome choice overload</h2>
<p>So after a long day, when you have no energy left, accountability is low, and the potential consequences are minor, consider satisficing your choice:</p>
<ul>
<li><p><strong>reduce the choice task to a binary one immediately</strong>. Only give yourself the choice of two options, randomly chosen, or the first that came to mind. For example, before you open a delivery app, decide you have to choose between the first two cuisines that pop up.</p></li>
<li><p><strong>stick with what you know</strong>. <a href="http://www-personal.umich.edu/%7Emrother/KATA_Files/FBM.pdf">Habits are created</a> when a choice was marked as a rewarding one by the brain in the past. This means the choices you make regularly are good ones according to yourself, the expert! In your app, navigate to your favourites section and pick one from there.</p></li>
<li><p><strong>stick with your first choice.</strong> Don’t waiver. Once you’ve decided, commit to your decision. Do you really want to spend all that time and effort reanalysing and going back and forth when the result is of minor consequence?</p></li>
</ul>
<h2>Satisficing may not work for everything</h2>
<p>Of course, not all choices are without grave consequences. When you are buying a house, you do want to consider all information needed to make an optimal decision.</p>
<p>Choice overload is likely because your brain is trying to connect all the dots consciously. So what do you do then?</p>
<p>If the decision is becoming overwhelming, try to pause and do some “<a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.586">unconscious thinking</a>”. When you get back to it after a good night’s sleep, your brain will have processed the information unconsciously and you will be able to make a more confident decision.</p>
<p>You know when people say “it just felt like the right choice”? <a href="https://www.econtalk.org/gerd-gigerenzer-on-gut-feelings/">Intuition is not some mythical creature</a> whispering in your ear – it’s your unconscious mind having been able to connect the dots. </p>
<p>Perhaps a cold comfort, but <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1069031X211073821">choice deprivation</a> has far greater consequences for our wellbeing than choice overload. Dissatisfaction with choices made is much higher when we are deprived of sufficient choices than when we have too many.</p>
<p>With a few simple tricks, even the luxury problem of what to order for dinner can be eliminated; now, you have some brain space left to agree on what to watch on Netflix as you dig into your pizza… or laksa.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/does-choice-overload-you-it-depends-on-your-personality-take-the-test-122196">Does choice overload you? It depends on your personality – take the test</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/193317/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Janneke Blijlevens does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Learning to satisfice can lead to a simpler, more content life – here’s how.Janneke Blijlevens, Senior Lecturer Experimental Methods, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1906912022-10-03T12:09:15Z2022-10-03T12:09:15ZCOVID inquiry: the UK government’s pandemic response was often not ‘guided by the science’ – yet now scientists are under fire<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/485858/original/file-20220921-26-pkd4r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C16%2C5607%2C3715&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/coronavirus-covid19-virus-disease-pandemic-outbreaknhs-1715798614">Cryptographer/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/">UK COVID-19 Inquiry</a>, an independent inquiry set up to examine the country’s response to and the impact of the COVID pandemic, has officially begun. </p>
<p>Along with issues including <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62250899">pandemic preparedness</a> and the healthcare system, one part of the inquiry, the second module, will examine political decision-making.</p>
<p>The inquiry recently started <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62744272">soliciting evidence</a> for this module, which will scrutinise decisions the UK government made during the early stages of the pandemic, up to March 2020. Eventually the inquiry will examine the decisions made by those in power up to February 2022.</p>
<p>Right from the beginning of the pandemic, the UK government loudly trumpeted the mantra that its decisions were “<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-coronavirus-18-march-2020">guided by the science</a>”. Not only did this add an air of authority to government decisions, it also provided a convenient scapegoat for the consequences of any decisions which ministers might later seek to disown.</p>
<p><a href="https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/2249/pdf/">Dominic Cummings</a>, former chief adviser to Boris Johnson, told the Health and Social Care Committee and Science and Technology Committee joint inquiry in 2021:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I certainly believe that the secretary of state, Matt Hancock, used Patrick Vallance and Chris Whitty as shields for himself – yes. He used the whole ‘We are following the science’ as a way so that he could always say, ‘Well, if things go wrong, we will blame the scientists and it is not my fault’. I saw him discuss that with the prime minister. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>More recently, we’ve seen Conservative leadership candidate Rishi Sunak argue that scientists were given <a href="https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-lockdown-files-rishi-sunak-on-what-we-werent-told">too much power</a> in pandemic decision-making. This is part of an ongoing narrative that seeks to shift the blame away from the government by depicting it as beholden to all-powerful scientists. </p>
<h2>‘Advisers advise, ministers decide’</h2>
<p>Despite their claim of being “guided by the science”, even the most cursory glance at the government’s decision-making reveals that this was often not the case. It is well documented that the government frequently <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/12/ministers-rejected-four-out-five-proposals-from-sage-to-avert-covid-second-wave">ignored scientific advice</a> in favour of populist policies which would eventually and inevitably backfire on them. </p>
<p>For example, in September 2020, the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) recommended <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4038">a circuit breaker lockdown</a> to curb a significant resurgence of COVID infections. Instead, the government waited until early November before <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/prime-minister-announces-new-national-restrictions">implementing a lockdown</a>.</p>
<p>High levels of cases inevitably led to more opportunities for the virus to replicate and mutate. After emerging in the autumn, in December 2020 the highly transmissible alpha variant <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/21/new-covid-variant-in-uk-spreading-christmas-fear">rose to dominance in the UK</a> (and eventually around the world), causing another steep rise in cases.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/boris-johnsons-pandemic-legacy-where-he-went-wrong-managing-covid-and-some-things-he-got-right-189666">Boris Johnson's pandemic legacy – where he went wrong managing COVID (and some things he got right)</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Again, scientists warned that acting early would be better than acting late. But <a href="https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1329549628358987778?s=20&t=CfawLNJqDOTwayXlGrjQwQ">Johnson was insistent</a> that he would “save Christmas”. Ultimately <a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/christmas-canceled-boris-johnson-orders-londoners-to-stay-at-home/">Christmas plans were cancelled</a> for millions at the last minute.</p>
<p>It has been estimated that delays in implementing England’s winter lockdown led to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/18/delaying-englands-winter-lockdown-caused-up-to-27000-extra-covid-deaths">thousands of avoidable deaths</a>. Far from the government’s touted approach of being guided by the science, experts’ advice was frequently <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/15/uk-government-coronavirus-science-who-advice">not heeded</a>. Margaret Thatcher’s well-known aphorism “advisers advise, ministers decide” held true even in this unprecedented time of crisis.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="People shopping at a market in London, some wearing face masks." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/485859/original/file-20220921-26-o60n95.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/485859/original/file-20220921-26-o60n95.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485859/original/file-20220921-26-o60n95.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485859/original/file-20220921-26-o60n95.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485859/original/file-20220921-26-o60n95.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485859/original/file-20220921-26-o60n95.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/485859/original/file-20220921-26-o60n95.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The UK government delayed locking down, despite advice from independent experts.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/london-uk-3-november-2020-people-1852355149">I Wei Huang/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Scientists under fire</h2>
<p>The BMJ recently commissioned a <a href="https://www.bmj.com/covid-inquiry">series of peer-reviewed articles</a> providing evidence for the COVID inquiry. The articles’ brief was to investigate successes and failures in the UK’s pandemic response, including whether politicians made the best use of the scientific advice and evidence that was presented to them.</p>
<p>Some of these articles are explicitly critical of the government’s approach to managing the COVID pandemic. As <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/378/bmj-2022-070615">a co-author</a> of <a href="https://www.bmj.com/content/378/BMJ-2022-071234">two articles</a> in the series, my colleagues and I have <a href="https://twitter.com/Kit_Yates_Maths/status/1566684806942965767?s=20&t=zzNhjI3I6dp1APk2BnId2A">repeatedly been labelled</a> “<a href="https://twitter.com/Kit_Yates_Maths/status/1571407425285939200?s=20&t=EHrFuYHNh3p3II4BwzAeaQ">hardline</a>” experts in national newspapers.</p>
<p>Disagreement and debate over government policy aren’t in themselves a problem. But it is worrying that national newspapers seem to have taken to impugning the integrity of experts and peer-reviewed science that has been published in a well-respected academic journal. These pieces run the risk of a chilling effect, intimidating those who are critical of the government’s response into silence.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/covid-lifting-the-remaining-measures-is-a-dangerous-and-senseless-move-expert-view-177389">COVID: lifting the remaining measures is a dangerous and senseless move – expert view</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Indeed, the experience of having your name and picture splashed in <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10411029/Now-Indy-SAGE-wants-prevent-flu.html">a national newspaper</a> is an unnerving one. And the inevitable increase in unpleasant comments and tweets that follow these sorts of articles make the prospect of speaking out again in the future less appealing.</p>
<p>But as the inquiry picks up pace, it’s vital that scientists continue to share and discuss the evidence on the impact of pandemic policy. We must highlight the instances when the government disregarded scientific advice, so that we might learn from the mistakes that were made and attempt to ensure we do not make those same missteps again.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/190691/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christian Yates is affiliated with Independent SAGE. </span></em></p>An ongoing narrative seeks to shift the blame away from the government for mismanagement of the pandemic, by depicting it as beholden to all-powerful scientists.Christian Yates, Senior Lecturer in Mathematical Biology, University of BathLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1829312022-08-22T12:25:46Z2022-08-22T12:25:46ZDog owners take more risks, cat owners are more cautious – new research examines how people conform to their pets’ stereotypical traits<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474683/original/file-20220718-77003-v47a7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=311%2C60%2C6398%2C4406&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Dogs are seen as more likely to leap without looking – possibly a trait shared with their owners.
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/action-shot-of-a-dog-running-fast-in-the-mountain-royalty-free-image/1315584843">Artur Debat/Moment via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/research-brief-83231">Research Brief</a> is a short take about interesting academic work.</em></p>
<h2>The big idea</h2>
<p>Dog owners tend to take bigger risks and respond more to reward-oriented advertisements. Cat owners, on the other hand, are more cautious and more likely to react to ads emphasizing risk aversion. Those are the two main findings from <a href="http://doi.org/10.1177/00222429221078036">new peer-reviewed research I co-authored</a>. </p>
<p>My dog Midoo is always eager to join me in various activities and is never hesitant to show her excitement when people appear at the doorstep. By contrast, my cat Mipom is more alert and suspicious when she is around strangers, keeping a comfortable distance from people. I wondered, do their general dispositions have any impact on my own behavior or the decisions I make? </p>
<p>These are the questions I hoped to answer over a series of 11 studies I conducted with fellow marketing professors <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=xNX83X0AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Xiaojing Yang</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=6QixZowAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Yuwei Jiang</a>. </p>
<p>Our first pair of studies looked at pet ownership data in U.S. states and compared that with several crude measures of risk-taking. For example, we found that people in states with a higher share of dog owners, such as North Dakota, had a greater prevalence of COVID-19 infections in 2020 than states with more cat owners, such as Vermont. Although we controlled for political orientation and other variables, our results show only a correlation. The reason dog ownership seems associated with more COVID-19 cases, for example, could be that dog owners take more risks – or they simply have to take their pets out for walks more often, which means greater exposure. </p>
<p>In another study, we wanted to get individual-level data, so we used an online survey tool to recruit 145 owners of either a cat or a dog – not both. We gave participants an imaginary US$2,000 and asked them to invest any portion of it in either a risky stock fund or a more conservative mutual fund. Dog owners, who made up 53% of participants, were significantly more likely to invest in stocks and also put more money at risk than cat owners.</p>
<p>The results of this study were also correlational in nature. So in the other studies we sought to document causality. </p>
<p>For example, we asked 225 people to view four print ads featuring either a cat or a dog and then decide how to allocate a $2,000 investment, as in the previous study. We found that exposure to dogs led participants to be more likely to invest more money in stocks.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Small white kitten hiding beneath a floral couch" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474684/original/file-20220718-51582-5ka2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474684/original/file-20220718-51582-5ka2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474684/original/file-20220718-51582-5ka2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474684/original/file-20220718-51582-5ka2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474684/original/file-20220718-51582-5ka2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474684/original/file-20220718-51582-5ka2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474684/original/file-20220718-51582-5ka2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Cats are said to be more cautious by nature.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/small-white-kitten-hiding-beneath-a-floral-couch-royalty-free-image/552105001">Jodie Griggs/The Image Bank via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Another study recruited 283 undergrads and asked them to recall a past experience involving a cat or dog. They then randomly read an ad for a massage business that either emphasized how massages increase metabolism, boost immunity and rejuvenate the body – <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/383429">messages psychologists have found</a> appeal to people seeking rewards – or how they soothe body aches, relieve tension and reduce stress – phrases that tend to work better on cautious people. We told them that the company was offering $50 gift cards to several participants based on how much they were willing to bid. </p>
<p>Students who recalled an interaction with a dog offered bids significantly higher when they were exposed to the reward-oriented rather than risk-aversion ads. In contrast, those who recalled a cat offered much higher bids when they saw ads focused on risk aversion. </p>
<p>We believe these effects occur because people form mental associations of pets’ stereotypical temperaments and personalities – dogs like Midoo are eager, cats like Mipom are cautious. As a result, upon exposure to dogs or cats, these associations rise to the top of the mind and influence decisions and behaviors, an effect confirmed by our studies.</p>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p>Pets, especially dogs and cats, are prevalent and play important roles in the lives of tens of millions of people.</p>
<p>In the U.S., <a href="https://www.lemonade.com/pet/explained/pet-ownership-statistics/#US-household">70% of households own at least one pet</a>. And 50% say they own at least one dog, while 40% have a cat.</p>
<p>Because pets provide a sense of companionship, many people treat dogs and cats as friends and family members. So it’s only natural to wonder if our furry friends exert an influence on us, just as our human friends and family members do. </p>
<p>Our research suggests they do.</p>
<h2>What still isn’t known</h2>
<p>We plan to examine other possible effects of pets on people’s decisions and behaviors. For example, it is possible that interactions with dogs or cats can make people more or less willing to engage in conspicuous consumption. We also want to examine whether interactions with pets could affect people’s tendency to donate to charitable causes and engage in other activities meant to benefit others.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/182931/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lei Jia does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A series of studies found that exposure to dogs leads people to make riskier financial decisions, while interactions with cats have the opposite effect.Lei Jia, Assistant Professor of Marketing, Kent State University Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1870492022-08-09T17:17:24Z2022-08-09T17:17:24ZHow your brain will help you save during the cost of living crisis<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/477129/original/file-20220802-23-3cfj1e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=115%2C77%2C5026%2C3345&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Supermarket sweep.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/thoughtful-man-grocery-store-customer-thinking-531012568">Shutterstock/Song_about_summer</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The cost-of-living crisis continues. The UK rate of inflation is <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62233571">up yet again</a>, and expected to rise further. And as energy, transport, fuel and groceries all get more expensive, there are fears that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jul/11/worse-than-the-pandemic-price-rises-push-more-people-into-financial-trouble">over 4 million</a> British households are experiencing financial difficulties.</p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62037395">recent survey</a> suggests, perhaps unsurprisingly, that low prices will become increasingly important to consumers in the coming month. Some will still take perceptions of good value and customer service into account, but for the majority, price will be the key factor when it comes to deciding where to shop and what to buy. </p>
<p>Research in neuroscience suggests that our brains are extremely well suited to helping achieve this. Making difficult decisions involves different parts of the brain working together towards a conclusion. </p>
<p>Typically, when people make decisions about buying something, they engage in one of <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2765926/">two processes</a>, using what psychologists call a “valuation system” or a “choice system”. </p>
<p>The valuation system involves the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (which processes notions of risk and fear) and the reward system of the basal forebrain, and ranks options based on their perceived worth and possible reward. </p>
<p>So imagine you’re at the supermarket shopping for food, with a limited budget. You could either buy a box of eggs from chickens housed in crowded barns for £1.20, or a box from from free range chickens which costs £2.20. </p>
<p>You may well end up buying the cheaper eggs, even though you know that it is ethically preferable for chickens to roam freely. In this instance, you based the choice entirely on the price, because the valuation system nudges people towards the option that will give them the best and most immediate reward – in this case, saving money. </p>
<p>The choice system meanwhile, is part of the work of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, which (putting it very broadly) is concerned with reasoning, memory and making decisions as well as the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and parietal regions. </p>
<p>So if you’re still at the supermarket, with the eggs in your basket, you consider buying a new sugar bowl, to replace a broken one. You find one that appeals, but it is also rather expensive, making you hesitate. </p>
<p>What happens in such situations is that when faced with uncertainty, the prefrontal cortex becomes <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1115327?casa_token=uxuwSEABvosAAAAA:oV3O-2CT0tO6zteqHLUBEFnoZoo678RycHe3MXbgny-Oybeld6c5ExOo0Ts1H__qcUuk8SIv5IL6qg">increasingly active</a> and inhibits impulsive decisions, which in turn enforces a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811915003614">natural aversion to loss </a> – in this case losing money. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Bag of groceries next to outline of a human brain." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/477124/original/file-20220802-13-1eczf7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=42%2C24%2C4046%2C2127&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/477124/original/file-20220802-13-1eczf7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/477124/original/file-20220802-13-1eczf7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/477124/original/file-20220802-13-1eczf7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/477124/original/file-20220802-13-1eczf7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/477124/original/file-20220802-13-1eczf7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/477124/original/file-20220802-13-1eczf7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The thoughts that count.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/image-brain-rotating-over-black-background-2162982323">Shutterstock/vectorfusionart</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Meanwhile, another part of the brain, the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, helps to improve decision making by <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11239">delaying your response</a> to give you time to process alternative options, such as looking for a more affordable bowl. </p>
<h2>Risk aversion</h2>
<p>Both systems demonstrate that when we are thinking about prices and costs, our brain biology has ways of ensuring we look for an alternative that we can afford – or at least gives us better value for money. </p>
<p>A natural aversion to risk helps consumers facing financial uncertainty to choose the cheaper of two similar products rather than being persuaded by a fancy label or by habit. Paying more becomes an avoidable risk. Other “values” such as brand loyalty of customer service, become almost obsolete as price dominates. </p>
<p>But it is worth remembering that our brain functions don’t always get it right. Having financial worries can be stressful, and research shows that stress can have a <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02288.x">negative effect</a> on the way people make decisions. They can, for instance, <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1981-04420-001">become “risk-seeking”</a> in the face of loss, meaning that they may take unnecessary risks. </p>
<p>Partially this is because elevated dopamine responses make people focus on immediate and potentially high rewards. Someone who is feeling stressed and looking for a loan could easily end up clicking on a deal that could end up making their financial situation far worse. There is also evidence that stress causes people to factor <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02455.x">completely irrelevant information</a> (like comparing random numbers to an interest rate) into their decision making process. </p>
<p>Overall then, decision making is a complex process, and as everything gets more expensive, price is likely to become an increasingly dominant factor. But while politicians argue, and the companies we rely on raise their prices, at least our brains are hard-wired to help us make decisions that go some way to protect us from the ravages of the current economic climate.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/187049/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Cathrine Jansson-Boyd does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A psychologist explains how your brain helps you save money.Cathrine Jansson-Boyd, Reader in Consumer Psychology, Anglia Ruskin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1838742022-06-01T15:17:36Z2022-06-01T15:17:36ZDecisive people don’t make better decisions – new research<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/466264/original/file-20220531-22-kxnmq8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C7040%2C4679&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/doubtful-young-woman-wearing-trendy-round-640006879">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>I’ve always been an indecisive person. What to wear, which menu item to pick, when to do house chores; always thinking through scenarios before committing to even the most trivial of choices. </p>
<p>If this sounds like you, you’re certainly not unusual: <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1057740814000916">many people struggle</a> with these issues. Our new research may not be able to help you choose which restaurant to go to, but it might reassure you. Decisive people may be more confident in the choices they make but they are no better at making decisions than the rest of us. </p>
<p>The starting point for <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268501">my recent study</a> into the differences between decisive and indecisive people was finding a reliable way of distinguishing between participants. My team used the <a href="https://studylib.net/doc/8586964/action-control-scale--acs-90-.">Action Control Scale</a>, a yes or no questionnaire about everyday choices and behaviour. For example, whether you get bored quickly after learning a new game. </p>
<p>This scale <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10783541/">can reveal</a> whether a person is action or state-oriented. <a href="https://www.experisjobs.ca/ej-ca-en/Career-Resources/Career-Center/Strengthen-Action-orientation-Ability.htm#:%7E:text=If%20you%20are%20highly%20action,you%20follow%20through%20on%20it.">Action-oriented</a> people focus on action. They are more decisive, flexible and likely to implement their intentions in the face of adversity. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/AB5F6366258C5C3348FF4DE46984141F/S1834490918000089a.pdf/div-class-title-individual-difference-in-goal-motives-and-goal-content-the-role-of-action-and-state-orientation-div.pdf">State-oriented</a> people focus on their emotional state. They are indecisive, often struggle to commit to their choices and abandon their commitments more frequently.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Bird's eye view of red shows and lower legs standing between two arrows, left for no and right for yes" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/466270/original/file-20220531-22-t0h7ly.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/466270/original/file-20220531-22-t0h7ly.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/466270/original/file-20220531-22-t0h7ly.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/466270/original/file-20220531-22-t0h7ly.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/466270/original/file-20220531-22-t0h7ly.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/466270/original/file-20220531-22-t0h7ly.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/466270/original/file-20220531-22-t0h7ly.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Small decisions can feel overwhelming.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/yes-no-right-wrong-answer-business-2033158799">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We surveyed 723 people, from whom we chose the 60 most action-oriented and the 60 most state-oriented to take part in the main experiments. The participants went through a set of cognitive tasks, with low-risk choices. For example, we tested their simple perception (whether a cloud of dots is moving to the left or right) and preference (which of the two snacks would you rather eat). </p>
<p>We <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-22372-000">compared the following</a> cognitive processes between the two groups: </p>
<ul>
<li>evidence-processing speed (how fast you can acquire new information)</li>
<li>decision caution (how much you need to know to commit to a choice)</li>
<li>initial bias (how much the choice is influenced by some prior knowledge)</li>
<li>metacognitive sensitivity (how accurately you can judge the correctness of your choice)</li>
<li>metacognitive bias (how confident you are about your decision).</li>
</ul>
<h2>What we found</h2>
<p>The only difference in the two groups, across all the experiments, was that action-oriented people were more confident in their choices. There were no differences in accuracy, speed, cautiousness, bias or sensitivity. The action-oriented group was more confident, despite not being in any way better, faster or more accurate. </p>
<p>Certainly it can seem excessive, and sometimes debilitating, when you can’t even decide what to have for lunch. Indecisiveness can hinder our ability to pursue our goals. For example, exercise becomes difficult if each morning we second-guess ourselves and deliberate staying in bed. </p>
<p>But our research suggests that indecisive people are in no way worse at making choices. We can process evidence as fast and harness prior knowledge just as effectively as decisive people (and careful consideration can pay dividends when making life-changing choices, like choosing a university or buying a house – even if, as a millennial, this is only an issue in theory). </p>
<p>Being less or more confident of the choice that has been made cannot affect the outcome. It can however influence future ones. State-oriented people are less confident of whether the choice is right, which makes pursuing our goals a much greater challenge. </p>
<p>It is easy to see how this can relate to things such as preparing for an exam, exercising or learning a new skill. If you have low confidence that you are making meaningful progress, it can discourage regular practice. The reasons for this confidence gap are yet to be properly explained. But some research suggests a link with how people <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2008-00543-019">regulate their emotions</a>. This confidence gap might be the reason why some people succeed where others do not.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/183874/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Wojciech Zajkowski received funding from the 'Diamentowy Grant' programme of the Polish Ministry of Education and Science.</span></em></p>A new study shows indecisive people should go easier on themselves.Wojciech Zajkowski, Research scientist in Psychology, Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1769682022-04-19T12:19:46Z2022-04-19T12:19:46ZPandemic decision-making is difficult and exhausting – here’s the psychology that explains why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458383/original/file-20220418-22-mu1qko.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=367%2C62%2C4848%2C3409&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">So much uncertainty around risk can make it extra hard to decide what to do.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/young-hipster-woman-using-a-smart-phone-in-her-royalty-free-image/990991128">Richard Drury/DigitalVision via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>You want to sit down for an indoor dinner with friends. A couple of years ago, this was a simple enough activity that required minimal planning. However, that is not the case in today’s world. Many people now face a stream of further considerations about benefits and risks.</p>
<p>Will I enjoy the experience? What are the potential downsides? Am I comfortable with the restaurant’s pandemic-related policies? What’s the ventilation like? Is it very busy there at this time of day? Am I planning to see lots of people, or people with compromised immune systems, in the near future? </p>
<p>This is exhausting! <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=gFXRTf4AAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">As scientists</a> <a href="https://tricomilab.wixsite.com/ldmlab/people">at the</a> <a href="https://tricomilab.wixsite.com/ldmlab">Learning and Decision-Making Lab</a> at Rutgers University-Newark, we’ve noticed how many decision-making processes are affected by the pandemic. The accumulation of choices people are making throughout the day leads to what psychologists call <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jean-Twenge/publication/237738528_Decision_Fatigue_Exhausts_Self-Regulatory_Resources_-_But_So_Does_Accommodating_to_Unchosen_Alternatives/links/554b9ee40cf21ed21359ccbd/Decision-Fatigue-Exhausts-Self-Regulatory-Resources-But-So-Does-Accommodating-to-Unchosen-Alternatives.pdf">decision fatigue</a> – you can end up feeling overwhelmed and make bad decisions. The current pandemic can make this situation more pronounced, as even the choices and activities that should be the most simple can now feel tinged with risk and uncertainty. </p>
<p>Risk involves known probabilities – for example, the likelihood of losing a certain hand in poker. But <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/305826/the-signal-and-the-noise-by-nate-silver/">uncertainty is an unknown probability</a> – you can never really know the exact chance of catching COVID-19 by engaging in certain activities. Human beings tend to be both risk-averse and uncertainty-averse, meaning that you likely avoid both when you can. And when you can’t – as during a confusing phase of a pandemic – it can be draining to try to decide what to do.</p>
<h2>Rules are easy, decisions are hard</h2>
<p>Before the COVID-19 pandemic, most people didn’t think through some basic decisions in the same way they might now. In fact, even early in the pandemic you didn’t really need to. There were rules to follow whether you liked them or not. Capacity was limited, hours were restricted, or shops were closed. People were strongly urged to opt out of activities they’d normally engage in.</p>
<p>This is evident in data we collected from university students in fall 2020 and spring 2021. One question we asked was, “What has been the hardest part of the pandemic for you?” Responses included “Not being able to see my friends and family,” “Having to take classes online,” “Being forced to stay home” and many other similar frustrations. </p>
<p>Many of our survey respondents were either not able to do things they wanted to do or were forced to do things they didn’t want to do. In either case, the guidelines were clear-cut and the decisions were less of a struggle.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458384/original/file-20220418-76603-u14lyb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="masked cafe worker puts out an 'open' sign" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458384/original/file-20220418-76603-u14lyb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458384/original/file-20220418-76603-u14lyb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458384/original/file-20220418-76603-u14lyb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458384/original/file-20220418-76603-u14lyb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458384/original/file-20220418-76603-u14lyb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458384/original/file-20220418-76603-u14lyb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458384/original/file-20220418-76603-u14lyb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A pandemic world that is open for business sets the scene for a lot more daily decisions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/all-set-to-restart-business-royalty-free-image/1272761167">pixdeluxe/E+ via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>As restrictions ease and people think about “living with” the coronavirus, the current phase of the pandemic brings with it a new need to make cost-benefit calculations.</p>
<p>It’s important to remember that not everyone has experienced these kinds of decisions in the same way. Throughout the course of the pandemic there have been people who did not have the luxury of choice and needed to go to work regardless of the risk. There have also been those who have taken risks all along. On the other end of the spectrum, some people continue to stay isolated and avoid almost every situation with the potential for contracting COVID-19.</p>
<p>Those who experience the most decision fatigue are those who are in the middle – they want to avoid COVID-19 but also want to get back to the activities they enjoyed before the pandemic.</p>
<h2>Shortcuts can short-circuit decision-making</h2>
<p>Psychologist Daniel Kahneman wrote in his book “<a href="https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374533557/thinking-fast-and-slow">Thinking, Fast and Slow</a>” that “when faced with a difficult question, we often answer an easier one instead.”</p>
<p>Making decisions about risk and uncertainty is hard. For instance, trying to think through the probability of catching a potentially deadly virus while going to an indoor movie theater is difficult. So people tend to think in terms of binaries – “this is safe” or “this is unsafe” – because it’s easier.</p>
<p>The problem is that answering easier questions instead of trickier ones leaves you vulnerable to cognitive biases, or <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808098.002">errors in thought that affect your decision-making</a>.</p>
<p>One of the most prevalent of these biases is the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9">availability heuristic</a>. That’s what psychologists call the tendency to judge the likelihood of an event based on how easily it comes to mind. How much a certain event is covered in the media, or whether you’ve seen instances of it recently in your life, can sway your estimate. For example, if you’ve seen stories of a plane crash in the news recently, you may believe the probability of being in a plane crash to be higher than it actually is.</p>
<p>[<em>The Conversation’s science, health and technology editors pick their favorite stories.</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?nl=science&source=inline-science-favorite">Weekly on Wednesdays</a>.]</p>
<p>The effect of the availability heuristic on pandemic-era decision-making often manifests as making choices based on individual cases rather than on overall trends. On one side, people may feel fine going to a crowded indoor concert because they know others in their lives who have done this and have been fine – so they judge the likelihood of catching the coronavirus to be lower as a result. On the other hand, someone who knows a friend whose child caught COVID-19 at school may now think the risks of transmission in schools are much higher than they really are.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the availability heuristic means these days you think much more about the risks of catching COVID-19 than about other risks life entails that receive less media attention. While you’re worrying about the adequacy of a restaurant’s ventilation system, you overlook the danger of getting into a car accident on your way there.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458385/original/file-20220418-87032-gbe2cc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="woman seated in restaurant booth looks out the window pensively" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458385/original/file-20220418-87032-gbe2cc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458385/original/file-20220418-87032-gbe2cc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458385/original/file-20220418-87032-gbe2cc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458385/original/file-20220418-87032-gbe2cc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458385/original/file-20220418-87032-gbe2cc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458385/original/file-20220418-87032-gbe2cc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458385/original/file-20220418-87032-gbe2cc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">You can’t know for sure whether you’ll get infected after meeting a friend.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/pensive-woman-sitting-by-herself-in-a-restaurant-at-royalty-free-image/1138424247">LeoPatrizi/E+ via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>A constant process</h2>
<p>Decisions in general, and during a pandemic in particular, are about weighing risks and benefits and dealing with risk and uncertainty.</p>
<p>Because of the nature of probability, you can’t be sure in advance whether you’ll catch COVID-19 after agreeing to dine at a friend’s house. Furthermore, the outcome does not make your decision right or wrong. If you weigh the risks and benefits and accept that dinner invitation, only to end up contracting COVID-19 at the meal, it doesn’t mean you made the wrong decision – it just means you rolled the dice and came up short.</p>
<p>On the flip side, if you accept the dinner invitation and don’t end up with COVID-19, don’t get too smug; another time, the outcome might be different. All you can do is try to weigh what you know of the costs and benefits and make the best decisions you can.</p>
<p>During this next phase of the pandemic, we recommend remembering that uncertainty is a part of life. Be kind to yourself and others as we all try to make our best choices.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176968/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>People tend to dislike uncertainty and risk – two things that are hard to avoid completely during a pandemic. That’s part of why it can feel especially draining to make even small decisions these days.Elizabeth Tricomi, Associate Professor of Psychology, Rutgers University - NewarkWesley Ameden, Ph.D. Student in Psychology, Rutgers University - NewarkLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1750342022-01-19T18:59:13Z2022-01-19T18:59:13ZFirst impressions count, and have an impact on the decisions we make later on<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441411/original/file-20220118-13-1mx0fgo.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=103%2C112%2C5647%2C3716&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Picture yourself standing at the edge of a road, trying to decide if it’s safe to cross. It’s night time and rain is falling, making it difficult to see what’s up ahead. After looking both ways, you step onto the road. </p>
<p>But what if this was a poor choice? Perhaps you’ve misjudged the speed of an approaching car. How does your brain realise its error and correct things before it’s too late?</p>
<p>Experiments in cognitive psychology and neuroscience have taught us we make decisions by integrating information over time – that is, our brains collect and “add up” information across a very brief window of time, often only tens to hundreds of milliseconds, to form a clearer picture before committing to an action. </p>
<p>But when we need to judge how appropriate a decision actually was, for example when we already have one foot on the road, we suddenly become selective. Our <a href="https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009738">new research</a> shows that when changing our minds, not all information is considered equally, and our first impressions count.</p>
<h2>Our brains make and ‘appeal’ decisions</h2>
<p>A useful analogy for how our brains make decisions is that of a courtroom judge. Rather than passing a judgement after hearing from a single witness, they wait to hear from multiple witnesses to avoid acting on false or misleading testimony.</p>
<p>Similarly, our brains sample sensory information for a while before deciding what to do. From the brain’s perspective – peering through the “veil of our senses” – the world is much hazier than you might think. As a result, we don’t always choose the most appropriate courses of action, despite our best efforts.</p>
<p>When mistakes are made, we need to be able to rapidly change our minds. Just as appeal processes are a critical part of the judicial system, the ability to reverse decisions is a critical function of our brains. </p>
<p>Imagine being unable to overrule the decision to step onto the road after grossly underestimating the speed of an approaching car. Even small delays in the time it takes you to reconsider can have serious consequences. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/changing-your-mind-about-something-as-important-as-vaccination-isnt-a-sign-of-weakness-being-open-to-new-information-is-the-smart-way-to-make-choices-167856">Changing your mind about something as important as vaccination isn't a sign of weakness – being open to new information is the smart way to make choices</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Probing how the brain samples information over time</h2>
<p>In our work at the <a href="https://dlab.unimelb.edu.au/">Decision Neuroscience Lab</a> at the University of Melbourne, we investigated how people sample information <em>across time</em> to change their minds. </p>
<p>Specifically, it has been unclear whether information used to inform an initial decision is also used in the process of reconsideration (and whether the weight given to information is constant or differs over time).</p>
<p>Think of a judge presiding over an appeal. The dominant perspective has been that only testimony heard <em>after</em> an initial decision has been made determines whether that decision is reversed. Another possibility, however, is that testimony from both <em>before and after</em> influence whether the decision is overturned.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441421/original/file-20220118-13-1wm8kl4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Hand moves chess piece during a game" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441421/original/file-20220118-13-1wm8kl4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441421/original/file-20220118-13-1wm8kl4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441421/original/file-20220118-13-1wm8kl4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441421/original/file-20220118-13-1wm8kl4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441421/original/file-20220118-13-1wm8kl4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441421/original/file-20220118-13-1wm8kl4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441421/original/file-20220118-13-1wm8kl4.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Prior to this research, it had been unclear whether information used to make an initial decision was also used when reconsidering.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>To investigate this, we ran an experiment in which participants watched two rapidly flickering squares (that varied in brightness) for a short time, and made decisions about which was brighter on average. </p>
<p>We carefully manipulated the exact brightness of each square at all times, noting how people’s perceptions changed throughout. Usually, people stuck with their decisions, but every so often they changed their mind. </p>
<p>Contrary to current theories, we found information used to inform an initial decision (the brightness difference between the squares early on) also influenced whether that decision was later reversed. </p>
<p>Most strikingly, the very first snapshot of brightness information participants saw had a large and lasting influence over whether, and how quickly, they later changed their mind. </p>
<p>If this first snapshot of information strongly supported participants’ initial decisions, they tended to exhibit greater “decision inertia”. That is, they were slower and more resistant to changing their mind, even in the face of evidence they had made a mistake. </p>
<p>If it was the other way around, however, participants were more likely and quicker to change their mind. It appears greater weight was given to the first snapshot of evidence, and the strength of this evidence influenced subsequent assessments, biasing decisions made thereafter.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/to-what-extent-are-we-ruled-by-unconscious-forces-161216">To what extent are we ruled by unconscious forces?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>First impressions count</h2>
<p>On first consideration, deciding if it’s safe to cross a road seems simple. Yet our research reveals complex and unexpected dynamics underlie even these rapid decisions. </p>
<p>In some sense, the variations in “decision inertia” participants displayed are reminiscent of confirmation bias, wherein a person will downplay evidence that does not support their initial conclusion. </p>
<p>Our findings are an important reminder that similar biases affect the processes in our brains which determine how we perceive, and act upon, the world around us.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/175034/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>William Turner was supported by a Research Training Program Scholarship while conducting this research. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stefan Bode receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC DP160103353). </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel Feuerriegel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>New research shows the choices we make, and our perceptions of the world, are biased by our initial impressions.William Turner, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, The University of MelbourneDaniel Feuerriegel, ARC DECRA Fellow, The University of MelbourneStefan Bode, Associate Professor and Head of Decision Neuroscience Laboratory, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1698162021-12-15T22:02:37Z2021-12-15T22:02:37ZSupport and collaboration with health-care providers can help people make health decisions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/437711/original/file-20211215-25-1nxtdxn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=282%2C67%2C3403%2C2084&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Shared decision-making is a patient-centred approach to health choices that considers a patient's values as well as clinical evidence.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an unprecedented <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/science-society-covid19/">interest in science</a>, as people everywhere were <a href="https://penntoday.upenn.edu/news/decision-making-and-anxiety-time-covid-19">faced with making decisions</a> that affected their health. These included decisions such as following public health protective measures, getting vaccinations and accessing health-care services.</p>
<p>All of this has taken place in rapidly evolving, uncertain environments. The events related to the COVID-19 pandemic have highlighted the importance of <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/evalwebs.htm">what constitutes credible information</a> or evidence (research-based information) and how evidence is communicated and used to make decisions. At the start of the pandemic, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01293-x">little was known about COVID-19</a>, and making health decisions was a challenge.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/omicron-faq-how-is-it-different-from-other-variants-is-it-a-super-variant-can-it-evade-vaccines-how-transmissible-is-it-160359">ongoing pandemic</a> has given rise to what is characterized as an “<a href="https://iris.paho.org/bitstream/handle/10665.2/52052/Factsheet-infodemic_eng.pdf">infodemic</a>” due to the sheer quantity of information available, including the rapid spread of misinformation or fake science reporting. From media outlets reporting in a 24/7 news cycle to the reliance on social media influencers, in many instances with a strong editorial bias, the information environment <a href="https://theconversation.com/people-want-to-use-bleach-and-antiseptic-for-covid-and-are-calling-us-for-advice-168660">is bewildering and difficult to navigate</a>.</p>
<p>The amount of information can pose <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201199">daunting challenges</a> to those who are seeking information to make informed health-care decisions. For example, misinformation has been found to negatively affect people’s <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1">willingness to get vaccinated</a> and can lead to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0033354919874074">risky behaviours</a>. </p>
<p>Making decisions that impact health has been a nearly universal experience during the pandemic: it affected everyone. Often these decisions were made <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07019-6">without support from health-care providers</a>. Our health systems have been challenged to better support people to make health-care decisions, such as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.27121">exploring options</a> to determine how to <a href="https://voxeu.org/article/how-nudge-covid-19-vaccination-while-respecting-autonomous-decision-making">support informed, values-based COVID-19 vaccination decisions</a>.</p>
<p>We are members of an interdisciplinary, international team of patient partners, health-care providers, educators and researchers that include the perspectives of patients in a leadership capacity. We have been seeking to understand and advance an approach to preparing patients for health decisions called shared decision-making.</p>
<h2>Support for people to take charge of their health</h2>
<p>“Shared decision-making” is when a person experiencing a health issue <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2005.06.010">works together</a> with their health-care providers to make decisions about <a href="https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/sites/default/files/Making-shared-decision-making-a-reality-paper-Angela-Coulter-Alf-Collins-July-2011_0.pdf">screening, treatments or managing chronic conditions</a>. Shared decision-making upholds <a href="https://www.who.int/news/item/28-05-2016-world-health-assembly-adopts-framework-on-integrated-people-centred-health-services">person-centred care</a> and supports people to take an active role in their health-care decisions. </p>
<p>Standard care provides patients with evidence-based information about health choices. However, with shared decision-making, the person’s individual preferences, beliefs and values are considered in making health decisions, as well as clinical evidence.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/437710/original/file-20211215-13-wza95z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Nurse sitting by patient's bed in hospital" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/437710/original/file-20211215-13-wza95z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/437710/original/file-20211215-13-wza95z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437710/original/file-20211215-13-wza95z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437710/original/file-20211215-13-wza95z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437710/original/file-20211215-13-wza95z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437710/original/file-20211215-13-wza95z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/437710/original/file-20211215-13-wza95z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Shared decision-making upholds person-centred care and supports people to take charge of their health.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Importantly, shared decision-making is a process that supports people to understand the risks and benefits of different options through <a href="https://www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do/our-programmes/nice-guidance/nice-guidelines/shared-decision-making">discussion and information sharing</a> with their health-care providers. </p>
<p>In fact, shared decision-making has been called “<a href="https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/shared_decision_making/files/sdm_pinnacle_of_patient_centered_care.pdf?m=1446225643">the pinnacle</a>” of person-centred care. A key feature of shared decision-making is the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2077-6">exploration of patient values and priorities</a> and it can be facilitated by using evidence-based decision support tools and approaches. </p>
<h2>Decision coaching</h2>
<p>Patient decision aids and decision coaching support people to have an active role in making decisions. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub5">Decision aids</a> include <a href="https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/AZinvent.php">booklets, videos and online tools that</a> make the decision clear, provide options and the pros and cons, and help people clarify what matters to them. </p>
<p>They may be used by patients alone or in consultation with a health-care provider. They have been shown to help people feel more knowledgeable, better informed and clearer about their values. In addition, people probably have a more active role in decision-making and more accurate risk perception.</p>
<p>Our team viewed it as important to determine the unique contribution of decision coaching, an intervention with strong potential to help people prepare for health-care decisions. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013385.pub2">Decision coaching</a> is delivered by trained health-care providers to support people facing decisions, with or without the use of an evidence-based tool (such as a patient decision aid).</p>
<p>We conducted a systematic review to <a href="https://www.cochrane.org/CD013385/COMMUN_decision-coaching-people-making-healthcare-decisions">assess the effects of decision coaching</a>. The review included 28 studies that covered a range of medical conditions with treatment and screening decisions. </p>
<p>While further research is needed on many outcomes, we found that decision coaching may improve participants’ knowledge (related to their <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2013.10.031">condition, options, outcomes, personal values, preferences</a>) when used with evidence-based information. Our findings do not indicate any significant adverse effects (for example, decision regret, anxiety) with the use of decision coaching.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/egJlW4vkb1Y?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Although we began our systematic review before the COVID-19 pandemic, our exploration of decision coaching is even more relevant given the decision demands of the pandemic and accompanying <a href="https://theconversation.com/should-children-get-the-covid-19-vaccine-153431">difficulty of the decisions</a>.</p>
<p>Experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic have shown that, in rapidly changing complex health-care environments, strategies that <a href="http://rimed.org/rimedicaljournal/2020/09/2020-09-10-commentary-knopov.pdf">uphold person-oriented health care</a> are critical. Shared decision-making tools and approaches, ideally using decision aids and decision coaching, can contribute to shaping person-centred health-care services that puts people first and upholds the principle of “<a href="https://ugc.futurelearn.com/uploads/files/19/40/19408460-e688-4a99-84bb-d5114eca9c97/2.3_Making-shared-decision-making-a-reality-paper-Angela-Coulter-Alf-Collins-July-2011_0.pdf">no decision about me, without me</a>.” To make the best health decisions for themselves and their families, people need support and opportunities to work with trusted health-care providers. </p>
<p><em>Maureen Smith, chair of the Cochrane Consumer Network Executive, co-authored this article.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169816/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Janet Jull has received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Ontario Institute for Cancer Research to conduct studies about shared decision making and decision coaching.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dawn Stacey receives funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Canadian Cancer Society to conduct studies about decision coaching. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sascha Köpke receives funding from German Ministry of Research & Education, German Ministry of Health, German Innovation Fund (federal funding), German Statuary Health Insurance ("Techniker Krankenkasse").</span></em></p>Shared decision-making upholds person-centred care and supports people to take charge of their own health: their views, input and experiences are important contributors to health plans.Janet Jull, Assistant Professor, School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen's University, OntarioDawn Stacey, Chair professor, School of Nursing, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of OttawaSascha Köpke, Professor, Institute of Nursing Science, University of CologneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1723622021-12-01T13:31:41Z2021-12-01T13:31:41ZAaron Rodgers dropped the ball on critical thinking – with a little practice you can do better<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434749/original/file-20211130-27-1si37tj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=997%2C449%2C4994%2C3538&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">However Rodgers came to his decision to remain unvaccinated, he did not follow the tenets of critical thinking.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/aaron-rodgers-of-the-green-bay-packers-looks-on-during-news-photo/1356221041">Patrick McDermott/Getty Images Sport via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It was hard to miss the news about Green Bay Packers’ quarterback Aaron Rodgers testing positive for COVID-19 on Nov. 3. Like the <a href="https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-status">vast majority of people</a> currently catching – and dying from – the coronavirus, he was unvaccinated.</p>
<p>A few days after his diagnosis, <a href="https://youtu.be/Y3JU_oAEinQ">Rodgers took to the airwaves</a> to offer a smorgasbord of <a href="https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/aaron-rodgers-covid-pat-mcafee-show-target-woke-mob/1caksb1mfhcrj1dgikrkvttu90">pandemic misinformation and conspiracy theories</a> in defense of his decision to skip the COVID-19 vaccine. </p>
<p>Having listened to many an interview with Rodgers, I found it totally predictable that he began his comments by asserting, “I’m not, you know, some sort of anti-vax, flat-earther.” </p>
<p>But as someone who does research on how people think and decide, it’s what Rodgers said next that caused me to lean in: “I am somebody who’s a critical thinker.” </p>
<p>Critical thinker? The fact is, research on the link between <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13833">critical thinking ability and behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic</a> suggests that Rodgers is the opposite.</p>
<p>For scientists <a href="https://twitter.com/DecisionLab">like me</a> whose job it is to unravel how people instinctively make choices, and then to help them make better ones, critical thinking isn’t just a slogan used to score points. It’s not some after-the-fact justification someone makes to convince others – or themselves – that their opinions or behaviors are sound.</p>
<p>Instead, critical thinking is a pattern of behaviors that happen before someone makes a judgment, like coming to the conclusion that something is risky. Likewise, critical thinking comes before making a decision, like choosing to avoid something judged to be too risky for comfort.</p>
<p>Here’s what it really takes to be a critical thinker.</p>
<h2>Three ingredients for critical thinking</h2>
<p>Critical thinking as a precursor to sound judgments and decisions involves three related elements that are accessible to almost anyone. </p>
<p>First, critical thinking means being able to recognize that there are situations where you must <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/books/review/thinking-fast-and-slow-by-daniel-kahneman-book-review.html">balance your instinctive reactions</a> to what’s going on around you, based on emotions like fear and desire, with the need for a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.37">heavier psychological lift</a>. In these cases, it’s crucial to take note of conflicting objectives and make <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2019.1569107">difficult trade-offs</a>.</p>
<p>Take the pandemic, which, thanks to the arrival of new variants like omicron, has gone into overtime. You may have a strong desire to live your “normal” life as you knew it before COVID-19 started to spread; at the same time, you probably want to keep those around you safe and secure. Knowing where to draw the line between personal comfort and the well-being of those around you means putting your emotions to the side and diving into data so you can better understand the broader consequences of your intended actions.</p>
<p>Second, critical thinking means following some <a href="https://sjdm.org/dmidi/Actively_Open-Minded_Thinking_Beliefs.html">basic principles</a> when you search for and use information. You must be open to and consider more than one solution to a problem, without ignoring or dismissing evidence that goes against your initial beliefs. And you must be willing to change your mind and your behavior in response to new information or insights.</p>
<p>Last, critical thinking means recognizing when you are out of your depth and then looking to legitimate experts for help. In other words, critical thinkers understand when it’s time <a href="http://www.sjdm.org/presentations/2019-Poster-Baron-Jonathan-endorse-AOT-cues.pdf">to outsource critical thinking</a> to others. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434750/original/file-20211130-13-1xdrnl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Rodgers confers with a coach on the sidelines" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434750/original/file-20211130-13-1xdrnl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434750/original/file-20211130-13-1xdrnl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434750/original/file-20211130-13-1xdrnl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434750/original/file-20211130-13-1xdrnl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434750/original/file-20211130-13-1xdrnl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434750/original/file-20211130-13-1xdrnl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434750/original/file-20211130-13-1xdrnl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Consulting those with additional expertise can be an important part of critical thinking.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/green-bay-packers-head-coach-matt-lafleur-talks-to-news-photo/1190913564">Jorge Lemus/NurPhoto via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But this raises an important question: How do you figure out who is an actual expert? Critical thinkers answer this question by not just looking at someone’s stature or credentials. They also assess potential experts’ behaviors with respect to the first two elements of critical thinking. How good is the expert at balancing instinct with the need for more in-depth analysis? And does the expert follow the basic principles that should govern the search for and use of information?</p>
<h2>Everyone loses when critical thinking is sidelined</h2>
<p>Consider the results of a recent study conducted during what scientists around the world agree is a serious public health crisis. In it, my colleagues and I found that people in the U.S. who score high on a scale used to measure critical thinking ability <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13833">judge COVID-19 to pose a real and significant risk</a> to public health. They also placed greater trust in legitimate public health experts, and – importantly – behaved in a manner that is more consistent with <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/prevention.html">pandemic risk management strategies</a> recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.</p>
<p>Judging by his behavior and statements, Aaron Rodgers wouldn’t have belonged in this group. Indeed, Rodgers’ own comments suggest he fumbled his way through the three elements of critical thinking. </p>
<p>In spite of his claim that his decision to remain unvaccinated involved “a lot of time, energy and research,” it seems he <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/kidspost/aaron-rodgers-played-scientist-when-he-should-have-stuck-to-playing-football/2021/11/10/3d3b1b48-36b4-11ec-9bc4-86107e7b0ab1_story.html">neither understood nor weighed the trade-off</a> between the exceedingly slim chance of becoming sick from one of the available vaccines versus the much higher probability of becoming sick – or making others sick – from COVID-19. </p>
<p>And historically, Rodgers hasn’t been shy about <a href="https://torontosun.com/sports/football/nfl/aaron-rodgers-wont-let-woke-cancel-culture-stop-him-from-expressing-himself">dismissing viewpoints</a> that run counter to his own. <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/sports/sporting-scene/the-selfish-individualism-of-aaron-rodgers">Boasting about his COVID-19 infection</a>, Rodgers confessed as much when he said, “I march to the beat of my own drum.” </p>
<p>Finally his success rate when it comes to handing off critical thinking to others is lousy. On COVID-19, he follows the advice of pseudo-experts like <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/01/business/joe-rogan-covid-19.html">Joe Rogan</a> over that of <a href="https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/public-health/open-letter-american-public-covid-19-vaccines">actual medical experts</a> and has chosen to <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/aaron-rodgers-packers-covid-vaccine-ivermectin-woke-mob/">subject himself</a> to a demonstrably dangerous drug, <a href="https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19">ivermectin</a>, instead of a <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/safety-of-vaccines.html">safe and effective vaccine</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434751/original/file-20211130-21-1bao6a1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Rodgers on the ground post-fumble with football out of reach" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434751/original/file-20211130-21-1bao6a1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434751/original/file-20211130-21-1bao6a1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434751/original/file-20211130-21-1bao6a1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434751/original/file-20211130-21-1bao6a1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=368&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434751/original/file-20211130-21-1bao6a1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=462&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434751/original/file-20211130-21-1bao6a1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=462&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434751/original/file-20211130-21-1bao6a1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=462&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rodgers fumbled on critical thinking when he overvalued advice from people who don’t have deep knowledge on coronavirus prevention and treatment.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/kony-ealy-of-the-carolina-panthers-forces-a-fumble-as-he-news-photo/496327324">Grant Halverson/Getty Images Sport via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Unfortunately, Aaron Rodgers is far from alone when it comes to poor critical thinking. And, making matters worse, the implications of uncritical thinking extend well beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>
<p>Indeed, the poster child for an absence of critical thinking is the political divide in the U.S. From Main Street America to the U.S. Capitol, I’d argue that nothing says my-way-or-the-highway like the <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/a-new-report-offers-insights-into-tribalism-in-the-age-of-trump">inflexible tribalism</a> that has infected important policy issues ranging from <a href="http://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/syndicated/fear-racism-public-manipulated-politics-tribalism/">inequality</a> and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/15/the-climate-change-movement-must-overcome-political-tribalism">climate change</a> to <a href="https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2019/09/14/david-burns-why-is-gun/">guns</a> and <a href="https://ldi.upenn.edu/our-work/research-updates/health-care-reform-in-the-age-of-partisan-deadlock-and-tribal-politics/">health care</a>. Balancing fast-acting emotion with the slow burn of analysis, a willingness to change your mind and compromise, and the courage to admit you are not an expert – and to trust those who are – seem as far away in politics today <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/1968-and-2020-lessons-from-americas-worst-year-so-far/612415/">as they have been in decades</a>.</p>
<h2>Training camp for critical thinking</h2>
<p>On the bright side, and with a little practice, people can learn to think critically. Unlike other tasks that require highly specialized skills – like playing the position of quarterback in the NFL – critical thinking is well within the reach of nearly anyone willing to put in the reps.</p>
<p>Studies show, for example, that critical thinking can be activated in the moment just before certain <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1548379">judgments</a> or <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101964">choices</a> need to be made. Researchers also know that the <a href="https://sjdm.org/dmidi/Actively_Open-Minded_Thinking_Beliefs.html">basic principles</a> of critical thinking <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1993.tb00731.x">can be taught</a>, even to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/109019819101800302">young children and adolescents</a>. And, for complicated judgments and choices, people can take advantage of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es4036286">decision-support tools</a> that help them clarify their objectives, consider relevant information, evaluate a wide range of options and understand the compromises that come with choosing one possibility over another.</p>
<p>Deploying the skills of critical thinking ultimately requires one more important ingredient, though, and this one can’t easily be taught: courage. It takes courage to break from your closely held opinions and, especially, from the relative sanctuary offered by your social or political circle. And it takes courage to publicly change your mind and your behavior.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434753/original/file-20211130-19-1t7l30r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Rodgers initiates a pass with an opposing player coming at him" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434753/original/file-20211130-19-1t7l30r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434753/original/file-20211130-19-1t7l30r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434753/original/file-20211130-19-1t7l30r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434753/original/file-20211130-19-1t7l30r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434753/original/file-20211130-19-1t7l30r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434753/original/file-20211130-19-1t7l30r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434753/original/file-20211130-19-1t7l30r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It takes courage to be a critical thinker, especially when you might take a hit for it.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/aaron-rodgers-of-the-green-bay-packers-throws-a-pass-while-news-photo/1293522412">Dylan Buell/Getty Images Sport via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But here too there’s a bright side. Changing your mind and behavior because you thought critically about something doesn’t mean that your earlier opinions and behaviors were a mistake. On the contrary, it’s a public display that you learned something important and new. And that, at least as much as success on the <a href="https://www.wiscnews.com/sports/football/professional/frozen-tundra-the-5-coldest-games-in-green-bay-packers-history/collection_17677ba1-d47b-565a-9fb1-bb89327ba36e.html">frozen tundra</a> of Rodgers’ home field in Green Bay, is worthy of respect and admiration.</p>
<p>[<em>You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors.</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?source=inline-youresmart">You can read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/172362/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joe Árvai has received funding from The National Science Foundation, NASA, and NOAA. In addition to his work at the University of Southern California, he serves as a member of the U.S. EPA’s Science Advisory Board, and as an advisor to a broad range of government agencies, businesses and NGOs.</span></em></p>Critical thinking means seeking out new information – especially facts that might run contrary to what you believe – and being willing to change your mind. And it’s a teachable skill.Joe Árvai, Dana and David Dornsife Professor of Psychology and Director of the Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and SciencesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.