The Pygmalion Effect: How Expectations Change Reality

An excursion into history

Psychologists Robert Rosenthal and Lenora Jacobson conducted an experiment: at the beginning of the school year, they singled out students from different grades of elementary school who, according to the test results, were more talented and had a higher IQ than their classmates. In fact, they were not found to have any outstanding abilities and the students were randomly selected, however, the teachers were told otherwise. Retesting at the end of the year showed that the results of the "gifted" students improved on average, and the IQ indicator increased.

According to psychologists, high expectations of teachers influenced the progress of students.

The teachers, expecting high results, approached the process of teaching the selected group differently, allowing more freedom of creativity and trying to inspire students. Rosenthal and Jacobson attributed this phenomenon to the Pygmalion effect.

Another example from history, preceding Rosenthal's experiment, is the Clever Gantz horse, owned by the teacher and horse breeder William von Austin. The animal responded to the questions asked with a hoof kick with an accuracy of 90%. The horse added, multiplied and named the time and date. Naturally, this aroused interest not only among onlookers, but also among psychologists.

Psychologist and biologist Oskar Pfungst came to meet Gantz personally. It turned out that the animal not only does not understand human speech, but is also incapable of performing mathematical calculations. So how did you get these 90% accuracy? The fact is that both the host and the audience gave non-verbal cues when Gantz issued the correct answer. Pfungst found that as soon as Gantz reached the correct answer, the questioner lowered his head. And if blinkers were put on the horse, then he was wrong.

How the Pygmalion effect works

The fact is that our brains have a hard time distinguishing between perception and expectation. Sociologist Robert Murton has described self-fulfilling prophecies, which include the Pygmalion Effect, as self-hypnosis. Having initially a belief about ourselves or others, we influence reality and make it so that it becomes true. This psychological phenomenon allows you to purposefully or accidentally influence reality.

Another experiment by Rebecca Curtis and Kim Miller confirms this. In two groups, students were paired. The members of one group were put in the head with a deliberately false statement that they were sympathetic to their partner, and the opposite was true for the members of the other. After that, the couples were invited to chat. And the result paid off.

Students who believed that they were sympathetic to their partner were more compliant in conversation, made contact, and the manner of communication was more pleasant than in those couples who thought otherwise.

In addition, students who thought they liked their partner actually garnered more sympathy than members from opposing couples.

Surely you have been exposed to the Pygmalion Effect more than once without noticing it yourself. For example, thinking that we will not cope with a certain task, we give up, and our behavior and actions lead to real failure. In the opposite situation, if you are expected to solve a problem, suggesting that everything will work out and you will cope, the actions and the result will be different.

The Pygmalion effect in practice

In fact, the Pygmalion effect is a secret weapon in the realm of control. People's expectations have an impact on our actions, thoughts, perceptions of opportunities and achievements. John Sterling Livingston, a lecturer at Harvard Business School, founder of the US Department of Defense Logistics Management Institute, expressed his opinion on the Pygmalion effect in management. In his work, he developed the idea of the influence of expectations on actions and results, paying particular attention to the expectations of managers from subordinates.

John Sterling Livingston Lecturer at Harvard Business School, Founder of the US Department of Defense Logistics Management Institute

If the manager has high expectations for his subordinates, then productivity will be high. If expectations are low, then productivity will decrease.

Livingston believed that managers should understand how the Pygmalion effect works, because the results of employees directly depend on the expectations of managers. A good leader, according to Livingston, must have high expectations, while an ineffective manager cannot. He made a connection between the self-esteem of the leader and the expectations that he shows to subordinates. A self-confident manager tends to expect high results from employees, while a bad manager is less confident in himself and even more so cannot hope to get something supernatural from his employees.

To translate into results, expectations must first be achievable and realistic.

John Sterling Livingston Lecturer at Harvard Business School, Founder of the US Department of Defense Logistics Management Institute

If subordinates do not meet the expectations of their superiors, which are close to their own, productivity and drive for success are reduced.

Setting sky-high goals that the employee cannot physically fulfill will not only not help improve productivity, but will completely reduce labor efficiency.

The presentation of the book "Traps of Thinking" about the brain-deceiver will take place in Moscow

The Pygmalion Effect is one of the many thinking traps we fall into on a daily basis. Lifehacker has a book on why this happens and how to avoid it. The editorial board studied more than 300 studies on the work of the brain and the human psyche and found scientific explanations for a wide variety of thinking errors. All materials in the book “Traps of thinking. Why our brain plays with us and how to beat it”are supplemented with simple tips. Put them into practice and don't let your brain fool you.

Expectations versus reality: 13 photos of a failed manicure

And they really paid for it. On the subreddit, "" people share a variety of failures: from food that does not look like the photo on the menu, to the questionable quality of clothing. But if the dish will almost certainly still be tasty, and the clothes can be returned, this will not work with a poor-quality manicure.