Why we miss good ideas and fall into the arms of scammers

Why it happens

Submission is more important than information

People are ready to listen to any nonsense, if presented correctly. This cognitive bias was discovered in a 1973 experiment and called the Fox effect.

Three groups of specialists with advanced degrees in psychiatry, psychology and sociology listened to a lecture by the actor, introduced as Dr. Myron Fox. The lecture was scientific in style, but easy to follow. It had little practical value, many neologisms, inconsistencies and deviations from the topic. All this was presented with warmth, lively humor and charisma. Despite the insignificance of the material, both the professor and his lectures were given high marks.

Another similar experiment was conducted on students. Each group was given three lectures: the first covered as many as 26 points, the other - 14, and the third - only four. One group was served all this in a boring manner, the other - in the style of "Dr. Fox", with humor and charisma. Students from the first group rated the lectures on the amount of material: informative speeches seemed to them better than those where they didn’t really tell anything.

But the students from the "Dr. Fox" group did not see the difference: they liked all the lectures about the same - both those that were saturated with topics, and almost empty, with coverage of only four questions.

In all the experiments, it seemed to people that they had really listened to good material and gained valuable experience. The pleasure of the lecture hid its low value.

And this explains how dishonest people manage to deceive both ordinary people and professionals.

For example, the elusive con man Frank Abagnale, who wrote the book Catch Me If You Can about his life, worked without any education as a lecturer in sociology, lawyer and chief pediatrician. Charisma and tremendous self-confidence did their job.

There is also the opposite effect: information is automatically recognized as bad if it is expressed by the wrong person. This cognitive bias is called reactive depreciation.

Information doesn't matter without trust

The reactive depreciation effect was discovered in a 1991 experiment. American scientists asked people on the street what they thought about the mutual nuclear disarmament of the United States and Russia. When people told passers-by that the idea belonged to Reagan, 90% agreed that it was fair and useful for the United States.

When the authorship of the idea was attributed to unnamed analysts, the support of the population dropped to 80%. If the Americans were told that Gorbachev was proposing to disarm, only 44% supported the idea.

Another experiment was conducted with the Israelis. People were asked how they felt about the idea of making peace with Palestine. If the participant heard that the idea came from the government of Israel, it seemed to him sound, if from Palestine it did not.

Reactive depreciation blinds you, forces you to pass judgment without evaluating an idea, and to reject good proposals.

During negotiations, it does not allow finding an alternative option that will suit both. This is how useless arguments arise, in which hatred is born instead of truth. Opponents do not listen to each other, knowingly prioritizing and recognizing the opponent as narrow-minded and unworthy.

How to deal with this bias

You can overcome these cognitive errors and use them to your advantage.

Be as objective as possible

If you want to appreciate the information, try to detach from the one who presents it. Deliberately forget who this person is, pretend that you do not know each other. Apply this wherever it is important to find the best solution, and not find out who is cooler.

During a brainstorming session, meeting, or collaborative project, always evaluate ideas, not their source. This way you are more likely to get to the truth.

Do not argue in vain

For the truth to be born in an argument, opponents must respect each other. If one side suffers from delusions of grandeur, there will be no sense. Is it worth wasting words?

Check people

If the students knew that they were not a professor, but an actor, his words would not have been so favorably received. Many fraudulent schemes succeed because people are driven by confidence and charisma. Trust the person instead of testing him.

Competence testing is a great habit.

Before you pay, find out where the seminar speaker and the author of the book come from, what the fitness trainer and business coach graduated from.

Do not think one-sidedly

You can endlessly complain that people are stupid and prefer external tinsel to real knowledge, but this will not change the state of affairs.

Your presentation can be very informative, but if it is not lively, the audience will fall asleep before getting to the point. You can be a very good specialist, but if you lack the charm and ability to communicate with people, you will be overshadowed by the less intelligent, but more pleasant.

No need to complain about fate - do everything to be charismatic and present information in an interesting way.