“When I ask my audiences this question, they generally say it’s just something they heard but they have no idea where or from who. Yet they are very confident that this is true. That should be proof enough that the way we form beliefs is pretty goofy.” – Annie Duke
The quote above pertains to the belief that male baldness is passed down from the maternal grandfather. Turns out, your Mom’s Dad is just “a variable” in explaining baldness, not “the variable”. People’s belief in this is based on hearsay, not objective evidence of a meaningful sample size. The point Duke is making in “Thinking in Bets” is that we form our beliefs rather indiscriminately.
Why?
The evolutionary view of this belief formation process hinges on our environment. Early in the development of Homo Sapiens belief formation was dominated by what is referred to as perceptual belief formation. Quite simply, what you see is what is true. There was no value in pausing to question if that tiger was actually a tiger. You just navigated around it.
As methods of communication proliferated, we gained the ability to learn about things we had not actually experienced. This is abstract belief formation. This new ability was not accompanied by a change in how beliefs solidify in our mind.
Given the way our decision-making software was developed, with perceptual belief formation processes adopted by abstract belief formation, we believe much of what we read and hear.
A secondary explanation, similar to the cognitive ease thesis underlying all our cognitive biases, is that our evolution prioritized efficiency, which some believe is a function of our species starting as hunter-gatherers. Not knowing when your next meal was coming was a part of life. The scarce resources we were able to obtain needed to be used efficiently to survive.
Our brains utilize a lot of energy (20% of total energy used), more than any other organ. So, instead of spending energy filtering information based on accuracy, we’ve evolved to take things at face value. It’s hardcoded into our software.
Poor Updaters
“Even though our default is true, if we were good at updating our beliefs based on new information, our haphazard belief formation process might cause relatively few problems. Sadly, this is not the way it works.” -Annie Duke
All of us are subject to confirmation bias. This is the tendency to search for and filter information in a way that supports your pre-existing beliefs. We naturally protect the status quo instead of working toward a more accurate sense of what’s true.
This poses some potentially significant problems for the incorrect beliefs you already hold. Confirmation bias creates a feedback loop that systematically strengthens your beliefs, whether they are true or not. This means your incorrect beliefs are self-reinforcing. That’s problematic.
“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” – Mark Twain
Room for Improvement
To recap, we quickly form beliefs based on the information we consume. The information is more often than not accepted as “true”, regardless of its accuracy. Once a belief is formed, our cognitive habits work to protect and even reinforce that belief. This perpetuates false beliefs and overconfidence.
Beliefs are a central component of decision making. Based on the logic above, there’s clearly room for improvement.
In a world where communication is easier than ever, this should catch your attention. The number of people pontificating on topics of all kinds is growing exponentially. As touched on in The Curation Economy, your information sources may not have the best intentions. Getting more selective about what you let in the door is the first line of defense.
The more difficult strategy to implement is to engage in more falsification. In order to combat confirmation bias, you or someone on your team has to play devil’s advocate. Take the other side of the argument. Test assumptions. This is easier said than done. It takes a lot of time and effort to examine both sides of a debate. It introduces cognitive dissonance and you have to check your ego at the door when done in a team setting.
If your goal is to have an accurate view of the world and make better decisions then taking these steps is worth the effort and a source of competitive edge.