Optimism Bias

Optimism Bias

Time for Reflection

Have you ever

• been consumed by that "it can't happen to me" feeling ?
• felt totally immune to everything negative ? 
• had a feeling of invulnerability ?
• thought that you can't be a victim of a layoff, can't suffer from any type of serious illness, can't meet with any mishap, you will get that coveted promotion or award above others, and similar ones that gives you the feeling of being better than you peers   

If you have ever been affected by any of the above, then that's a clear indication that Optimism Bias is at play.

Definition and Background

Optimism Bias refers to the belief that our chances of experiencing negative events in life are lower and our chances of experiencing positive events in life are higher than those of our peers. This belief suggests that we are immune to any ill-happening in life and less likely to suffer from any misfortune and more likely to attain success than what reality would suggest.

Misfortune is a part of our day-to-day living and no one is spared by it. Living in this highly dynamic VUCA (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex , Ambiguous) and assuming yourself to be immune to anything negative in the environment is but living in an illusion. This illusion is what keeps us away from the reality.

Optimism Bias occurs for both positive events and negative events, though the bias is stronger for negative events. About 80% of people across all age groups and gender, suffer from Optimism Bias.

The "Optimism Bias" phenomenon was initially described by Weinstein (1980). In a study conducted by Weinstein, 100 college students compared their own chances of experiencing 45 different health-and life-threatening problem with the chances of their peers. They showed a significant optimism bias for 34 of these hazards, considering their own chances to be below average.

For negative events, majority of the college students believed that they have a lower tendency than other students, whereas in case of positive events, majority of the college students felt they have a higher tendency than other students.

Tali Sharot, Professor, University College, London has worked extensively in the area of Optimism (Bias) and also authored book on the subject. Her work on Optimism grew out of a keen interest in the positive side of human nature and that's what prompted her to survey and interview people about their memory of 9/ 11 . Few of her findings about Optimism Bias are as below:

• We are more optimistic than realistic
• Collectively, we may grow pessimistic but privately, we are still optimistic
• Optimism runs across all cultures, irrespective of any race, religion or socio-economic bracket
• Overly positive assumptions can lead to disastrous miscalculations
• Optimism bias protects us and inspires us
• Optimism may be hardwired by evolution into the human brain

During her TED talk on Optimism Bias, Talia Sharot calls Optimism Bias as "cognitive illusion" and also as long as we are aware of our own optimism bias, we can protect our actions from its harms.

The TED talk of Talia Sharot can be viewed at the following link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQ6JJjyYHbk

Why/ How Does Optimism Bias occur ?

The Optimism Bias occurs because people tend to overestimate the probability of positive events and underestimate the probability of negative events happening to them in the future.

Optimism starts with one of the most potent ability humans have, which is the "mental time travel". This ability is crucial to our survival and enables us to move through time and space in our mind. The "mental time travel" helps us to plan ahead by setting goals, drawing then big picture, anticipating problems, and related things.

The four factors that cause a person to be optimistically biased are

• their desired end state - the goals people want and the outcomes they wish to see

• their cognitive mechanisms - mental processes that guide judgements and decision-making

• the information they have about themselves versus others - people have more information about their own risks compared to the risks faced by others and this lack of relevant information about others results in drawing wrong conclusions and making erroneous judgements 

• overall mood - person in a sad mood (anger, frustration, etc.) tend to exhibit a low tendency towards optimism bias whereas person in a happy mood tends to display a high tendency towards optimism bias

Impact of Optimism Bias

Talia Sharot highlights that being optimistic leads to success and health benefits, thereby reducing anxiety and stress. She gives three reasons about why it's good to be an optimist

• Whatever happens, whether you succeed or fail, people with high expectations always feel better
• Regardless of the outcome, the pure act of anticipation makes us happy
• Optimism changes objective reality.

Few other key positive impacts of Optimism Bias are 

• enhanced well being
• enhanced self-belief
• anticipating goodness

Few of the key negative impacts of Optimism Bias

• underestimation of risks
• leads to poor decision making
• engaging in risky behavior
• making poor choices
• illusion of being in control
• reflecting little on past decisions
• enhanced health risk due to a tendency to skip necessary tests, checkups, etc

Overcome/ Addressing Optimism Bias

• Experiencing events in real reduces optimism bias 
• Building objectivity while doing comparisons which means thinking beyond the general stereotypes
• Being a skeptic of our own ideas and opinions to avoid overconfidence and over-estimation
• Gathering proper and requisite information and relying on a fact-driven approach while taking decisions 
• Self-Analysis on different aspects of our life indicates the composite nature of our personality 
• SWOT helps provide insight into one's "weaknesses" and thereby a realisation that everything is not positive always
• Engaging in group/ team tasks builds insights about other person's capability and helps be more realistic in our approach
• Developing EI (Emotional Intelligence) skills helps with better self-awareness and others' awareness too.

A yin-yang belief prepares us better for any future eventuality !

Negativity Bias

Negativity Bias

Time for Reflection

What stands out in our mind about

• an argument we had with with your friend, spouse, partner on some serious matter
• a feedback we received from your boss/ superior about you about your performance
• audience's reaction to a presentation/ speech/ talk we delivered
• the advice you received from your parents, and elders/ seniors when you messed up an important task
• a commitment broken by a person you trusted a lot 
• a partnership that ended not quite "amicably"

The answer is - some "unpleasant thought/ memory" related to the episode is what tends to occupy our mind space.  It isn't the case that there are no pleasant or happy memories associated with any of the above episodes; it's just that the "unpleasant or unhappy" memories seem to get recalled faster in our memory than the "pleasant or happy" memories. What's getting exhibited here is a case of  "Negativity Bias". 

Definition and Background

Negativity Bias is defined as "the tendency of the negative things to stick longer in memory than the positive things". In other words, it refers to the notion that even when of equal intensity, things (thoughts, emotions, events, etc.) of a negative nature have a greater effect on us (our behavior and cognition) than the ones that are neutral or positive in nature. So, basically, it means "bad stuff sticks to our memory better than the good stuff".

There has been a lot of research on Negativity Bias. John Cacioppo at the University of Chicago, conducted study on negativity bias and in one such study he recorded the electrical activity in the brain (cerebral cortex) when the subjects(participants) were presented with both, positive and negative stimuli. His study showed that there was a greater surge in electrical neural activity when the stimuli presented was negative as compared to when the stimuli presented was positive. The study concluded that our personality (behavior and attitude) is influenced more with bad news than good news or neutral news.

Findings of Vaish et al. suggested that infants displayed a strong negativity bias in social referencing behavior.

In 2001, researchers Paul Rozin and Edward Royzman identified 4 types of negativity biases which are - 1. Negative Potency, 2. Negative Gradients, 3. Negative Dominance, and 4. Negative Differentiation

Why/ How does Negativity Bias occur ?

By default, our brain is accustomed to pay more attention to negative events in our environment,  which, in some way, pose danger or harm to us.

The Negative Bias has its roots in human evolution, when our ancestors used it as a survival technique. While going hunting for food, humans were attuned to "flight-or-fight" mode, an outcome  of their anticipation of a looming danger. So, it was this "danger anticipation" approach that kept the men on their toes always, prepared to face any eventuality. 

Rick Hanson, a renowned psychologist who has studied/ researched Negativity Bias shares an interesting insight about Amygdala, a part of the brain responsible for processing of emotions, uses about two-third of its neurons looking for the negative stuff and when found, it stores them the related negative experiences and event very quickly in the memory. This is in direct contrast to encountering of positive things/ news by Amygdala, where it takes about a 12-15 seconds to shift the related experience and events from the short term memory to long term memory.

More About Negativity Bias

Negativity Bias served an important evolutionary purpose by aiding our ancestors in their survival bid and because of this bias we are out of harm whenever confronted with something negative. Our brain has developed certain systems that makes it impossible for us to not notice any danger and respond to it. We tend to give more weightage to negative/ bad experience than positive/ good one.

Our brain is built with greater sensitivity to unpleasant news and this could be gauged from the greater surge in electrical activity in our brain whenever it encounters a negative stimuli. Our brain, subconsciously, places more significance on negative events than the positive ones, affecting

cognition and behavior.

Researchers assert that negative emotions has a 3X (three times) stronger impact than the positive ones. Some contend its 5X (five times). So, to negate the impact of any negative/ bad act, we need to counter it with three positive/ good acts.

A clear indication of the existence of Negativity Bias is visible  through our brain activity, where more electrical activity shows up in brain scans in response to negative stimuli that a positive stimuli.

Another interesting thing to note about the role that amygdala plays in negativity bias is that negative information is sent directly to LTM (Long Term Memory) to invoke the "flight or fight" response, whereas positive information takes longer to reach LTM as the information passes through STM(Short Term Memory) also before being sent further to LTM.

Impact of Negativity Bias

Negativity Bias impacts us not only at an individual personality level but also in our relationships at both, personal and professional front. It affects our our attention and memory which ultimately impacts our behaviour, attitude and emotional self.

Negativity bias renders a person worried, anxious, stressed and depressed. The person tends to develop a pessimistic outlook towards life and is always absorbed in anticipating problems. The bias affects affects the performance as most of the energy and effort is spent in thwarting seen and unseen obstacles. The person may not be able to identify even easy and obvious opportunities because of the focus on the negative/ bad and may get stagnant, unable to realise goals and move ahead in life. The bias could lead a person to a state of becoming obsessive with something really negative. 

Negativity Bias can adversely affect a person's self-esteem and confidence 

But there's a flip side (positive side) to negativity bias and that is - it keeps us alert and focused always. It makes us cautious and leaves us well prepared for the imminent danger. This bias acts as a saviour in matters of extreme danger (especially when it's a matter of life and death or something as serious). The presence of this bias may also provide us with better insight and additional perspective to things and situations. 

  

Overoming/ Addressing Negativity Bias

Because of the evolutionary nature of the bias, it cannot be undone but we can definitely address it by changing the way we interact with the stimuli. We can thrive on the following 2 facts 

• Neurons that fire together, wire together which means that if we can get a bunch of neurons firing together for positive experiences, that will build new neural structures.

• "Neuroplastic" nature of the brain which means that through repeated action of a similar type,  brain has the ability to change itself. 

Rick Hanson, the renowned neuroscientist and psychologist, suggests a 3-step process to address the Negativity Bias. This process is termed as "Take in the Good". The three steps are as mentioned below

• Let positive facts become positive experiences. Always be open to notice and cherish, even the small, little moments of success and happiness. 

• Savour the positive experience for 10-20-30 seconds. Let the experience get as intense as possible.

• Intend and sense that the positive experience is soaking into you, becoming a part of you   

As per some scientists/ researchers, "Self-Talk" plays a key role in minimizing the impact of Negativity Bias. "How we talk to ourselves about our experiences" goes a long way in addressing the negativity bias

Grant Benner, Mt. Sinai Beth Israel Medical Center, has suggested the following steps to address the Negativity Bias

• Awareness - Recognize what's happening when negative pattern gets activated and then try to break the pattern by doing something each and every time, even if it is very small

• Stop Overanalysing things

• Replace negative self-talk with positive self-talk

• Savour - Celebrate small victories

At times, it pays to be Positive about Negativity !

Money Illusion Bias

Money Illusion Bias

Time For Reflection

Let's look at a hypothetical scenario

Looking back at our investments which yielded us say,  a certain x% of returns, don't we all feel happy about getting a bit richer with that ROI - an additional x% of what we initially invested ?

Let's do a reality check - During the period when our investment increased by x%, the inflation also increased by, say (x+1)% .  Now, the question is - If we factor in the inflation, did we calculate the  profit on our initial investment correctly? The answer would be NO, because the accrued amount (of my initial investment) does not hold the same purchasing value as my initial investment at that point in time and i may not be able to buy as much as i could with my (invested) money earlier !

This exactly is what "money illusion bias" does to us in reality. We forget to factor in the inflation factor and end up calculating the return on out investments incorrectly.

Definition and Background

Money Illusion Bias refers to the tendency of people to think of money in terms of nominal value (face value) rather than real value (purchasing power). Here, nominal value refers to the price expressed in money of the day and real value refers to the price which adjusts for the effect of inflation.   

The bias happens when the numerical/ face value of money is mistaken for its purchasing power(real value) and the increased nominal amount of money creates the illusion that we have become wealthier. 

The term "Money Illusion" was coined by Irving Fisher in 1920s and he also wrote a book titled "The Money Illusion" in 1928, where he clearly defined the problem that many people think in terms of nominal values instead of real values, or as the case may be, in a mix of the two. The concept of money illusion was popularised by John Maynard Keynes.

Why/ How Does Money Illusion occur ?

The "Money Illusion" occurs because a particular amount of money, at a specific point of time, is not not worth the same amount today. The main reason is because of the effect of inflation. 

When some nominal income increases, it can generate the mistaken feeling of purchasing power having gone up, when in fact, monetary erosion due to inflation may be decreasing the purchasing power in real terms 

More About Money Illusion

The concept of Money Illusion can be understood with this quote by Warren Buffet - 

"It is not how many dollars you have, but how many cheeseburgers you can buy. In other words, if stocks double but so does the price of milk, gas and cornflakes, you haven't actually gained anything in real net worth."

Eldar Shafir, Peter A. Diamond and Amor Tversky (1997)  have provided empirical evidence for the existence of Money Illusion Effect, and it has been shown to affect behaviour in a variety of experimental and real-world situations.

Shafir et al. also state that money illusion influences economic behaviour in 3 main ways which are as mentioned below :

• Price Stickiness - Nominal prices are slow to change even when inflation causes real prices or costs to rise.

• Contracts and Laws are not indexed to inflation as much as one would rationally expect

• Social disclosure, in formal media and more generally, reflects some confusion regarding real and nominal value. 

The "Money Illusion" influences people's perceptions of outcomes. Experiments have shown that people generally perceive an approximate 2% cut in nominal value with no change in monetary value as unfair, whereas, a rise of 2% in nominal value where there's a 4% inflation as fair, despite them being almost rational equivalents. Also, in money illusion, nominal changes in price can influence demand even if real prices have remained constant. 

Many economists contend that money illusion does not exist and people act rationally i.e. they think in terms of real value, by accounting for inflation/ deflation, with regard to their money 

The presence of Money Illusion could be seen in areas like Wages/ Salary, Housing, Stocks/ Bonds and any cash flow including dividends and interest. more. Talking about the impact of Money Illusion, it it could lead to 

• underestimation of the need to save
• sharp reduction in purchasing power
• poor economic choices
• inaccurate view of prices and costs

Though there is no easy solution for the money illusion bias and the most we can do is to adjust any nominal value increase with respect to the inflation.

"Investment adjusted with Inflation" is the best antidote to "Money Illusion"

Loss Aversion Bias

Loss Aversion Bias

Time for Reflection

How do you approach decision-making for situations/ events which provide equal potential for moving forward as for going backward ? 

• Do you keep an eye on the advantages/ benefits that the situations/ event has to offer ? 

OR 

• Do you adopt a risk-averse approach and in such a situation and focus more on minimizing loss than on maximizing gain ? 

Here's another one - 

Which of the following deal/ offers do you find more attractive ?

• a deal offering 20% flat discount on your favourite product

OR 

• a deal offering 15% discount but additionally building exclusivity by suggesting you to hurry up and not lose out this unique opportunity to own a piece of your favourite product before the stocks run out !

If you are the one who prefers a "play safe" option, even when it is at the cost of growth, you are bound to select an approach which involves less risk and which focuses more on the aspect of loss.  Even in retrospect, while you recall addressing some key events of your life, maybe an important investment or taking a call on the relationship front or about a new assignment/ job, the one common thing in your approach across each of them(event) must have been the tendency to try to "avoid losses". These losses could be of any nature, such as financial, materialistic, emotional, time-based, etc. This tendency of  "avoiding losses" is an indication of the presence of a bias, known as "Loss Aversion". 

Let's look at this bias in more detail 

Definition and Background

"Loss Aversion" is defined as the tendency of the people to prefer avoiding losses than acquiring equivalent gains. When confronted with a scenario/ event, providing equal potential for loss and gain, we tend to select a "loss avoiding" option always, when impacted with this bias.  

Loss Aversion is an important concept in the field of Behavioral Finance and holds the key to successful investment. The more the anticipated loss, the more we tend to hold onto that investment.

In 1979, psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman developed a successful behavioural model, called prospect theory, using the principles of loss aversion, to explain how people assess uncertainty. The experiments carried out also showed that in people, the pain of losing is psychologically about twice as strong as the pleasure of gaining and therefore a human tendency to focus more on avoiding loss.

Why/ How Does Loss Aversion Bias occur?

Loss Aversion Bias occurs

• because of our innate need/ desire to avoid losses than to achieve gains. 
• We, humans, are afraid or losing and want to avoid the psychological pain associated with losing/ mission out 
• because of our(human's) basic instinct for survival, our natural response is always more towards addressing threats than opportunities.

Indicators/ Symptoms of Loss Aversion Bias

• Avoiding changing the "status-quo"
• Focusing solely on the "loss" aspect
• Having tendency to delay things and putting timely closure on them
• Hanging on to things till they result in psychological, emotional pain
• Delay in letting go of things that are not providing desired results 

Impact of Loss Aversion Bias

The bias has an impact, both at the individual and organisational level

Of the many negative impact of the bias, few of the key ones are  

• Develop the habit of procrastination
• Adversely impacts rational decision making
• Makes us vulnerable about our possessions. The more we have, the more vulnerable we become
• Builds a pessimistic and defensive approach towards life where avoidance becomes the mantra 
• Limits growth and development because of preference to stay in "comfort zone"
• Results in bigger losses than necessary as the tendency is to hold on till the "closure"
• Results in stress as the losses add up 

At the organisational level, the bias could lead to huge financial losses and may even lead to bankruptcy. 

On the flip side, i.e. on a positive note, this bias helps us be more cautious in life, avoid taking risks, develops patience

Real-Life Examples of Loss Aversion Bias

This bias is used to great effect in many areas of our life, both at an individual level and organisational level. Some examples are  

• Consumerism, where it is used to trigger impulsive buying through strategies like
• End of Season Sale
• Stock clearance (only few items left)

• Human Resource, in areas like 
• Employee Motivation, where, still, "carrot and stick" approach is used as a strategy for employee motivation
• Recruitment, where, a better pitch to the candidate would revolve more around what they would lose out by not being a part of the organisation than what additionally they can hope to gain over their present assignment 

• Decision-making  at an individual level, where the "odds in favour" are the same as "odd against". It could be
• Making an investment decision, whether to stick to existing investment, which has started showing signs of downward spiraling or to opt for a new investment
• Making a decision about moving out of an existing relationship which is in troubled waters

Overcoming/ Addressing Loss Aversion Bias 

• Using a framework for decision-making to ensure that all the associated parameters related to the context are captured  
• Goal-setting would help create SMART goals resulting in being focused on what needs to be aimed at and by when relevant actions to be taken and desired results to be achieved. This would help pay attention to possible gains instead of loss
• Develop the habit of seeing the Big Picture to ensure clarity about the vision
• Be open to Fail, Learn and Move on. It's not always that we may get every thing right 
• Emotional detachment from the event to ensure a more rational decision making process
• Developing a mindset/ attitude of Abundance rather than of Safety
• Perspective Changing is a good strategy to quantify the risk to a more relatable unit for comparison 

"Avoiding Loss" does not equate to "Embracing Gain" !

Kantian Fairness Tendency

Kantian Fairness Tendency

Time for Reflection

Don't we all go about living our life with this one basic expectation that life be fair to us always and haven't we all followed the "law of reciprocity" so diligently, just to ensure that we get a fair treatment as always.

The "Law of Reciprocity" principle may be understood by the popular quote "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". This means if we want to get goodness, we need to give it to others first. 

Now, let me ask you a few pertinent questions  - 

• Do you think life has always been fair to you ?

• Recall few key instances from your life when you felt that life played unfair with you?

• From among the few instances that you recalled, did you feel that somewhere when life was being unfair to you, it was still being fair to someone else -some people other than you ?

Sincere thought to the above would reveal that inspite of our best efforts and attempts, life does not always play fair with us and therefore, to expect it to be fair to us always is to let the bias of "Kantian Fairness Tendency" play in our life ! 

Definition and Background

The "Kantian Fairness Tendency" refers to the expectation that life is fair and is based on the philosophical framework created by the 18th century German philosopher called Immanuel Kant. His "categorical imperative" or golden rule required humans to follow those behavior patterns that, if followed by all others, would make the surrounding human system work best for everybody. 

Charlie Munger is credited with popularising the concept of "Kantian Fairness Tendency" in his book titled "Poor Charlie's Almanack", where he talks about 25 tendencies that lead humans to make bad decisions.

"The craving for perfect fairness causes a lot of problems in system function. Some systems should be made deliberately unfair to individuals because they'll be fairer on average to all of us" - Charlie Munger 

Why/ How Does Kantian Fairness Tendency occur ?

The key reason for its occurence is our held belief that life is fair and our reliance on "law of reciprocity" to live. When the law of reciprocity doesn't give us the desired results, it leads to a conflict with our existing belief system.

Indicators/ Symptoms of Kantian Fairness Tendency

When our actions follow the law of reciprocity, expecting a fair treatment in return for rendering the same to others. 

Impact of Kantian Fairness Tendency

Life is not always fair and to expect it to be so is to give space to frustration and many other negative emotions. Once these emotions creep inside us, it adversely affects our personality, impacting our emotional and mental health aspects.  

Real-Life Examples of Kantian Fairness Tendency

There will be plenty of these from our lives, where we showed human goodness, in the hope that the same will be reciprocated in some way, by someone. 

Overcoming/Addressing Kantian Fairness Tendency

Few of the ways in which we can mitigate the effects of this bias are 

• Firstly address our existing belief about life being fair. Exposing ourself, through news and social media, to the cases and examples highlighting the other aspect would bring in the desired change in our belief system

• Be open to take decisions that are best for the majority, even at our own cost, sometimes

• Get away with reliance on the principle of "law of reciprocity" to live life. Perhaps, start living life on a more rational principle

• Draw a line between empathy and being "emotional/ sentimental" so the we don't get carried away by human emotions when more a more rational decision making/ behaviour is expected from us to set a precedent for others. 

• Practising gratitude would greatly help develop an attitude of doing things for satisfaction rather than for expectation 

At times, life may play a bit unfair to us but still we can be a pathbreaker !

Just World Bias

Just World Bias

Time for Reflection

Has this ever crossed your mind - Why do "bad things" happen to good people ? 

How do you justify an act of misfortune befalling on you or, for that matter, on someone else ?

What do the words, "lucky" and "unlucky" connotes to you ?

How do you respond to stories/ news capturing "fall from grace" or "rags to riches" ?

Most of us, in all probability, would view the above happenings through a lens of "destiny", wherein instead of providing any logical explanation we tend to believe and propose that everything that's  happening is bound to happen that way only. Making use of phrases like "Life takes a full circle", "you reap what you sow", "what goes around comes around", and similar, to describe our response to the above questions reiterates our belief in the concept of "destiny".

So, if you happen to be like most, where you tend to respond to any fortune/ misfortune as an act of destiny, then you suffer from what is known as "Just World Bias". Let's explore the bias a bit more

Definition and Background

"Just World Bias" refers to the assumption that a person's actions are inherently inclined to bring morally fair and fitting consequences to that person, to the end of all noble actions being eventually rewarded and all evil actions eventually punished. 

In other words, this bias implies the existence of a force/ power, cosmic justice, destiny, divine providence that's entrusted to ensure stability or moral order in the world. As per this bias, any misfortune befalling on a person, or for that matter, any fortune happening to a person, is rationalized by attributing it to the ground that the person "deserves it". 

The bias revolves around the belief that the world is just(fair) and people only get what they deserve. And when people's actions prove to be their undoing that misfortune happens. So, the victim is responsible for everything bad that happens (and also the credit for everything good that happens) to him/ her.

Melvin Lerner coined the term "belief in a just world" and the seminal experiment illustrating this bias was conducted by Melvin Lerner and Carolyn Simmons in 1960s. The experiments used shock paradigms to record observer responses to victimization. In one of the experiments, a group of volunteers were made to watch a woman (an actor for the experiment) receiving electric shocks. 

As the experiment proceeded with the woman receiving shocks on failing to give correct answers to a test, one group from the larger group of volunteers selected for the experiment, was allowed to intervene and choose a different mode for the woman. This group perceived the woman as innocent  and wanted to end her suffering. On the other hand, the other group was not allowed to intervene in any way as they continued to watch the woman suffer. This group found the woman guilty.

Lerner concluded that people who had no way of helping a person who was suffering found the person deserving of the pain or suffering due to her own actions and behavior. Many others have also researched the bias since Lerner and one of the notable research is the one by Zick Rubin and Letitia Anne Peplau. The two mentioned above developed a Just World Scale, to study how people who believe in a Just World, think and behave  

The victim is victimised more by being blamed as the cause of all that happens to him/ her.

Why Does Just World Bias occur ?

Since people want to believe that the world is fair, so they look at ways/ reasons to rationalize away injustice, very often resulting in blaming the victim itself for all its suffering, pain and misfortune. This strong belief is also triggered by an urge to perceive a balanced world and to justify our own inability to end the victim's suffering.

Another reason is the need to live in a comfortable, safe and secure environment which is characterized by a destiny-driven world.

So, in a nutshell, when a person's belief in a "Just World" is threatened does he/ she resort to derogating the victim, which happens to be a key tendency of a person suffering from this bias.

Indicators/ Symptoms of Just World Bias

Some of the indicators could be as mentioned below:

• When we overemphasize "destiny" as the rule of life
• When we ascribe someone's misfortune to his/ her intrinsic characteristics 
• When we completely ignore external factors/ circumstances as the reason for someone's fortune/ misfortune
• When we cover up our inability to end someone's suffering by resorting to the victim blaming tendency 
• When we engage in character assassination, mud-slinging, extrapolating someone's suffering/ misfortune, victim blaming attitude 

Impact of Just World Bias

Some of the benefits of believing in a "Just World" are 

• Helps us feel better about ourselves by protecting our self-esteem
• Makes us feel less anxious and fearful 
• Helps us feel less vulnerable as we tend to differentiate ourselves from the victims of ill fortune
• Always keeps us optimistic about life due to our belief that people get what they deserve
• Safeguards us from committing any wrongdoing and from potential guilt and shame

Some of the disadvantages of hanging onto the belief of a "Just World" are

• Fail to see the big picture in terms of how other variables (external factors) may also have contributed to the person's misfortune
• Build antipathy in us instead of empathy resulting in adversely impacting our inter-personal relationships
• Makes us delusion resulting in us being completely unprepared to deal with the VUCA (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, Ambiguous) world around us
• Living in illusionary utopia which is far away from the actual reality
• No/ Limited development of essential skills like creativity, lateral thinking, innovation, and similar ones  

Real-Life Examples of Just World Bias

• One of the real incident about the bias is as mentioned below 

"When the British marched a group of German civilians around the Belsen concentration camp at the end of World War II to show them what their soldiers had done, one civilian said, “What terrible criminals these prisoners must have been to receive such treatment” (Hewstone, 1990) 

- Social Psychology and Human Nature, Roy F. Baumeister, Brad J. Bushman, 2007(Brief Edition)/ 2016 (Comprehensive Edition)

• This bias is so clearly evident when we mention about criminals, criminals facing capital punishment, victims of terminal illness, victims of sexual assault, war victims, victims of mental illness or any other serious ailment, the discriminated lot.

Overcoming/ Addressing Just World Bias

• Accepting that deeds and destiny may not always have a connection
• Building a Belief System encompassing the yin-yang principle will provide a holistic view of the world
• Becoming aware about the VUCA nature of the world that we live in would open us to the realities of the dynamic and fluid nature of the world 
• Performing SWOT analysis will help identify the environmental factors impacting the event
• Building a more enlarged view/ perception of the world and not limit to viewing life through a lense of "destiny"
• Understanding the importance of inter-personal relationships and focus on improving empathy skills
• Stop labeling the victim and instead view the event from all possible perspectives to bring a more rational explanation for the event. Six Thinking Hats is a good tool to start with 
• Stop assuming that we can/ have control over other people's life 

Let's learn to ADJUST because life is not always JUST (fair) !

Implicit Bias

Implicit Bias

Time for Reflection

Don't we all, at times, fail to identify a logic to our many affinities in life - be it a political party, a sports team, an online network/ community/ group, a group of colleagues at workplace, a specific set of friends in personal life, a specific group of people from a particular religion/ caste/ country/ ethnicity, etc. ? Well, the list is endless and can go on and on !

The moot point here relates to the existence of our unexplainable affinity (as mentioned in the above paragraph) beyond the factors of right or wrong, success or failure, good or bad !

The above "prejudice" highlights the presence of a bias, known as "Implicit Bias".

Definition and Background

Implicit Bias refers to the attitudes, stereotypes or beliefs that impact our understanding, actions and decisions in an unconscious manner. Explaining the definition further, Implicit Bias is when we, without our knowledge and awareness, start behaving in a pre-disposed manner towards a certain set/ group of people. Somewhere, our judgement gets impacted under the influence of Implicit Bias.

Implicit Bias is an involuntary process and may be based on any number of characteristics and more than 150 types of implicit biases exist.

The term "Implicit Bias" was coined by Mahzarin Banaji and Tony Greenwald in the 1990s. In 1995, they published their theory of implicit social cognition which asserted that individuals' social behaviour and biases are largely related to unconscious, or implicit, judgements.

   

Why Does Implicit Bias Occur ?

Whether we believe it or not, like it or not, each one of us is susceptible to implicit bias and that's because of the basic nature of our brain. The brain takes in information and starts forming associations and making generalizations. So, its these "mental connections (associations and generalizations)" that are responsible for "Implicit Bias" in us. Implicit Bias is found throughout the brain, whether amygdala, temporal lobes or frontal cortex.

Lets understand how these "mental connections" lead us into imbibing implicit bias

• Brain seeks patterns and association which impacts our disposition towards people in social situations
• Brain seeks shortcuts - Faced with huge volume of information/ data, the brain tries to simplify the information by creating shortcuts to sort the information/ data
• Our Beliefs and Value System, which is an outcome of our experiences(direct and indirect) and our social conditioning 

Indicators/ Symptoms of Implicit Bias

The biggest indicator is when we unconsciously start attributing a set of characteristics to a certain set/ group of  people.

When we become too judgmental about a person/ set of people based solely on one interaction and we let this first impression influence our disposition.

Impact of Implicit Bias

"Implicit Bias" has a tendency to trigger dominos effect, where any existing implicit bias at a micro level could create a cascading effect and reach a macro dimension, which could impact the global order and render it disorderly. The "social media" world that we live in today has the potential to magnify the impact of implicit bias manifold and create an unprecedented damage.  

At a personal and self level, the bias dents the personality severely and blocks the opportunities of growth. A restricted perception and disposition halts the growth of the individual.

Implicit Bias is not just confined to personal self but affects a whole range of setups like educational/ learning institutions, workplace, social gathering and legal systems. Within educational institutions, implicit bias primarily exist around skin type and gender type, with the key issues being behavioral and subject choices/ preferences.  

Talking about the impact of the bias at Workplace, the bias is chiefly evident in areas like 

• Core HR tasks which include Recruitment, Hiring and Retention. The presence of Implicit Bias could render the claims of being an Equal Opportunity Employer and providing a diverse and inclusive workplace/ environment as totally baseless, resulting in severly damaging the  reputation of the organisation  

• Interpersonal relationships in the organisation, both at inter-team and intra-team level. This ultimately impacts the teamwork and collaboration, which happen to be the backbone of any flourishing organisation.  

It is also worth noting that a lot of modern day problems (terrorism, apartheid) that pose a great threat to world peace and order are in some way a manifestation of implicit bias. 

Real-Life Examples of Implicit Bias

There are plenty of real-life examples of implicit bias occurring in setups like classrooms, workplace, legal system, etc. but one of the most popular (rather viral) is about an incident that occurred on April 12, 2018 at a Starbucks outlet in Philadelphia, where two black men got arrested after refusing to leave, on being told to do so by a Starbucks employee. This incident, highlighting implicit bias, reached such proportions that Starbucks had to issue an apology for its' treatment to these two black men. 

The details of the incident may be read at the following links 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/04/14/starbucks-apologizes-after-employee-calls-police-on-black-men-waiting-at-a-table/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e43ff1f022bf

https://www.fastcompany.com/40561997/starbucks-to-angry-facebookers-we-cant-deny-this-is-a-race-issue

Overcoming/ Addressing Implicit Bias

2 important things about Implicit Bias

• Even the aware, educated or socially conscious have biases
• Implicit Bias exist/ operates at an unconscious level and so difficult to access

Now, let's look at the possible ways to mitigate the impact/ risks of Implicit Bias

• First and foremost, becoming aware of the Implicit Bias is the starting point to deal with it. One of the best way to become aware of Implicit Bias is through the IAT (Implicit Association Test), a test developed by Banaji and Greenwald in 1998, to confirm their hypothesis regarding their theory of implicit social cognition. IAT was designed to assess the strength of unconscious biases through a computer program. The test is available online at  

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/langchoice/canada.html

It may be noted that like with every test, even this test has limitations but is still a good bet for the purpose.

• For addressing the bias at an individual level, the following could help

• by reducing our reliance on generalizations and stereotypes
• Avoid being judgemental by relying less on "gut feeling" and/ or "intuition" and more on "facts" 
• Seeing/ Understanding people as individuals rather than as part of an identified group by seeking personal information about the person in terms of interests, skills, and other personality traits
• Counter Stereotypical Imaging which refers to going against the mental picture that we hold in our mind for a particular group/ set of people
• Giving time for the interaction to unfold organically by attempting a positive interaction  

• For addressing the bias at an institutional/ organisational level, the following could help
• Building Anonymity in the recruitment and hiring process
• Walking the Talk when it is about Inclusivity, Diversity and Equal Opportunity. Seeking Commitment from every employee on the seamless integration of the above 3 in their routine would build more trust among them (employees) 
• Building an organisational culture comprising of values and mission that capture the essence of mitigating the existence of implicit bias could turn out to be very effective if every employee could align to them by heart
• Ensuring that every essential gathering comprises of as many diverse participants as possible 

Living in a technology driven VUCA (Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, Ambiguous) world, where information/ data rules the roost, the best defense we can build up against Implicit Bias is not to over-react towards any "emotion evoking" piece of data/ information. Rather, if we just let the dust settle first, and then provide our reaction, it is bound to be a more balanced and rational reaction.

When "First Impression" starts creating a "lasting impression", it's time so start looking beyond for more !

Hindsight Bias

Time for Reflection

Remember

those "I told you so" and "I knew it all along" moments when you played Nostradamus (A famous French astrologer and physician of the 16th century who became very popular for his various prophecies) but only after the event had already occurred

(the times) when you thought that the predictor in you knew the outcome of a particular event all along but you disclosed it only after the occurrence of the event

watching that thrilling movie or reading that book where after the climax got disclosed, you believed you already knew the end / finish of the movie/ book 

What the above highlights is the presence of overestimation and overconfidence in self and that is quite indicative of  a bias referred to as "Hindsight Bias".

Definition and Background

Hindsight Bias refers to the "tendency people have to overestimate their ability to have predicted an outcome correctly that could not have been possible predicted". Once an outcome of an unforeseen event has come, people tend to believe the event as predictable, despite having no objective basis for

predicting.

The phenomenon was first described and studied in 1970s by psychologists while investigating the errors in human decision making. The research on Hindsight Bias started with Fischhoff (1975). During the late 70s, Paul Slovic and Baruch Fischhoff began studying how scientific results and historical events seemed so predictable to people when, in fact, they had no idea about them.   

Why Does Hindsight Bias Occur ?

According to one theory, Hindsight Bias is a natural coping mechanism that prevents us from facing embarrassment and disappointment. 

Another theory says that the bias is hardwired in out system

Also, the actual outcomes are easier to comprehend and remember than the many which did not materialise.

 Indicators/ Symptoms of  Hindsight Bias 

• Memory Distortion which refers to various memory errors about remembering an earlier opinion, judgement or prediction  
• Distorting information by fixating on the final outcome
• Holding strong belief in the inevitability of the event ("It had to happen")
• Applying Ego-boosting strategies at having predicting the outcome correctlty
• Building False assumption/ belief about having great intuitive abilities   
• Overestimating the accuracy of our own prediction

Impact of Hindsight Bias

The bias impacts us negatively in many ways. Some of them are as below

• Makes us less accountable for our decisions 
• Builds over-confidence in us which affects our ability to make decisions
• Prevents us from learning through our experience 
• Builds a tendency of criticising the decision-making ability of others
• Inculcates high risk-taking ability

Real-Life examples of Hindsight Bias

Research in Hindsight Bias provides ample of empirical evidence about the bias's existence in many areas of our life such as Sports, Politics, Education, Military, Workplace and Healthcare.  

Overcoming/ Addressing Hindsight Bias

• Reminding ourself that past may not always determine future and we are not fully equipped to predict an outcome accurately all the time 
• Keeping a journal to record our prediction so as to help us do a comparison of our prediction once an event has occurred. This will aid in reflection and help with gaining insight to refine decision-making skill 
• Base decision/ predication on data analysis and not solely on intuition or gut feeling
• Consider alternative outcomes to dig deep into your approach to making decisions/ predictions
• Analyse the outcome with your previous prediction (before event occurrence) and this will help develop a framework/ strategy for future predictions. 

Things may soon "crumble and fall" if your live with the attitude of "i know it all" !

Groupthink Bias

Time For Reflection

Remember those moments of internal disagreement with your friends, family, colleagues, boss during some important discussion/ brainstorming/ team meeting/ project presentation, when you begged to differ but still chose to remain silent, simply to appear aligned with the rest of them ?

Well, such a behaviour is quite common, where inspite of being a (rational) contrarian and fully  aware of the negative consequences/ repercussions of an irrational choice or decision, we still tend to approve of that choice or decision (by conforming to it) when taken in a group setting.

This type of behaviour is indicative of the existence of a bias known as "Groupthink".

Definition and Background

The word "Groupthink" was coined by William H. Whyte in 1952 in an article in Fortune Magazine.

Irving Janis, a social psychologist from Yale University is credited with studying the bias. He addressed it in his book in 1972.  As per Janis, Groupthink is defined as "a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive group, and when the members' striving for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action".

Decoding the definition further, Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon in which our need to conform with the group outdoes our need to act rationally and we tend to go with the groups' decision.

Why Does Groupthink Bias occur ?

There are many reasons for Groupthink to occur. Few of the reasons are

At group level, the reasons could be

• presence of an overbearing group leader
• internal/ external pressures on the group to take good and faster decision

At an individual's level, the reasons could be 

• strong desire to maintain the cohesiveness of the group
• intent to ensure harmony within the group
• to avoid playing the odd one out and being an outcast
• strong belief in the rules and morality of the group
• save time in decision making by avoiding voicing opinion, suggestion, idea, etc.
• not fully knowledgeable about the topic of discussion and therefore unsure about the rationality of one's own choice/ decision 

Indicators of Groupthink Bias

At the outset, the unanimity in decision making is the best indicator of Groupthink.

Further, Janis has identified eight different symptoms (indicators) of  Groupthink and they are as mentioned below:

• Illusion of invulnerability - complacency kicks in within the group leading to an attitude of over optimism and risk-taking. As a result of their earlier successes and great bonding within the group, the group starts to feel insulated from any dire consequence irrespective of the choice they make or the decision they take.

• Belief in inherent morality of the group - Because of the presence of extreme cohesiveness within the group, a false sense of belief about being morally correct always, creeps in which further leads to an illusion of rational decision-making.  

• Collective Rationalization - the false sense of self-belief prompts the group to overlook any warning signals whatsoever and this leads the group to never questions their existing assumptions or beliefs.

• Out-Group Stereotypes - The group members who do not share the same beliefs, ideas and opinions of the "in-group" are stereotyped as "out-group", considered to be outside the group

• Self-Censorship - Members who have any sort of fear or phobia withhold sharing their views, ideas or counter-arguments

• Illusion of Unanimity - Even when members prefer to remain silent instead of sharing their POV (point of view), this silence is construed as their acceptance of the group's decision

• Direct Pressure on Dissenters - The member who don't agree with the group's views are coerced and ultimately compelled to agree to the group's views.

• Self-Appointed "Mindguards" - There are members of the group who take up the task of filtering information so that no contradictory views and opinions reach the group 

Impact of Grouthink Bias

The key negative impacts of the bias are 

• Irrational decision-making in the absence of multiple perspective 
• Compromise on freedom of Individual thinking and expression 
• Operating in comfort zone
• No new perspective or POV (Point of View) encouraged 
• Adversely affects the morale and confidence of members who hold contrary views which further leads to dissatisfaction, frustration and stress
• Create internal friction as the members who hold a differing view may come together and create a mini-group within
• The group becomes overly obsessive and protective about their views and opinion which leads to insulation from others outside the group. This further impacts the group's intent and ability to collaborate 
• Absence of creative thought process

The key positive impacts 

• Decisions tend to get taken faster 
• The group never falters on the deadlines
• Strong cohesiveness which leads to lot of trust among group members

Real-life Examples of Groupthink

Human history is replete with many incidents that highlight the presence of Groupthink. Some of the popular ones are as mentioned below

• Pearl Harbour attack, 1941 - Inspite of intercepting warning messages related to Japan planning to attack, the U.S. army did not pay any heed to the signs and signals. The U.S. soldiers and the authority at Pearl Harbour engaged in groupthink. This resulted in faulty decision making by ignoring the evidence of imminent danger under the assumption that Japan won't attack because ultimately they would get defeated by U.S. army 

• Bay of Pig Invasion - In 1961, about 1500 exiled Cubans, trained and financed by CIA attempted an invasion of Cuba from sea in the Bay of Pigs to overthrow Fidel Castro. The attempt was a complete fiasco. It is believed that U.S. President Kennedy gave a go-ahead to the mission as a result of groupthink 

• Collapse of Swissair, 2001 - The collapse of Swissair a.k.a The Flying Bank, as it was fondly called, is attributed to 2 key symptoms - 1. Illusion of  invulnerability and 2. Belief in inherent morality of the group

• Collapse of Nokia and Blackberry as phone giants - Both Nokia and Blackberry were phone giants in their own segment but presence of symptoms like illusion of invulnerability, belief in inherent morality of the group and collective rationalization led to their fall.

Overcoming/ Addressing Groupthink Bias

Exploring objectives, alternatives and encouraging ideas hold the key to addressing the Groupthink Bias. Some of the ways it could be achieved are as mentioned below:

• Encourage discussion and debating within the group 
• Implement multi-perspective approach to decision-making/ problem solving through tools like "Devil's Advocate" and "Six Thinking Hats". These tools can bring about critical evaluation aspect in decision making
• Conformity could be outdone by inviting members first to share their views and opinions prior to the sharing of views/ opinions by the leader 
• To invite an impartial opinion, every group member should discuss the group's ideas with someone trustworthy outside the group 
• Leader should be absent from many meetings to avoid influencing the decision-making by group members
• Experts from outside be invited to ensure an impartial assessment of the discussion during meetings.
• Encourage creative and critical thinking in the group
• Creating mini-groups during decision making helps capture all the relevant viewpoints

Inclusivity always pays rich dividends !