How did I do it?
I simply understand that:
a) experiences are remarkably
similar in specific contexts
b) body language shouts at observers
though most are unaware as to what body language is saying.
c) people's attire speaks volumes
about their income, beliefs, and life attitude
d) a bunch of other things that
will make this article too long!
Today I want to show you what
people are inclined to DO. ....I want to show you how you are
inclined to act. Behavior. Different than thoughts. We think
we want X but we buy Y. I want to show you not only what people
are thinking but also what they do...
An example. If I say, pick a
number from 1-10, you are inclined to say "7." The
majority of people do in the English speaking culture.
If I ask you to think of a shape
and say it out loud you are inclined to say "triangle."
The majority of people do in the English speaking culture.
But knowing what someone is going
to say or think is matched in importance by knowing what people
are likely to DO. If you see what people do in given situations
you can predict their behavior in future situations.
For decades each nation's military
has typically been afforded the most current information about
human behavior... it's helpful to know what your opponent will
do, how they will respond and react...and what their next move
will be.
The same is true in sales and
marketing.
Some decisions to buy something
are made under great "pressure." Others are decided
in the absence of "pressure." Knowing what will cause
someone to decide X can be pretty helpful information! Knowing
WHY they decide X can change how you communicate with people
forever. Knowing HOW people perceive you and the rest of the
world... is downright invaluable.
Research into how people make
decisions while under pressure could help the U.S. military
improve training for its leaders and lead to better decision-support
systems. Studies have shown that when people process information,
they develop unconscious strategies – or biases – that simplify
their decisions. Now, research at the Georgia Tech Research
Institute (GTRI) is revealing how these biases affect people
when they're dealing with lots of information – and little time
to form conclusions.
The same research applies to
all of us in all decision making situations. Watch and see what
I mean as I check the "biases" that GTRI has listed
as being the most "important." The examples I give
are not those from GTRI but those I am giving YOU to optimize
influencing others.
These are the biases (unconscious
strategies) GTRI has revealed are important in decision making:
a) Absence of evidence. Missing, relevant information is not
properly considered. People don't think of the part of the story
you don't tell them. They only think about what is put "out
there".
b) Availability. Recent events
or well-known conjecture provide convenient explanations. If
I read it in the paper today it's got more impact than something
I read last month... If it is in THIS month's issue of the magazine
or TODAY's edition of the newspaper, it means A LOT. If it's
in yesterday's, the value is GREATLY diminished.
c) Oversensitivity to consistency.
People give more weight to multiple reports of information,
even if the data came from the same source. Repetition is VERY
powerful. If people start to hear the same thing over and over
again, it makes little difference where they hear it...it simply
becomes... true.
d) Persistence of discredited
information. Information once deemed relevant continues to influence
even after it has been discredited. Someone can tell you they
lied to you about where they were on a given night... but a
few weeks from now, you will continue to believe they were there.
Once you tell someone something, it's what they will remember,
if anything. Saying later that you might have been wrong or
that someone else was wrong...or that it "might not be
right," simply doesn't matter.
e) Randomness. People perceive
a causal relationship when two or more events share some similarity,
although the events aren't related. People will believe anything.
I had a guy take my seat at the blackjack table because I won
$5000. You think that stool knows what cards are coming out
next??? People will mistake what causes what... almost all the
time.
f) Sample size. Evidence from
small samples is seen as having the same significance as larger
samples. People just don't have a clue as to how unimportant
their own personal experience is...or the experience of a friend
or a relative. The fact is that a single well-told story will
convince with far greater magnitude than a computer filled with
statistical PROOF of the opposite.
g) Vividness. When people perceive
information directly, it has greater impact than information
they receive secondhand -- even if the secondhand information
has more substance. You can read it in a comic book and it has
more weight than what a scientist tells you he learned at the
neuroscience convention....
To test the affects of these
biases, Folds had experiment subjects view an inbox on a computer
screen containing a variety of text messages, maps, photographs
and video and audio recordings. Subjects (the majority being
Georgia Tech ROTC students) were instructed to report certain
military situations, such as incidents of sniper fire or acts
of suspected sabotage. They were not to report other events,
such as normal accidents in an urban area unrelated to enemy
activity.
To decide whether or not an event
should be reported, subjects reviewed a series of messages that
contained both bona fide evidence as well as information created
to trigger the biases that cause poor decisions. In each trial,
subjects were allowed enough time to spend an average of 20
seconds per element data plus one additional minute for reporting;
they were also asked to attach information that supported their
decision.
In the first experiment, all
seven biases appeared with the greatest number of errors caused
by vividness and over sensitivity to consistency.
In addition, Folds discovered
two new biases that can hinder the quality of rapid decisions.
These are two newly discovered
biases (unconscious strategies):
h) Superficial Similarity. Evidence is considered relevant because
of some superficial attribute, such as a key word in a message
title. For example, a hostage situation might have been reported
earlier, and then another message shows up in the inbox with
the word "hostage" in its header, although the message's
actual content has nothing to do with hostages.
i) Sensationalist Appeal. Items
containing exaggerated claims or threats influence a decision-maker
even when there is no substance to the content.
Folds was surprised at how well
subjects could perform the task while under pressure, he said.
Although he expected an accuracy rate of about 50 percent, subjects
correctly reported 70 percent of incidents.
In a second experiment, researchers
divided subjects into two groups, using one as a control group
while training the other group how to spot conditions that spark
decision-making biases.
Subjects who received training
were able to detect about twice as many "false-alarm opportunities"
as the control group.
The biggest difference between
the two groups involved "persistence of discredited information"
and "small sample" biases. Forty-eight percent of
trained subjects were able to recognize when a "persistence"
bias existed compared to 18 percent of the control group. Fifty
percent of trained subjects caught the "sample-size"
traps versus 11 percent of the control group.
Although training helped participants
recognize when traps existed, it didn't help them identify the
specific bias. "When subjects were under pressure to make
decisions rapidly, the distinctiveness of the categories fell
apart," Folds explained. "That's significant, because
it helps us tailor training efforts."
The experiments also revealed
what kind of information is meaningful to decision-makers, Folds
noted. Software designed especially for the trials tracks when
subjects open a document for the first time and when they go
back for a second time or third look. The amount of time that
subjects spend reviewing data – along with the data they attach
to reports showed a decided preference for text messages over
other formats.
Folds' team is conducting more
research: Two new sets of trials are examining how decision-making
errors occur in groups, while another experiment is trying to
pinpoint how rapidly individuals can make good decisions.
In your next installment, we'll talk about the power of covert persuasion. Until next time....