Daniel Kahneman described two systems of thought processing and decision-making, system 1 and system 2 (Kahneman, 2011). These are not literal areas of the brain but rather a way to understand how we process and organize information and how that in turn effects our decisions, actions, and beliefs. System 1 is easy, lazy, and automatically activated by heuristics, biases, and the unconscious. System 2 is organized, thoughtful, and requires more effort and energy. Literally, placing a frown on your face can help to elicit System 2 and a smile, system 1. It’s complicated and discussed in much greater detail in the earlier chapters of the book (which I plan to review and write up after I finish the book).

This chapter, “Tom W’s Specialty” discussed the differences between representativeness and base rate in prediction. In psychology, we are always interested in predicting behavior. This chapter looks at how people can use the easier, less reliable, sometimes completely wrong representativeness of people (a lazy system 1 sort of stereotyping) to predict things that should really be based on base rate (more difficult system 2 sort of statistics). Most people aren’t trained in statistics so they are less likely to be aware of some rules of statistics that don’t readily come to mind if not taught to consider (like probability). Even when people were asked to ignore a description or extra details of questionable reliability, they couldn’t help but let it greatly effect their decision. Even those who were trained in statistics, weighed the unreliable information over the statistical base rate because it was easier (system 1 wins over system 2).  Kahneman points out that calculating the probability of something (or likelihood) is more difficult than similarity or representativeness of something which is more of an automatic stereotypical type of thinking and that is a big mistake. He continues to make the point that anyone who “ignores base rates and the quality of evidence in probability assessments will certainly make mistakes” (p.150).

This makes me think about the election of Donald Trump to President of the United States for which the “subjective degree of belief” when evaluating the probability of an event was sorely misconstrued (p. 150). When confronted with such a hard question, such as the probability of Donald Trump being elected, the mind searches for easier questions to answer – questions that fall into “automatic assessment of representativeness“(p. 150). So when some people were met with the easier question, “Does Donald Trump appear Presidential?” They automatically came up with a mental images of a big white male in a suit who seemed authoritarian and powerful and thought, “yes” – an easy match. A vague concept but still a closer match than a women (Hillary Clinton for President) for whom many people have no mental image of a female U.S. President – outside of fictional images (VEEP, movies) or images of powerful women in other countries such as, the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel, or Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand but they are not Presidents. There are several female Presidents but they don’t readily come to mind to many people – I dare say to the majority of the United States.

Donald Trump raised that very question, himself, to the media and other groups, saying he felt that “Hillary Clinton doesn’t have a Presidential look” and asking others the same (New York Times 9/6/2016). The stories spread quickly – an example of the availability cascade and availability entrepreneurs discussed in chapter 13 . So, when people needed to evaluate the more difficult system 2 questions between the two candidates’ education, experience, and various probability questions or the easier automatic stereotypical system 1 question of “which one looks more presidential” – the easy answer comes first and wins. A good example of the availability heuristic, when people make decisions based on the availability of an example which easily comes to mind and may be heavily swayed by emotion (e.g., prejudices, fear, anxiety, etc.). It is in the availability entrepreneur’s best interest to arouse emotion and system 1 and align them with easy questions to answer.

 

Reference

Kahneman, D. (2011). Tom W.’s Specialty.  In Thinking Fast and Slow (pp. 156-165). New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.