Are You Biased? Yes, But So Am I. Let’s Do Better.
Reflections of Bias: The Unseen Mirror in Decision-Making
Bias: Preconceived notions or prejudices that can affect the objectivity of decision-making.
So, you walk into a meeting, armed with spreadsheets, charts, and a triple-shot espresso. You’re about to make a decision that will influence the trajectory of your project. Or maybe you’re crafting a campaign that could either be a home run or a dud.
But have you stopped to consider how your biases might color these decisions?
Here’s the tricky part: you might recognize bias in others, but odds are, you’re practically blind to your own. In a sense, we’re all living in a paradox. A 2007 study by Pronin termed this the ‘bias blind spot.’ We’re prone to giving our own judgment the benefit of the doubt while quickly spotting bias in others.1 Ever thought, “My views are objective; it’s everyone else who’s biased”? You’re not alone.
Why Are We Biased?
First, let’s pause and ponder: Why are we wired this way?
A study by Peters in 2020 suggests that biases like confirmation bias could be adaptive.3 Our inclination to prefer information that aligns with our beliefs might actually help us influence social structures to match our view of them. Theoretically, this could make it easier to navigate our social world. So, biases aren’t always bad; they’re mental shortcuts.
The Bias of Complexity and the Simplicity Paradox
But wait, what if I told you that embracing simplicity could actually make you less biased? Brighton and Gigerenzer’s 2015 study introduced the concept of “bias bias,” suggesting that in fields like marketing and finance, simple models often outperform complex ones.2 Here’s the kicker: we often overlook simplicity because we’re focused on reducing bias at the cost of increasing another error type: variance.
In simpler terms, in trying to eliminate bias, we sometimes create a model so complex that it becomes overly sensitive to fluctuations in data. It’s like tuning a guitar so meticulously that it’s out of tune the moment the temperature changes.
So, What’s the Deal with Groups?
Let’s not forget, the biases multiply when you’re making decisions in a group. Wilde, Velden, and Dreu’s 2018 study found that groups can be anchored by cognitive biases, particularly if they are cooperating towards a shared goal.5 The good news? Making these groups aware of the process can actually mitigate the anchoring bias.
Questions for You:
- Can you recall a recent decision where your own bias might have played a role?
- What practices do you have in place to combat bias in group decision-making?
- Are there times when you’ve favored complexity over simplicity? What was the outcome?
Call to Action: Embrace Evidence-Based Decision Making
To tackle bias, we must adopt evidence-based decision-making in our workplaces.
This doesn’t mean ignoring your gut feelings entirely, but it does mean balancing intuition with data. Whether it’s making the team aware of potential biases, or simplifying the decision-making model, ensure that you’re not just reacting, but responding thoughtfully. Consider the data, question the sources, consult others, and then make your decision.
Advice for Navigating the Bias Labyrinth
- Self-Awareness
- Continuously ask yourself if you’re falling into the ‘bias blind spot’ trap. Do this especially when you’re convinced you’re being objective.
- Opt for Simplicity
- When in doubt, consider a simpler model. This might offer more accurate predictions than a complex one, thereby reducing both bias and variance.
- Group Accountability
- When making group decisions, employ a system of checks and balances. Make everyone in the team aware of biases like anchoring to improve the decision-making process.
Bias is not just a buzzword; it’s an integral part of human psychology. While we can’t eliminate it entirely, we can manage it, become aware of it, and make better decisions in its presence.
So, the next time you walk into a meeting with your spreadsheets and espresso, remember, self-awareness and simplicity might just be the best tools you have. Ready to take the first step toward combating bias? If not now, when?
This article doesn’t pretend to eliminate your biases, but if it made you think, it’s done its job.
References:
- Pronin, E. (2007). Perception and misperception of bias in human judgment. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 37-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.001.
Short summary: People are generally aware of biases in human judgment but often fail to recognize their own due to overreliance on introspection and the belief that their perceptions objectively reflect reality, leading to a lack of self-awareness and potential conflicts. - Brighton, H., & Gigerenzer, G. (2015). The bias bias. Journal of Business Research, 68, 1772-1784. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2015.01.061.
Short summary: In marketing and finance, simple models sometimes outperform complex ones due to a common “bias bias,” where the importance of bias in prediction error is overstated while variance is neglected, making simplicity a more useful framework for decision-making than commonly thought. - Peters, U. (2020). What Is the Function of Confirmation Bias?. Erkenntnis, 87, 1351-1376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-020-00252-1.
Short summary: The confirmation bias, often criticized for impairing objective thinking, may actually be an adaptive trait that evolved to help us shape social realities to match our beliefs, thereby improving our ability to navigate those realities. - Johnson, D., & Tierney, D. (2019). Bad World: The Negativity Bias in International Politics. International Security, 43, 96-140. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00336.
Short summary: In international relations, the “negativity bias”—the human tendency to give greater weight to negative information—may explain why states often overemphasize threats and losses, a phenomenon that rationalist theories struggle to account for and that may fuel patterns of conflict. - Wilde, T., Velden, F., & Dreu, C. (2018). The anchoring-bias in groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 116-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JESP.2018.02.001.
Short summary: The study found that decision-making groups are susceptible to anchoring bias, but this bias can be mitigated through process accountability or competitive motivation, and it primarily operates through early influence on individual preferences rather than biased information exchange.