In 1975, social psychologist Richard Nisbett and his student Eugene Borgida conducted a study to see if it made sense to spread the findings of psychology and science in general. The basic idea was very simple. Learning certain notions should make us change our beliefs, our predictions of events, and even some aspects of our behavior.
Richard Nisbett
Eugene Borgida
Unfortunately, the results are clear, we are too stupid to turn learned notions into something useful. The best we can do is understand what is being explained to us. But the theory remains, it does not become part of us. So, when we find ourselves in situations where those new notions might be helpful, we show who we are: emotional.
We are so irrational that we give more weight to intuition than objective data. But letâ??s take a step back.
Experiments that showed we are all stupid
The investigation was conducted in 1975 by Nisbett and Borgida. Two psychologists illustrated to the students the famous rescue experiment. Volunteers were escorted to individual booths (they didnâ??t look at others, they just listened to their voices) and were invited to talk on the microphone about their lives and personal problems. They had to talk for about two minutes and only one microphone at a time was on. Everyone spoke in turn, the collaborator of the experimenter confessed that he had struggled to adapt to the life of New York, said he was very stressed and admitted with great embarrassment that he too was undergoing epileptic seizures. Two minutes passed, the microphone fell silent, and the word passed to the student in the other cabin. When the microphone returned to the co-worker, he was stressed. He began to say inconsistent words, to speak in disgust. He sighed and felt an epileptic seizure approaching. With his last breath he said: I do not breathe ... I will die! At that point the microphone of the other cabin began and no one knew anything about it.
Participants thought one of them was going through an epileptic seizure. However, as there were many other people who could help him, they were quiet in their cabin without interfering. Only four of the fifteen went to help. Experimentation shows that we feel relieved of responsibility when there are other people with us who can intervene in the same request for help.
The results are surprising. We all think we are ready to help someone in need and believe that others are too. But through the experiment of shared responsibility, Nisbett has shown that this is by no means the case.
However, even when confronted with evidence of their misconceptions, the students did not change their minds. They remained anchored in their faith in human nature. This conservative attitude is very understandable, it is difficult to change your mind about yourself or something you believe in. And changing the mind for the worse is even more so.
This is certainly nonsense, but there is one aspect of human nature that is even more so.
To convince a man, it is enough to deprive him
If telling objective data does not serve to convince a person, there is probably another way to do it.
Nisbett has realized a disappointing truth. To convince a man of something, you have to amaze him. Unfortunately, the statistics do not surprise anyone, even when they show exaggerated data. People miss other people's individual stories. To learn the law of distributed responsibility, it did not serve to show the number of those who provide assistance and those who do not. But the story of a good person was enough, who explained that he had not given help because he felt overwhelmed among the many other people who could help. The special occasion was the best lesson for everyone and after this story, everyone was convinced that helping someone in need is not so automatic.
Our reason makes us vulnerable to bad information
A well-made story is enough to convince us of something. The news of an immigrant breaking the rules is enough to make us conclude that they are all criminals. It is not true, as immigrants are much less than Italians, it is clear that most crimes will be committed by Italians.
Suffice it to tell the story of children who contracted autism after the vaccine to raise the suspicion that vaccines are dangerous. They are not. There are statistical data that show the opposite without the possibility of replication.
It is enough to read the news about a plane crashing to make us perceive that vehicle as unsafe. Maybe weâ??ll take the car thus increasing the risk of having a fatal accident dozens of times over.
We need to stop being stupid. Our intuition is certainly a useful ally in certain circumstances. But it doesn't have to be the only way to appreciate the world. We must learn from time to time to put it aside and give way to reasoning. He also deserves to have his say.
