One of the subjects I’m most interested in is how the human mind works. What makes us do what we do? How do we make choices? How do we make sense of the world? Fueling my interest have been a string of intriguing books in the cognitive psychology / behavioral economics vein, including Predictably Irrational, Brain Rules, and The Lucifer Effect.
My latest read, How We Decide, by Jonah Lehrer is an excellent exploration of how the mind processes information and makes choices. Suffice to say that the rational animal is not nearly as rational as economists might lead us to believe.
Lehrer demonstrates that, contrary to long held belief, logic and emotion are complimentary decision making tools, and not competing impulses at opposite ends of some ‘reason continuum’. Reason, represented by the prefrontal cortex, is a kind of gatekeeper that can have the final say, but it doesn’t process everything, and it isn’t particularly good at dealing with complexity.
The brain actually processes information with a number of different systems, each of which compete for attention and prominence. Rely too much on any one system (say, reason or emotion) and you are in danger of making a bad choice. Given this fact, certainty becomes the enemy of good decision making. Certainty closes the internal dialogue and causes the brain to ignore information that contradicts a firmly held belief.
I think this is a critical (though hardly new) piece of information for designers. And it confirms one of my own long-held beliefs (can you say confirmation bias?). We need to let go of our egos, embrace uncertainty, and encourage those around us to tell us where we’re wrong.
For most of us that doesn’t come naturally. We are conditioned to want to be right, and to avoid being wrong at all costs. How else could we survive school? But when we hold too tight to our own ideas and deflect all criticism, the end result is very often wrong. In fact, Lehrer tells of a study of expert political commentators whose predictions tended to be significantly worse than random chance. The reason? Certainty clouded their ability to process information that conflicted with their ideas.
This doesn’t mean that we need to fold up like a cheap card table when someone disagrees with us. We need to think deeply about our design choices, and explain them when challenged. But we also need to hear contrary ideas, and weigh their merits without being defensive.
So, the next time someone sees a flaw in your approach, keep an open mind and jump on the chance to make things better. It’s how the mind works when it’s at its best.
Posted in on May 5, 2010
blog comments powered by Disqus