Conflict and Cognitive Biases

When looking at various conflicts that can occur, it is important to be cognizant of certain cognitive biases due to the frequency that they arise and the number of human interactions they can affect. These cognitive biases often occur because of the “mental models” we create about people and external situations (Organizational Behavior. Mcshance, Tasa p.75) Human beings need mental models to understand the world around us and to function in everyday life. These mental maps that can be used to understand individuals and group dynamics are necessary and useful, however one major draw back of our mental models is that we tend to over-simplify interpersonal interactions and group dynamics. To a certain degree we might need to over-simplify, at least initially, as human beings are infinitely complex physiologically and mentally. When we meet Joe or Jane for the very first time, we generally just say “hello” or “how are you.” We obviously don’t say: “hello fellow trillion celled organism, ohh you also have an organ inside that can conceptualize the universe.”  “Hi there, you are also a sum almost every positive, neutral or negative interpersonal interaction that you have ever had.” No, they are just John, Ashley, or Santiago (some of the worlds most common names internationally) and they likely have some of the same biases that we do.

The first common bias to look at is a form of categorization known as homogenization. Homogenization is deeming that people of a particular group have similar characteristics. It might be as simple as stating that the people from Nova Scotia have a specified characteristic such as being cheerful or smelling like trout-fish. Homogenization can lead into a related bias referred to as differentiation. Differentiation is defined as: “assign[ing] more favorable characteristics to people in our social identity groups than to people in other groups” (O.B. Mcshane, Tasa.77), and this bias can have a considerable affect on group dynamics. The initial purpose of these biases can be to improve our individual self esteem as we validate ourselves or our social group through these processes. The major problem is they can lead to disunity or lack of integration when people or groups attempt to integrate.

Another bias that shows up frequently is confirmation bias. “Confirmation bias is the nonconscious tendency for people to screen out information that is contrary to their decisions, beliefs, values and assumptions, while more readily accepting information that confirms those elements” (p.74). With confirmation bias we sometimes create a theory and then we often come up with information to support the theory. As beliefs and mental models stabilize us in the world, it can be very difficult and even cause physiological discomfort to look thoroughly at opposing viewpoints. This bias has been coming to light more frequently in our society, as we have often heard the phrase “echo chambers” and we joke about the: “Divided States of America.” (Though I can’t go down a partisan-rabbit hole in 800 words). In the workplace, confirmation bias could be similar to a self-fulfilling prophecy, as managers and co-workers have pre-emptive beliefs on how an employee will perform. The employee might be performing better or worse than the first lens though which they are perceived, however an accurate perception of their skill level might be delayed or never actually be seen.   

The third set of biases relates to perception and is referred to as the Fundamental Attribution Error, which is the tendency to “overemphasize internal causes of another person behavior and discount or ignore the external causes of their behavior” (O.B. Mcshane, Tasa. p- 80). The fundamental attribution error can be linked with the self-serving bias, which is the: “tendency to attribute our failures to external causes more than internal causes, while crediting our successes more to internal than external factors” (O.B. Mcshane, Tasa). A student might attribute his success on an exam due to his own study habits or intelligence, while labeling someone else with a lower score as lazy or even less intelligent. The student may fail to consider or be empathetic towards the hardships his fellow student had to endure, such a personal or family health issues. However, if the student who did well initially, did poorly on a future exam he might emphasize his own external hardships. These biases could cause divergence, if the students had to work together in a group on a following assignment.

While there isn’t a full proof solution to avoiding cognitive biases, there are strategies we can use for greater clarity. The well-known Psychotherapist Rollo May once stated that: “Radical objectivity is still subjective.” Therefore, one thing is simply knowing that we all have our biases and to be mindful of what they may be in the specific situation. The second solution that I find the most effective is asking myself internal questions such as: am I being “hubris” and putting myself above this person or group by using differentiation? Am I being guilty of using fundamental attribution error and erroneously excluding external facts, while unnecessarily passing judgement on this person? Although there isn’t a fail-safe solution for avoiding our cognitive biases, even being aware of some of them, and asking ourselves internal questions can enable more clarity in perception and allow us to see the idiosyncrasies and nuances in human interaction.   

_____________

What about you, do you find yourself prone to any cognitive biases? The one I catch myself in most frequently is confirmation bias.

Dan Ariely, the Psychologist from Israel once said: “Even the most analytical thinkers are predictably irrational; the really smart ones acknowledge and address their irrationalities.”

Other recommended resources for more clarity and depth:

https://danariely.com/ (Dan Ariely)

https://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahneman_the_riddle_of_experience_vs_memory#t-43093