Read Online Mastermind: How to Think Like Sherlock Holmes by Maria Konnikova - Free Book Online Page B

result ofexternal circumstances—stress, strain, bad luck, whatever it may be—and everything positive of her character. She will get credit for all that’s good, and the environment will shoulder blame for all that’s bad. Chance and luck? Not important. The knowledge that we are, as a general rule, extremely bad at making any sort of prediction about the future, be it for an event or a behavior? Likewise irrelevant to his judgment. In fact, unlike Holmes, he likely hasn’t even considered that possibility—or evaluated his own competence.
    All the while, Watson will likely remain completely unaware of the hoops through which his mind is jumping to maintain a coherent impression of Mary, to form a narrative based on discrete inputs that makes sense and tells an intuitively appealing story. And in a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts, which could potentially have rather perverse consequences, his own behavior could prompt Mary to act in a way that seems to confirm his initial impression of her. Act toward Mary as if she were a beautiful saint, and she will likely respond to him with a saintly smile. Start off thinking that what you see is right; end by getting just what you’d expected. And all the while, you remain blissfully unaware that you’ve done anything other than remain perfectly rational and objective. It’s a perfect illusion of validity, and its impact is incredibly difficult to shake, even in circumstances where all logic is against it. (As an example, consider that interviewers tend to make up their minds about a candidate within the first few minutes—and sometimes less—of meeting them. And if the candidate’s subsequent behavior paints a different picture, they are still unlikely to alter their opinion—no matter how damning the evidence may be.)
    Let’s imagine that you need to decide on the suitability of a certain person—let’s call her Amy—as a potential teammate. Let me tell you a bit about Amy. First, she is intelligent and industrious.
    Stop right there. Chances are you are already thinking, Okay, yes, great, she would be a wonderful person to work with, intelligent and industrious are both things I’d love to see in a partner . But what if I was about to continue the statement with, “envious and stubborn”? No longer as good, right? But your initial bias will be remarkably powerful. You will be more likely to discount the latter characteristics and to weigh the former moreheavily—all because of your initial intuition. Reverse the two, and the opposite happens; no amount of intelligence and industriousness can save someone who you saw initially as envious and stubborn.
    Or consider the following two descriptions of an individual.
    intelligent, skillful, industrious, warm, determined, practical, cautious
    intelligent, skillful, industrious, cold, determined, practical, cautious
    If you look at the two lists, you might notice that they are identical, save for one word: warm or cold . And yet, when study participants heard one of the two descriptions and were then asked to pick which of two traits best described the person (in a list of eighteen pairs from which they always had to choose one trait from each pair), the final impression that the two lists produced was markedly different. Subjects were more likely to find person one generous—and person two the opposite. Yes, you might say, but generosity is an inherent aspect of warmth. Isn’t it normal to make that judgment? Let’s assume that is the case. Yet participants went a step further in their judgment: they also rated person one in consistently more positive terms than person two, on traits that had nothing whatsoever to do with warmth. Not only did they find person one more sociable and popular (fair enough), but they were also far more likely to think him wise, happy, good natured, humorous, humane, good looking, altruistic, and imaginative.
    That’s the difference a single word can make: it can color your entire