Home » Uncategorized » old post: Overconfidence, Foxes, Hedgehogs, and Inigo Montoya

old post: Overconfidence, Foxes, Hedgehogs, and Inigo Montoya

From 2011: 

Watching the Arab Spring, I have been struck by the remarkable confidence of commentators as they predict the future of the region, even while in disagreement about what that future will be. How could they be so confident when surely some of them must be wrong?

This overconfidence is something very familiar to social psychologists (not just because we sometimes display it, but because we study it!). For instance in one study by David Dunning and his colleagues, students were asked to predict the likelihood of events like whether a person would drop a course, live off campus, etc..  When the students were 100% certain something would happen, it  happened 85% of the time. If you've seen the movie Princess Bride, you know  that Inigo Montoya gets this discrepancy. Vizzini repeatedly seems certain, but then the unexpected happens, to which Vizzini exclaims "Inconceivable!" Montoya's response is "You keep using that word. I do not think it means  what you think it means." Ah, certainty. How little we understand you!
If you want to examine the overconfidence of political commentators, I recommend Philip Tetlock's Expert  political judgment: How good is it? How can we know?The first chapter  is available (free!) here:
This is an  extraordinarily lovely first chapter, though parts get technical in ways  that might daunt those of you who aren't social scientists. Tetlock  has, for decades, tested political experts; ability to predict the  future. Do the experts do better than, say, chimps  throwing darts? Well, some seem to exceed that standard, but on the  whole, Tetlock has found them far too Vizzini-like, declaring "inconceivable" that which nonetheless occurs.
But Tetlock finds that some forecasters do better than others. Who? Well, first let's look at what does not make a difference. Per Tetlock:
Who </em>experts were--professional background, status, and so on--made scarcely an iota of difference to accuracy. Nor did what experts thought--whether they were liberals or conservatives, realists or institutionalists, optimists or pessimists.
What does matter? Again, Tetlock:
How experts  thought--their style of reasoning--did matter. The foxes' self-critical,  point-counterpoint style of thinking prevented them from building up  the sorts of excessive enthusiasm for their predictions that hedgehogs,  especially well-informed ones, displayed for theirs.
In  speaking of foxes, Tetlock describes a cognitive style in which one is self-critical, seeking points contrary to what the fox thinks, whereas hedgehogs (think the most ideological  of our brethren and sistren) think one big idea and tend to apply it to  everything, eschewing contradictory data. This will be a theme I will tackle repeatedly here at Psych Geek. Cognitive style matters. Do we ask ourselves why we might be wrong? Do we grapple with contradictory evidence? Do we tolerate ambiguity? Or do we seek the comfort of certainty? I am a big fan of the honest pursuit of information that conflicts with what we believe, as a way of being more Montoya than Vizzini.
If  you're interested in human reasoning, and in trying to bring a critical  mind to bear on the vapidity that so often marks contemporary political  discourse, I think this is your book. I think there's a 70% chance it is, in fact!
In the meantime, trust the foxes for predictions if you  value accuracy. This might mean living with uncomfortable uncertainty.  I am more inclined to view it as living with a complexity that makes room for hope.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: