Decisive People No More Accurate Than Self-Doubters, Study Says (theguardian.com) 111
It's a trait best seen in the eager pub quizzer -- a tendency to leap to an answer without a shadow of a doubt. Now researchers have suggested that while people who have little difficulty making decisions are more confident in their choices, they are no more accurate than those who feel more torn. From a report: Writing in the journal Plos One, researchers revealed how they conducted experiments to explore potential differences between people who tend to be decisive, known as action-oriented people, and those who struggle to commit to a choice, known as state-oriented people. "What we found is that confidence was the only thing that was different," said Dr Wojciech Zajkowski, the first author of the research, who is now based at the Riken social decision science laboratory in Japan. "Meaning state-oriented people were just as good, and as fast at making those small choices, as were the action-oriented people. The action-oriented people were, however, much more confident." The team asked participants, who had been assessed -- through screening questionnaires -- to be either very decisive or not, to complete a number of tasks.
Obligatory anecdote... (Score:5, Funny)
"I've never been wrong. Except for that one time I thought I was wrong but it turned out I was right."
Re: (Score:3)
Mod parent Funny, but it's also along the lines of the current Slashdot fortune cookie:
"It is better to have tried and failed than to have failed to try, but the result's the same." - Mike Dennison
But I hope Mr Dennison is wrong. Something is learned on the journey even when the destination is different than hoped for. Ignorance of the learning is no excuse?
And of course the Dunning-Kruger Effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] is also an obligatory citation.
But my take on the entire story is "Of course." Though it matters that they refuse to become discouraged in any sensible way no matter how many times they co
Re: (Score:2)
It is better to have never tried at all, saving the time, work, and money, than to have tried and failed.
Especially if you instead go and try something else and do kind of OK.
- every person that refused to invest in Theranos and instead kept the money in a mutual fund.
Re: (Score:2)
It turned out that you were right in thinking that you were wrong? The second statement cancels out the first.
Re: (Score:2)
That whooshing sound was the joke flying over your head....
The speaker said or believed X at some point in the past. They later thought X was wrong, but it turned out that X was true, and their belief that X was wrong was their only actual mistake. So they would have had a perfect record if only they never doubted themself.
Re: (Score:2)
I hear that wooshing noise a lot these days. Sometimes, it sounds like I'm living across from a runway at O'Hare.
Wrong (Score:2)
I can confidently state this study is rubbish.
Re: (Score:2)
Do what you want how you want and don't ask "Why?" seems to be a takeaway from this study.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you say "Putin"?
Re: Wrong (Score:2)
TFA says both groups were just as fast. So it's not clear either is reaching a decision sooner.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably, if for no other reason it does not consider consequences of indecisiveness, to the (non) decider and the people he works with.
With that, knowing you need more information to decide is different from having the information and not being able to make up the mind.
"Confidence" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Dunning-Kruger Effect is a real thing; and the fact is some people are just better at metacognition than others.
Re: (Score:2)
Well a problem is Narcissist (Where Narcissism is an actual psychological illness, which is actually very detrimental to the person and others) due to their condition, just show confidence as part of their personality. This often gets them into high positions because Confidence is considered a positive trait, and the only people who seem to relay be able to spot them out, are those who are Competent and Confident in their own abilities that they actually trust themselves enough to see that the otherguy is
Re: (Score:2)
However am I actually being a bad person
Probably. Just like the rest of us.
So? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But if only jumping to conclusions was an Olympic event! I could have a chestful of medals!
That still makes them more productive (Score:2)
because they don't waste time pondering: they get right to the ass-guessed point.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't confuse productivity with being busy.
Re: (Score:2)
No it doesn't, because they waste time doing the wrong thing or acting on the wrong information. They either then double down on what they're doing, or they create churn with all the backtracking and re-planning.
Don't confuse productivity with being busy.
This would only be true if the group that didn't make decisions faster was actually more accurate - but according to the research, that is not the case. GP's point absolutely stands.
That's also the whole point of "fail faster" in the software industry - it's not important to fail, it's important to get to work faster, so that if you fail, you rebound from it more quickly. Sitting around bemoaning the possibility of failing gets nothing accomplished. Note that this applies only to testable software and proce
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Doing prototyping is a completely orthogonal activity to being confident about something.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm talking about a proof of concept (POC) which is much more primitive than a prototype. You would attempt to build a POC when you don't have confidence in whether the idea can be executed from a technical point of view [codilime.com].
And then if it's successful, the POC gives you confidence to proceed in that direction and start working on the prototype.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference between prototype and poc is beside the point.
The point is about confidence vs self-doubters.
You can do poc and then a prototype and still maintain doubt about the next stage, and then the next.
I wouldn't trust anyone who is full of confidence at any stage without mounting evidence to back it up.
Re: (Score:2)
You still don't understand the purpose of a proof-of-concept. Worse, you don't want to.
Ok, we're done here.
Re: (Score:2)
This would only be true if the group that didn't make decisions faster was actually more accurate - but according to the research, that is not the case. GP's point absolutely stands.
No it doesn't stand, because I didn't say that the converse was more accurate. I was saying that they're not MORE productive. That is all.
They may be productive in some ways. But they are not MORE productive than the ALTERNATIVE if you average it out.
Re: (Score:2)
Well like all things in life, there is often a balance between seemingly opposing ideologies.
It is much like the Torturous and the Hair race.
If you are too quickly to jump and do the job without consideration, you could get it done before the other had finished thinking about it.
However if you did it wrong or made a mistake in the process then that might set you back, where the person who did more planning initially would get an upper hand.
Lets say there was a job to put 1,000 records into a system.
A decisi
Re: (Score:3)
It can go both ways.
A decisive person jumps in prematurely and screws things up because they wanted to act now. Or further, they not only started, but they aren't revisiting and adjusting course in the face of new information, either because they aren't even seeking new information to inform course corrections, or because they believe never showing weakness is some sort of virtue.
Meanwhile, someone who refuses to act until they gather all data without regard for when the decision may be 'in time', may miss
Re: (Score:2)
Nowhere can that imply I'm saying that the OTHER side is MORE productive.
I should not have to spell everything out.
Guessed you missed that part - yet you're sure (Score:5, Informative)
> That still makes them more productive because they don't waste time pondering: they get right to the ass-guessed point.
You sound pretty confident there.
Seems you didn't waste 6 seconds reading the summary before replying to it. It says:
"Meaning state-oriented people were just as good, and as fast at making those small choices, as were the action-oriented people".
The speed is the same. The only difference is that one group understands that they may be wrong, so they can later adapt when things aren't working as they expected.
Re: (Score:2)
The only difference is that one group understands that they may be wrong, so they can later adapt when things aren't working as they expected.
yes, but the real important difference is not in the decision makers in but the bystanders, they do get the impression that the confident guy actually knows what he's doing. that's how leadership works, and that's why most leaders are actually just overconfident clueless assholes.
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like you've been following some not-very-good leaders.
The leaders I follow are distinguished by the ability to and willingness to make the best decision possible *despite* limited information. Look at the information with appropriate care, then make a decision. Then - here's an important part - be willing to change course as you get more information.
That last bit can be seen writ large between Putin and Biden. I'm not a fanboi of any of those men. I do see that as Biden learned that as the situation
who, for the last 52 years? (Score:2)
Just curious - in your soap opera, who exactly has been running Joe Biden for the last 52 years?
Re: (Score:2)
You sound pretty confident there. Seems you didn't waste 6 seconds reading the summary before replying to it. It says:
"Meaning state-oriented people were just as good, and as fast at making those small choices, as were the action-oriented people".
The speed is the same. The only difference is that one group understands that they may be wrong, so they can later adapt when things aren't working as they expected.
This is an extremely weird way to put things. What is the point of the entire structure of this summary being the difference between "people who tend to be decisive, known as action-oriented people, and those who struggle to commit to a choice, known as state-oriented people"? What is this "struggle" they refer to, if not strongly characterized by the time involved in the decision?
One of the definitions of the term "decisive" is actually "characterized by or displaying no or little hesitation". Why do they
Re: (Score:2)
Nice catch on the behavior of person you responded too!
Re: (Score:2)
No. Doubters are not more wrong than deciders.
For all the know, the deciders are wrong most of the time. In fact, that might make them even faster.
What the hell...? (Score:2)
What the hell is a "pub quizzer"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Quiz.
-er suffix often denoting a person that does something.
It shouldn't be so hard to work out.
Re: (Score:2)
Given what you say, it's still open to several interpretations, at least two of which are somewhat plausible:
1) A person who quizzes pubs. Makes no sense if you interpret "pub" as a location, possibly makes sense if "pub" refers to the owner or principle person of the establishment (sort of like "The White House announced...").
2) A person who stands in the pub on Friday nights and reads trivia questions to the audience. From a linguistic viewpoint (and from your description of '-er' as someone who does so
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What the hell is a "pub quizzer"?
What is a "pub quizzer"? - someone who does pub quizzes.
What is a "pub"? - it's short for "public house".
What is a "public house"? - an establishment licensed to sell alcohol for consumption on premises.
What is a "quiz"? - a set of questions where you try to give answers.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, these must all be EU terms...not something I'd be finding commonly recognizable at a glance.
I go to "bars" not pubs.
Ok, till now, this is the first time I've ever heard the term "public hous
Re: (Score:2)
They certainly are well known in the US - brew pub, gastro pub, pub crawl, etc. And 'trivial nights' are certainly a thing at many bars (pubs). And many bars have TVs that constantly run trivia games that patrons can play and compete against other people in the bar in other bars. And these games often have a time element - the quicker you answer (correctly) the more points you get.
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't bars mostly for drinking, watching sports and chasing women?
And playing pool, darts, ... My local one here in Seattle has a load of board games too.
Re: (Score:2)
We do have pubs in the US as well, but the distinction vs bars (vs brewhouses, brewpubs, cantinas, saloons, taverns, nightclubs, etc, all of which I have encountered here in US) is unclear to me. It might be one of those things like "restaurant" vs "bistro" vs "eatery" vs a bunch of other synonyms: when you're naming your business, pick whatever sounds best.
Trivia contests at bars (or whatever they call themselves!) aren't unheard of in the US, either. And while banks of TVs for sports are a big thing (pers
Re: (Score:2)
Hey.. (Score:2)
Be nice to those with OCD and other compulsive behavioral traits. They need to obsesses on whatever it is they are obsessing on. If they need to waste 10 minutes to feel they did the "best" possible job, then that's what it needs to take.
You just have to learn this about people and deal with them in the appropriate manner.
I work with a guy that has mentioned thinks he may be on the spectrum for aspergers and it really fits. We both write orders for our department and there is a certain amount of forecasting
Re: (Score:2)
I resemble that remark.
I've sometimes said that if there are two sides to an issue, I can see all three.
Obligatory Simpsons (Score:3)
Max Power : Kids: there's three ways to do things; the right way, the wrong way and the Max Power way.
Bart: Isn't that the wrong way?
Max Power : Yeah, but faster!
It Doesn't Matter... (Score:2)
If you make choices and they are as right as anyone else's, you'll end up being seen as the one that 'makes good choices' because you actually do something instead of talking about it and debating it forever.
--
The best preparation for tomorrow is doing your best today. - H. Jackson Brown, Jr.
This week in Tesla news (Score:2, Offtopic)
First, Musk said people must return to the office [cnn.com]. Or else.
"If you don't show up, we will assume you have resigned."
And it must be for at least 40 hours each week because, according to Musk's comments from two weeks ago [fortune.com], Americans lack a work ethic, unlike Chinese workers.
Second, Musk is saying he will lay off 10% of Tesla's workforce [forbes.com] because he has a "super bad" feeling about the economy.
Third, Musk is being sued by Twitter shareholders [reuters.com] claiming
Re: This week in Tesla news (Score:2)
There isn't any relevant Tesla news.
Re: (Score:2)
There isn't any SpaceX news, either, since SpaceX sending astronauts to the ISS has become almost as routine as a bus route. Also since the FAA is sitting on its ___ pretending to do an environmental impact study on SpaceX's Starship and Super Heavy, when in all likelihood they're just trying to ensure that NASA's Senate Launch System gets off the ground first. IMNSHO.
So how else can Musk get in the news?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The "super bad" feeling about the economy is especially interesting in light of his very recent, massively overpriced bid for a company that is not profitable. Not a move that a "super bad" feeling about the economy would support.
Of course, the "super bad" comment should be taken like everything else he says, just more manipulation for his personal interests. I think the top 10% of the company should leave now, it would be a win-win for them, for the industry AND for Elon's stated goals. Anything to acce
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't want to buy Twitter to make a profit, the idea was to be able to engage in media manipulation like his fellow billionaires, who already own media outlets.
But then he figured out it was a dumb idea and now he's trying to weasel out.
dont expect ppl to believe u if u doubt yourself (Score:3)
Not the same thing at all.
Re: (Score:2)
> How does the study differentiate arrogance from confidence?
Confidence is an element of arrogance. The distinction is irrelevant to the nature of the study.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the title is backwards (Score:2)
Self doubters tend to study all the angles. Look deeply into each decision. Get cold feet and look at the problem again. Worry that itâ(TM)s the wrong choice and study the problem yet again. You would think that their decisions would be more accurate and better than someone who just says âoeThat oneâ when making a decision. So to me, it sounds like decisive people (like myself) are just as accurate as self doubters who waste precious life moments studying the fuck out of irrelevant issues. I
Re: (Score:2)
This has been especially apparent in the bosses I have worked under. There have been many a meet
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
However, I take issue with the study because it excluded free will. That is, the participants had no influence over the correctness of their assertions. I would argue that is not really decision-making, but only question-answering.
In reality, decision-making matters most when you have at le
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I generally learned to keep quiet when Boss was getting details wrong, realizing that sometimes he was making a larger point, and the detail was not important (at that time, in public). Later I might instruct him if it was moderately important. And yes, if it was a critical detail, and it was the type of meeting where the details were critical, I'd speak up.
Re: (Score:3)
But there are lots of cases where doing nothing is better than making the problem worse. Delaying a response may also allow the problem to "mature" so that the best solution approach becomes more obvious.
Re: (Score:3)
So to me, it sounds like decisive people (like myself) are just as accurate as self doubters who waste precious life moments studying the fuck out of irrelevant issues. I am glad for the confirmation.
I see you didn't read the fine article.
Decisive idiots still idiots (Score:2)
Who would have ever expected that...
Re: (Score:2)
Indecisive idiots are also still idiots
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indecisive idiots are also still idiots
Yes, but far less obnoxious.
Re: (Score:2)
This seems like an appropriate thread to include this truism: "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realize that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
Re: (Score:2)
That's because you're a decisive idiot. We indecisive idiots weren't so sure.
I suppose they needed to study this (Score:2)
But it's not exactly news. I think most of us have suspected this all along - if anything, based on my personal experiences I'd expect the "decisive people" to be wrong more often.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong is often not binary either. If you get a decision, and end up "close", is that good enough? Sometimes we obsess with being 100% on target, when 80% will do just fine.
A missing piece (Score:2)
I am, in general in-decisive. I find that I do typically make "better" or more accurate decisions than generally decisive people, but I've learned over time that this isn't always a good thing. There's a payoff in being able to make a less accurate decision more quickly vs. making a more accurate one with more time and effort. Some highly decisive people get a better payoff because they know that being 100% correct on small things isn't worth the cost. However there are also highly decisive people who are
Faster is better (Score:3)
But by deciding sooner, the decisive people will learn sooner if they were wrong, so can correct the original problem more quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That makes perfect sense and is exactly what any reasonable person would expect.
So, of course, the summary says that you're wrong. (!?!) No, really:
I'm as surprised as you are. WTF.
self-doubters at a disadvantage (Score:2)
Taking no action is the wrong move about the half the time. Depending on circumstances of course.
Most of us are aware that iterating on a problem until the solution is perfect is how big projects fail to meet deadlines. Getting your perfect but incomplete project makes you feel way worse than shipping something where you regret not being able to spend more time on some aspects of it.
Radical uncertainty (Score:2)
In a book I read recently, entitled "Radical Uncertainty", it was pointed out that most important decisions have to be made without sufficient data to deduce the "right" decision. One of the authors was Mervyn King, who was governor of the Bank of England for ten years. I presume he had a lot of important decisions to make in his job, and could not hang about waiting for detailed studies to inform decisions. What I got from the analysis is that in a great many cases, we simply don't know. We don't know what
Re: (Score:2)
Suffice to say that Popper considered such theories largely a load of BS, and dangerous BS at that, leading to the evils of Nazism and Stalinism.
It's pretty normal for people in dire straits to fall for strong rhetoric from a strong leader. I think it's safe to assume that's been happening throughout time. How is that not natural? We're supposed to be the masters of nature, not mastered by it, so what's natural is only relevant in terms of making useful predictions. And it should have been predicted that a destitute Germany would go wrong, and some did predict it. Were they wrong?
Re: (Score:2)
I think Popper's point was that there is no magic hidden mechanism of destiny, which is a common theme in Nazism and various other mythologies. Yes, it is psychologically natural for people to fall for strong rhetoric, in order to cling to some hope for the future, but that does not mean that the simplistic theories of the demagogue actually correspond to laws of nature, which is the sense in which I used the word "natural". As far as I can understand Nazi philosophy, they believed that there was an inevita
Re: (Score:2)
As far as I can understand Nazi philosophy, they believed that there was an inevitable course of evolution of society, that would lead to the master race prevailing over inferior races.
Maybe they were right, but wrong about the race ;)
Seriously though, yes the Nazi leadership apparently believed in the inherent superiority of the supposed Aryan race. But race was just made up to justify white people shitting on brown people, so that was always a spectacularly dumb thing to believe.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, brown people did not figure in Nazi racism very much, as far as I know. Jews were the top villains. There was also the theory of lebensraum (living room), which involved invasion of lands to the east of Germany. The Slavs who lived there were considered inferior to the Aryan race, and thus it was "destiny" that the superior race would prevail. The fact is that there weren't that many brown people in Europe, compared to Jews.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, brown people did not figure in Nazi racism very much, as far as I know.
You don't know much. [aaihs.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I am not denying that the Nazis persecuted black people. It is just that the really big genocide was focused on Jews. I think it safe to assume that the Nazis persecuted anybody not like them, and anybody they considered "defective". I am just reading about Jesse Owens winning four gold medals in the 1936 Berlin Olympics. This upset Adolf Hitler. However, Hitler was someone who never let facts get in the way of his ideology.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not denying that the Nazis persecuted black people. It is just that the really big genocide was focused on Jews.
They had more Jews to persecute.
I think it safe to assume that the Nazis persecuted anybody not like them, and anybody they considered "defective".
...which was anybody not like them. They were just working their way down their list, and Jews were at the top for whatever reason; some think Hitler was a self-hating Jew. (There is some evidence of same.)
I am just reading about Jesse Owens winning four gold medals in the 1936 Berlin Olympics. This upset Adolf Hitler. However, Hitler was someone who never let facts get in the way of his ideology.
Most don't.
Devil's Dictionary (Score:2)
This puts me in mind of The Devil's Dictionary [amazon.ca] by Ambrose Bierce, which amongst its many gems offered...
positive
(adjective): Mistaken at the top of ones voice.
Re: (Score:2)
This puts me in mind of The Devil's Dictionary [amazon.ca] by Ambrose Bierce, which amongst its many gems offered...
positive
(adjective): Mistaken at the top of ones voice.
A favorite tome! Valid in all fields of technology, business, politics, and religion.
Isn't that kinda the point? (Score:2)
Right or wrong, the decision has been made and you move forward.
More often than not, the act of making a decision has moved things forward; whether or not the decision is later shown to be the wrong one.
Nobody ever said they were more accurate. (Score:3)
The point isn't that decisiveness is BETTER in terms of the decisions made.
The point of decisiveness is that in a wide variety of contexts, delay HAS ITS OWN COST which is wasted in the decision making process.
A good decision after a week of dithering likely will not give as good an outcome as a good decision made promptly. A bad decision made immediately is only rarely worse than a bad decision made after several hours of lip-chewing, hemming, hawing, and indecision.
Good or bad, generally it's better to make up ones' mind quickly if there's no real benefit to contemplation. The trick is knowing which problems actually WILL be worth mulling over, and which really won't.
The real benefit (Score:2)
Another way of saying... (Score:2)
Self-Doubters No More Accurate Than Decisive People, Study Says
half-full, or half-empty?
The gaming logic is often misstated. (Score:2)
On the other hand, you have two cases: Confident logical and compulsive-doubting logical. The way these work is, logic tells you something, and you either commit to its lessons or adopt a timid posture based on what is essentially superstition / fear of failure. A confident logical thinker has the full benefit of their logical process while also having the personal
So what does this mean for doctors? (Score:2)
They suffer less (Score:2)
Which is very important, as suffering & stress are not good for your health