How can an Ivy League football game played in 1951 help us to see the world more clearly?
Subject: Motivated Perception and Reasoning - Ivy League Football
Event: Dartmouth and Princeton Football Game, 1951
We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are. -Anaïs Nin
On this day in 1951, two Ivy League teams, Princeton and Dartmouth, played a football game in Princeton, New Jersey. The game was roughly played; Princeton’s star tailback left the game in the second quarter with a broken nose, and at the end of the third quarter, a Dartmouth player broke his leg. Princeton prevailed.
If not for two psychologists, one from Princeton -- Hadley Cantril, and another from Dartmouth -- Albert Hastorf, the game might have been just another forgotten football game. What made it memorable, however, was a follow-up study published by the two psychologists.
About one week after the game, Hastorf and Cantril asked students from both schools to give their assessment of the game. Their responses depended on their school: Princeton students overwhelmingly blamed Dartmouth for the rough play while Dartmouth students blamed Princeton.
Hastorf and Cantril then had all students watch a film of the game and keep track of infractions by players on both teams as if they were a referee. The results showed both groups of students were unable to see the game dispassionately or objectively; the Princeton students still blamed Dartmouth and the Dartmouth students still blamed Princeton. Although both groups of students watched the same film, both groups seemed to be watching an entirely different game.
Hastorf and Cantril published their case study entitled “They Saw a Game” in 1954. It established the concept of motivated perception; in short, we don’t always see reality; instead, we see what we want to see. This concept is similar to motivated reasoning, where instead of coming to conclusions based on evidence, we interpret the evidence in a way that fits our preconceived beliefs. In other words, we don’t always believe the truth; instead, we believe what we want to believe (1).
In her 2021 book The Scout Mindset, Julia Galef warns against the dangers of self-deception and of motivated reasoning. Like the college students in 1951, we sometimes employ emotionally-biased reasoning to produce the verdict we want to be true in favor of the actual truth. We cherry-pick evidence that supports our side, and we rationalize to make a case sound better than it actually is. Galef calls motivated reasoning the soldier mindset and argues that it is an unconscious cognitive bias that needs to be exposed and rooted out. Galef also prescribes a more sound, reasonable approach called the scout mindset. Instead of seeing what we want to see or being defensive, we need to seek first to understand. We should be skeptical of our own conclusions and value the pursuit of truth over our fears of being right or wrong. The pursuit of the scout mindset means testing your own claims and understanding that changing your mind is not a sign of weakness (2).
One powerful way to understand motivated reasoning is to see it through the eyes of a sports fan. Imagine you are watching a basketball game, a game where your favorite team is competing for a championship against a longtime rival. Imagine your reaction when your team is charged with a foul that results in points being taken off the scoreboard. What would be your honest reaction? Would your emotions motivate you to find immediate fault with the referee's call and begin to construct rationalizations for why the call was wrong? Or would you calmly accept the call and defer to the referee’s indifferent judgment? Most honest fans -- short for “fanatics” -- will admit that their emotional
investment in their team prejudices them and blinds them to objective judgment. In addition, they are rarely even consciously aware of their own bias. To further understand the impact of motivated reasoning, compare the reaction you have when your team is called for a foul versus when your team’s opponent is called for a foul? In the latter case, do you spend any time or emotional energy scrutinizing the fairness or justice of such a decision?
Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason: What is the difference between the soldier mindset and the scout mindset, and which mindset was more prominent in the 1951 football study?
Challenge - Scouts and Soldiers: Write a public service announcement that explains the thinking behind the scout mindset versus the soldier mindset. Try to persuade your audience that the scout mindset is preferable and a possible solution to the political polarization that is plaguing our country.
Sources:
1-Resnick, Brian. “How desire can warp our view of the world.” Vox.com 8 Aug. 2019.
2-Galef, Julia. The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don’t. New York: Portfolio/Penguin, 2021.
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment