Option C: Schmoption B
This podcast talks about cognitive illusions, situations where our perception of a decision-making situation is different than reality. In the same way that an optical illusion "tricks your eyes" into seeing something that’s not really there, a cognitive illusion "tricks your mind" into approaching decisions in a less than rational way.
Let’s say that we know that people are equally as fond of cherry pie as they are of blueberry pie. And let’s say that I’m writing a scenario in one of our courses where we ask the learner to choose either cherry or blueberry pie. Based on the conditions of our premise, if we were to ask everybody on Earth what they want for desert, 50% would go for cherry and 50% would point to blueberry as their preferred and most delicious option. And that’s generally the way that things would shake out if we presented people with this decision, with those options.
But let’s say that we expanded that choice to include three options; cherry pie, blueberry pie or cherry pie with a human hair baked into the crust.
With that additional choice, we’ve created the conditions for a cognitive illusion. As you’d expect, people aren’t drawn to the cherry pie with the hair in the crust. But, according to the research that Ariely discusses in this presentation, the vast majority of the people would now choose cherry pie over blueberry pie. It’s no longer the 50-50 split that it was with two options. People who would otherwise prefer blueberry pie are now picking the cherry pie just by virtue of the face that there’s this new, gross kind of cherry pie on the table. The gross version of one option makes the untainted version look better than it is.
This is a cognitive illusion because, obviously, the way that we’ve presented the decision hasn’t really changed how people feel about pie… it’s just changed how they answered this question. By expanding the range of options to include a less than great version of Option A, you’ve instantly made Option A much more attractive and appealing than Option B.
Ariely gets into other, more nuanced examples of cognitive illusions, including an example where framing a decision differently changes physician recommendations of candidates for hip replacement surgery versus treatment with Tylenol. But this simple preference-based example of a cognitive illusion above made me think about the scenarios that we write in our courses. Also, it made me hungry.
When we write branching scenarios, we always give the learner a few different options of how to proceed. Usually, one answer choice represents the optimal behavior that we’re trying to teach, and the other choices all represent compelling sub-optimal behaviors that are rooted in specific misconceptions.
If there’s not a reason that someone would pick a choice, we don’t include it. Our thinking is that if there’s no rational reason that someone would do something, there’s no reason to present it as an option.
But in looking at the example that I’ve described above, there’s no reason why anyone would ever choose a cherry pie with a gigantic hair in it. So, I would never include that option in a scenario. But this podcast has shown me that by including that as an option, we’ve completely changed how people approach that decision.
It’s something that I’m going to think about the next time I write a scenario.
Let’s say I was working on a sales course that had this decision point:
Customer: “You know…. I just don’t know if I’m in the market for a new widget right now. I should probably talk to my wife first. I’ll tell you what…. I’ll call back tomorrow. You going to be around?”
Question: How should you respond to the customer?
Option A: Ask him if there’s any additional information that would help him make this decision. (Optimal Choice)
Option B: Thank him for his time and make sure that the customer has your contact information. (Sub-Optimal Choice)
How would this change with the introduction of another option?
Option C: Make a joke about the customer’s controlling wife as you make sure that the customer has your contact information. (Sub-Optimal Choice with the Hair In It)
Would this introduction of Choice C make people more likely to pick Option B?
If so, that’s a good thing. The more mistakes people make in our scenarios, the more expectation failure they’re experiencing — and the more expectation failure they’re experience, the more they’re learning.
