3 more dangerous behavioural science myths - and what to do about them
Earlier this year I wrote about three dangerous behavioural science myths…
…unfortunately however there are many more than three!
This article describes three further behavioural science myths – along again with what to do about them.
The three myths are as follows:
1. Human behaviour is irrational
2. Systems 1 and 2 exist as distinct regions of the brain
3. People don’t do what they say they do
Let’s look at each myth in turn…
Myth 1: Human behaviour is irrational
The Idiot Brain. Predictably Irrational. You are not so smart.
Whether accidentally or not, books like the above have helped to feed Myth 1: Human behaviour is irrational.
However, a definitive Human behaviour is irrational is simply not true.
Why?
The first reason is that what appears irrational behaviour to a researcher is often very rational to whoever is doing it…
…but unfortunately the researcher doesn’t always look hard enough for (or report back) the rational explanation(s).
Take pension saving.
Here, many people may appear not to be saving “enough” into pensions. However, at the same time they may be doing other things which render their approach to pensions saving far from irrational.
For example, instead of saving into a pension they may be:
Prioritising other long-term investments – e.g. buy to let property
Building a business with a plan to sell it in the future
Simply unable to commit to the future at the expense of the now
All of the above are completely rational – but may not be discovered unless the researcher digs a bit deeper.
A second, more subtle argument against seemingly irrational behaviours concerns methodologies used to “prove” this point.
In summary, effects such as cognitive biases (which are often offered as definitive evidence of human irrationality) are found (if at all) at group level – not individual level.
In other words, the methodology used does not allow us to accurately say all people are affected by one cognitive bias or other. At best we can only say some people are affected.
The arguments above not withstanding, there are certainly things humans can struggle with. However, trying to claim all human behaviour is irrational is simply inaccurate.
What to do as researchers about Myth 1:
Try not to fall into the trap of using the false characterisation of human irrationality to dismiss as “irrational” any respondent behaviours or attitudes whose logic is not immediately obvious: instead, dig deeper at the individual level to try to understand their (likely rational) reasoning
Be careful not to over-report any cognitive biases uncovered: typically at most any bias will only affect a few respondents within a sample
2. Systems 1 and 2 exist as distinct regions of the brain
System 1 and 2 were popularised by Daniel Kahneman in his bestseller Thinking, Fast and Slow.
The idea of two separate parts of the brain – one fast, intuitive and automatic, with the other slow, deliberate and effortful – is extremely compelling as it’s simple and easy to understand.
Unfortunately however, the evidence for this, and other authors’ portrayals of “dual systems” is weak.
What’s more, even Kahneman himself – when referring to Thinking, Fast and Slow – once said:
“I should begin by saying that I don’t believe they are really systems. They are expository fictions, and I write the book as a psychodrama between two fictitious characters.”
To be clear, this is not to say that automatic processing (often using shortcut rules of thumb, or heuristics) and reflective processing don’t contribute to decisions.
However, there is scant robust evidence to suggest that these are represented by different regions of the brain. What’s more, automatic and reflective processing often work in tandem in decision-making.
What to do as researchers about Myth 2:
Try not to concern yourself with whether different respondent behaviours could be described as originating in the fictitious system 1 or system 2
Instead, incorporate robust models like COM-B into your research that consider both automatic and reflective processing, along with many other forms of potential influence (e.g. respondent knowledge, self-belief etc.)
3. People don’t do what they say they do
“The trouble with market research is that people don't think what they feel, they don't say what they think and they don't do what they say” (David Ogilvy)
The “say-do gap” describes how people don’t do what they say. This – along with the quote above from David Ogilvy – has long been used by some to discredit market research.
However, like Myth 1 above (Human irrationality) it’s a gross exaggeration.
Further, there are various ways in which we as researchers can perpetuate this myth – falling into the trap of convincing ourselves that people never do what they say they do.
Take the testing of new concepts in market research.
Unless you present respondents with a perfectly realistic choice scenario you are always likely to severely over-estimate likely uptake – thus perpetuating Myth 3.
Similarly, the inherent falseness of the research scenario – where most respondents will be overly positive to try and please the researcher – creates further belief in this myth.
In summary, there will of course be some situations where people will not do as they say (for example they might not feel comfortable admitting to some things). However, a blanket People don’t do what they say they do is a dangerous statement and is definitely not true across all situations.
What to do about Myth 3:
Use triangulation of different data sources (e.g. purchasing data + market research) to properly test the relationship between what people say and do in your area of interest
In concept testing, for a more realistic insight into what people might do, go into as much detail as you can: for example, instead of asking only about things like appeal, ask about the types of things / order of events that’d need to happen for the respondent to buy the product
Finally, if you’re concerned in particular about potential under-reporting of sensitive behaviours, see article 3 here for some question tips
Conclusion
This article has presented the following three behavioural science myths:
1. Human behaviour is irrational
2. Systems 1 and 2 exist as distinct regions of the brain
3. People don’t do what they say they do
If you’d like to learn more check out our publications on three alternative behavioural theories – or four alternative frameworks.