For the past few years my father has continually recommended that I read Thinking, Fast and Slow. He believed I would enjoy it so much to go so far as sending me a copy of the book at some point during my sophomore year. Due to the craziness of school I never got around to reading the book, so when we were asked to read the book for class I was very excited.
As I read through the first five chapters I was instantly captured by learning about how the brain works and the impact that its functioning has on our interactions with information and others around us. There are many different aspects of this book that I found interesting and relatable to my personal experiences, and I could talk about these at length; however, there is one application of the biases that are a result of how System 1 and System 2 that I find particularly interesting.
Kahneman begins to address the application of the bias when he gives the following example,
“An individual has been described by a neighbor as follows: “Steve is very shy and withdrawn, invariable helpful but with little interest in people or in the world of reality. A meek and tidy soul, he has a need for order and structure, and a passion for detail.” Is Steve more likely to be a librarian or farmer?
Our instinct is to say that Steve is a librarian, but statistically it is more likely that he is a farmer, as there are more librarians than farmers in the United States. This is an example of System 1 making the quick and easy decision as System 2 was lazy and did not take the time to logically think through this situation. While this seems like a small mistake, when applied to other contexts, it can have consequential outcomes for ourselves and those around us.
This past Friday as a part of my pre-service teacher training I attended a training put on by the Center for Global Studies, where we discussed how we talk to people in and outside of our culture and the impact this can have. We discussed things such as the actor-observer bias, culturalism, cognitive dissonance, and many other psychological tendencies that influence our interactions with others. As we discussed these ideas and the implications that they may have in our classrooms as we work with students, I could not help but think about the role that the ideas discussed by Kahneman have in this process.
The overall idea of the training was that we look at someone and instinctively label them as a member of a certain group and believe that they must be defined by what we associate with this group. An example of this would be “All white males like grilling,” so when we encounter a white male, we assume they must like grilling. As I considered the why behind this human tendency that everyone has, I could not help think of System 1. When we meet a new person it is natural to want to discover as much information about them as possible so we can judge (not in a negative way) who they are and what role they have in relation to ourselves. By labeling a person as a certain group, we can tell ourselves that we know about them and feel more comfortable ourselves. This is System 1 – making a quick decision and judgement.
However, this can turn negative very quickly. When we meet someone and label them, we often carry with that label many negative thoughts and beliefs about the category of that label. The development of these beliefs is also an instinctive reaction that is not well thought through as “System 1 provides the impressions that often turn into your beliefs and is the source of the impulses that often become your choices.” (p.58). So when we act on System 1 alone we label people with negativity and assumptions and do not get to know them for who they really are.
I saw an example of this at the Penn State vs. Temple game this weekend. As Penn State Students, myself included, we look at a student in cherry and white Temple gear and label them as a “Temple Student.” With this label may come characteristics such as dumb, lazy, rude, and lacking class. We naturally associate this with every Temple fan who entered the stadium. On the other hand, every Temple student looks at a student in blue and white and labels them “Penn State Student.” With this label may come characteristics such as pretentious, obnoxious, and rude. (Disclaimer: these are not things that I think to be true of either population, but I will admit my instinct, System 1, brings them to mind first). This labeling then farther shapes our actions with how we treat these groups, for example my friend from Temple who I met at the game having food thrown at him when visiting me in the student section. While we found this to be humorous, in another context you can see how this instinct can be harmful. What these students didn’t know is that this was my Best Friend’s little brother who I have known for years and who has a heart of gold and stood respectfully to honor Joe Paterno even when his peers did not, and who continually strives to serve those around him.
The reason that we do such things is not because we are an inherently mean species, but because our brains are lazy. System 2 does not want to put in the effort to combat our instincts with what we actually know to be true about the people in these groups. It takes focus and cognitive effort to first recognize how our biases are affecting our views of others and our actions.
When I return to the context of a classroom and the impact this can have, I am reminded of the importance of exposing students to these ideas. In mathematics specifically a teacher or a person may look at a student and label them as female and in doing so associate them as less able in mathematics, despite the fact that women often outperform men. By crafting opportunities to discuss the biases we have and where they come from with students, they will be able to begin to combat the impact these snap judgements have.
But how does one combat this. Here I will draw on the expertise of Kahneman. “Errors can be prevented only by the enhanced monitoring and effortful activity of System 2… [one must] learn to recognize situations in which mistakes are likely and try harder to avoid significant mistakes when the stakes are high.” (p.28)
The process of combating these biases is not an easy one for, but one that is critical in striving towards a world where we treat each other with empathy, kindness, love, and acce
As a fellow student who is also preparing to become a teacher, and has opportunities to currently teach and tutor on a voluntary basis, I find the thoughts you lay out in this post to be very insightful, and particularly important for educators. Over the summer, I had the opportunity to take a class that focused on culture as it relates to teaching ESL. During that course, we talked about different methods of approaching culture as we interact with our students. At one point, we talked about the idea that students are socialized into cultures, rather than born with an inherent cultural essence. One example that is particularly relevant to my life is the tendency to focus on fact memorization and exam scores in the Chinese education system. Because of the system’s focus, students learn very early on to also focus on these two aspects of education. As a result, American English teachers who go to teach in China frequently bemoan the lack of critical thinking and creativity in their students. Although this may be a very real issue in English classrooms in China, I was reminded not to view this as a “cultural essence” of all Chinese students. It may be a cultural trend, but it is one that is learned, and it can also be unlearned, although it may be a challenging process. Furthermore, it is not a focus that every Chinese student has necessarily acquired, so while awareness of the trend is crucial, I should not make assumptions about my individual students. Although I am not especially familiar with Thinking, Fast and Slow, I believe that cultural knowledge and beliefs such as this one are a key place where we must be careful to activate system 2, rather than relying on system 1 to make quick assumptions for us about students’ personal cultures. As you said, the implications of this in the classroom could be quite serious for students.
Thanks for your great explanatory post. I am a Community, Environment, Development major and in my Local Government and Power class we read an article on the Economist called “Yes I’d Lie to You” (found here http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21706498-dishonesty-politics-nothing-new-manner-which-some-politicians-now-lie-and I’d highly recommend) and the article mentions the book Thinking, Fast and Slow. I was so happy to see the collision between materials. The article explores post-truth politics as it is being manifested in this election cycle, ramifications of the weakening significance of data, and the psychological reasonings for this change. In my class, we spoke a lot about confirmation bias and how a single instance or a small frame of an instance and confirm notion someone possesses. We also talked about how data or videos or content can be spliced and framed to achieve a specific goal.
From a biological anthropology perspective (my freshman major and I’m an anth minor), I find it fascinating to think about why we are inclined to make assumptions and hold biases. I think it is because it is advantageous of us to make assumptions and quick decisions in instances or moments there could be potential danger. But now in the pretty safe and information saturated world we live in, consciousness and critical thinking is essential to transcend these assumptions. I look forward to possibly reading this book too, sounds so interesting and like the findings are applicable in so many disciplines.