The Scottish philosopher David Hume once wrote ”a wise man proportions his beliefs to the evidence.” In contrast, he also wrote, “reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions”. This is the paradox of misinformation.
I had the good fortune to listen to a lecture by Cailin O’Connor a while ago and received a copy of her book, The Misinformation Age, co-authored with James Owen Weatherall.
Humans are social creatures, so we are strongly influenced by the people and ideas around us. The authors share how beliefs are tested through repeated connections with others and are gradually confirmed or challenged through these social interactions. The more regularly beliefs are confirmed and not challenged, the stronger they may become.
Our Social Networks and Our Beliefs
If we want to develop successful scientific theories to help us anticipate the consequences of our choices, mistrusting people with different beliefs can create polarized camps that fail to listen to real, trustworthy evidence coming from the other side.
In A Noncooperative Model of Network Formation by Venkatesh Bala and Sanjeev Goyal (2000) the authors hypothesize that the "cost" of forming a new link in a network is disproportionality borne by the person initiating the new contact. Once a member of an existing network, there is a strong tendency to conformance, and it is a risk to reach out to another network. In this model, scientists within the light node network may come to believe that the data supporting action B is accurate, but still not change their behavior.
Misinformation and Advertising
This pattern assumes that the data being shared is accurate, which is not always true. The Tobacco Industry Research Committee is a classic example of purposefully misleading scientific results during the 1950s and 60s. Edward Bernays' book Crystallizing Public Opinion (1928) is a primer on how to use advertising as propaganda to change people's beliefs. He wrote, "We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." This concept of propaganda is clearly reflected in the role of modern social media Influencers.
It was interesting for me to learn that the theory that high-fat foods cause obesity was promulgated by the sugar industry. Industrial groups can exert pressure on the community of scientists to produce more results favorable to their industry by simply increasing the number of studies produced by well-intentioned scientists who happen to be wrong. This muddies the water, and it takes longer for consensus to emerge regarding the real truth. This has been the case with research regarding climate change. Journalists may exacerbate this tendency by feeling a responsibility to share "both sides" of a controversial topic, thereby giving credibility to fringe theories with little evidence.
Keep Diverse Networks, Consider the Evidence
The fact is we cannot be experts about everything, so we need to rely on our networks to provide information. The conclusion of this book is that we will derive a more accurate understanding of the world by having more diverse networks of information and by being willing to consider evidence that does not immediately seem to fit in with our established beliefs.
If you would like to explore how these concepts play out in your workplace or with your team, please contact me for a complimentary consultation.
