CLOSE
Original image

The Abilene Paradox

Original image

How often has this happened to you: your family gets together for the holidays and ends up doing something -- going out for food, playing some game, going to see a movie -- that nobody actually wants to do? This happened to me over the holidays when my family planned a trip to a local restaurant. We all agreed to go at a certain time, because each of us assumed that everybody else wanted to go. But secretly, nobody wanted to go. We caught the situation at the last minute when somebody piped up and confessed that he didn't particularly want to go out. "Oh, me neither!" we all agreed.

There's a name for this situation, my brother then told us: the Abilene paradox. According to Wikipedia:

The Abilene paradox is a paradox in which a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of any of the individuals in the group. It involves a common breakdown of group communication in which each member mistakenly believes that their own preferences are counter to the group's and do not raise objections.

Of course, in my case somebody did raise an objection -- but there must have been countless instances where we've done something (like seen a particular movie, etc.) which actually none of us particularly wanted to do. Read more about the Abilene paradox after the jump.

More from Wikipedia:

It was observed by management expert Jerry B. Harvey in his article The Abilene Paradox and other Meditations on Management. [Now expanded into a book -Higgins] The name of the phenomenon comes from an anecdote in the article which Harvey uses to elucidate the paradox:

"On a hot afternoon visiting in Coleman, Texas, the family is comfortably playing dominoes on a porch, until the father-in-law suggests that they take a trip to Abilene [53 miles north] for dinner. The wife says, "Sounds like a great idea." The husband, despite having reservations because the drive is long and hot, thinks that his preferences must be out-of-step with the group and says, "Sounds good to me. I just hope your mother wants to go." The mother-in-law then says, "Of course I want to go. I haven't been to Abilene in a long time."

The drive is hot, dusty, and long. When they arrive at the cafeteria, the food is as bad. They arrive back home four hours later, exhausted.

One of them dishonestly says, "It was a great trip, wasn't it." The mother-in-law says that, actually, she would rather have stayed home, but went along since the other three were so enthusiastic. The husband says, "I wasn't delighted to be doing what we were doing. I only went to satisfy the rest of you." The wife says, "I just went along to keep you happy. I would have had to be crazy to want to go out in the heat like that." The father-in-law then says that he only suggested it because he thought the others might be bored.

The group sits back, perplexed that they together decided to take a trip which none of them wanted. They each would have preferred to sit comfortably, but did not admit to it when they still had time to enjoy the afternoon.

Have you experienced the Abilene paradox? Share your experiences in the comments...and remember to speak up the next time you don't want to do something!

Original image
iStock
arrow
science
Does Self-Control Deplete Over the Course of the Day? Maybe Not, Says New Study
Original image
iStock

For months now, I’ve been trying to cut out sugar from my diet. I’ve read about all the ways my sweet tooth will be the death of me, and I’ve resolved to give it up. And yet, even as I write this, my long-term goal to eat healthy is losing out to my eternal desire to eat M&Ms at my desk. Is it because it’s the end of the day, and I’ve been trying to make choices for eight hours already? Or is it something else?

A new study in PLOS One pushes back on the popular theory known as "ego depletion," which hypothesizes that self-control is a finite resource that depletes throughout the day, much like energy levels. Instead, researchers from the University of Toronto and the learning technology company Cerego found that people's self-control depletes when it comes to doing one task for a long period of time, but that self-control fatigue isn't a factor when you're switching tasks. In other words, it's hard to say no to the box of cookies all day long, but saying no to the box of cookies won't impede other acts of self-control, like your ability to focus on your homework instead of turning on the TV.

The study used data from Cerego, which publishes online study materials, examining the study behaviors of two groups of college students using the Cerego system as part of semester-long psychology courses. The researchers looked at data from two groups of users, one group of 8700 students and one of almost 8800, focusing on how long they worked during each session and how well they performed at the memory tests within the curriculum.

If self-control really is a finite resource, it should be depleted by the end of the day, after people presumably have spent many hours resisting their first impulses in one way or another. But the researchers found that this wasn't true. Overall, students didn't do any better if they used the program earlier in the morning. Instead, performances peaked around 2 p.m., and people logged in to use the software more and more as the day went on, suggesting that the motivation to learn doesn't fall off at night (though that may also be because that's when college students do their homework in general).

However, mental resources did seem to be drained by doing the same task for a long period of time. The researchers found that after a certain point, students' performance dropped off, peaking at about 28 minutes of work. They made about 5 percent more mistakes 50 minutes into the session compared to that peak.

When it comes to the idea that we exhaust our store of self-control, the authors write, "the notion that this fatigue is completely fluid, and that it emerges after minutes of self-control, is under considerable doubt."

The notion of ego depletion comes from a 1998 study in which researchers asked participants to hang out in a room full of fresh-baked cookies, telling them to eat only from a bowl of radishes, leaving the cookies untouched. Then, those volunteers worked on an impossible puzzle. Volunteers who had spent time avoiding the delicious pull of cookies gave up on the mind-boggling task an average of 11 minutes earlier than a group of volunteers who were brought into the same room and allowed to eat as many cookies as they wanted. (Lucky them.)

Since then, the idea has taken off, leading to hundreds of subsequent studies and even influencing the habits of people like Barack Obama, who told Vanity Fair in 2011 that he only wore blue or gray suits in order to cut down on the non-vital decisions he had to make throughout the day.

This current study isn't the first to challenge the theory’s veracity, though. In 2016, a 2000-person replication study by some of the same authors (with scientists in 23 different labs) pushed back on the theory of ego depletion, finding that short spurts of self-control didn't have any effect on subsequent tasks. This study just adds to the evidence against the well-established idea.

So it's looking more and more like ego depletion isn't a good excuse for my afternoon vending-machine habit. Perhaps the true secret to excellent self-control is this: Just be a raven.

Original image
iStock
arrow
science
Think Other People Have More Friends Than You? You’re Probably Wrong
Original image
iStock

If you've ever felt bad about how small your social circle seems compared to everyone else's, fear not. A new study finds that most people overestimate how large the social groups of people around them are, according to Business Insider. In other words, people think others are way more popular than they actually are.

The study, published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin by researchers at the University of British Columbia, explored the prevalence of this misconception among first-year college students. Because freshmen are just entering a new social environment, many are leaving their longstanding social circles behind for the larger, unfamiliar territory of college life. They might not have made very many friends yet, but it appears that most believe that their peers have.

The two experiments surveyed a total of almost 1500 students combined. In the first, almost 1100 second-semester freshmen were asked about the number of close friends and acquaintances they had made at school—distinguished by whether or not they confided personal problems in them or not—then to estimate how many friends the other first-year students had made in the same time period. Almost half the students thought that others had more close friends at school than they did, while just 31 percent estimated that they had more close friends at school than others did. The same went for the number of acquaintances they had. The students reported having an average of 3.6 close friends of their own, but thought that others had an average of 4.2 close friends.

In the second experiment, the researchers followed almost 390 students, divided into two groups, for two years, asking them the same questions as in the first experiment. They also asked what percentage of their total time they spent socializing with friends they made prior to coming to college as well as what percentage of time they spent socializing with other students they met at UBC. They estimated how much time others spent on the same activities, then completed questionnaires on their well-being, life-satisfaction, loneliness, and sense of belonging.

Again, most of the students thought that other people had more friends than they did, and estimated that their peers spent more time socializing with their new college friends than they themselves did. This misperception extended even to their specific close friends and acquaintances, who they believed spent more time socializing with their other new friends than they did. However, the more time the participant spent with said friends and acquaintances, the smaller the gap between perception and reality were. Importantly, people who believed that everyone else was more popular than they were reported lower levels of well-being and a lower sense of belonging.

This misreading of others' experiences may in part be due to the fact that a lot of social activities are very visible, whereas hanging out by yourself is, by nature, not. Eating with a bunch of people in the dining hall is a public activity that others can see, whereas few people see you studying alone in your room. "This could make it difficult for students to imagine the prevalence of their peers' solitary activities and therefore to over-rely on peers' publicly visible social activities to estimate their peers' social connectedness," the researchers write.

The study only examined the perceptions of young people who find themselves in a totally new social environment, but it's easy to imagine that the same misperception could exist outside of college, too. It's not the only misconception we tend to have about friendship, after all. In 2016, a study revealed a depressing stat: As many as half of your friendships might be one-sided, meaning you consider someone your friend, but they don't consider you theirs.

It turns out, when it comes to our social lives, most of us have no idea what's going on.

[h/t Business Insider]

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER
More from mental floss studios