
Suppose a digital
clock says the time is 2:42. You probably do a quick mental calculation and
think “OK, I have about 20 minutes until my 3 o’clock appointment.” But if you look at an analog clock, you
probably don’t even bother with the minute-level of precision because you
immediately have an intuition of how much time is left until 3. The
digital readout demands just a little bit of cognitive effort, while the analog
readout is immediately intuitive. Some
analog clocks don’t even have numbers.
Psychologists
have discovered that people have two ways of making decisions, called System 1
and System 2. System 1 depends on
experience and intuition. It is
relatively fast, comfortable, and effortless.
System 2 is more like the scientific method. It relies on data
gathering, logic, analysis, and cognitive work.
A lot of people do not like System 2 thinking because it is more
work. “I’m not a math person; I go with
my gut.”
There is a
time for System 1 and a time for System 2. System 1 is what you want if you are being
chased by a bear. You don’t have time for analysis and you have plenty of
hormonal intuition about fight or flight. Forget the analysis, run!
But System 1
can get you into a lot of trouble. They
are bad for investment decisions and bad for deciding when to go to war. That’s when you need System 2. Facts, data, analysis, logic, formal models.
In making
risk decisions, when should we use System 1 vs System 2? If the consequences of being wrong are small,
and we have good intuition, or we must make an immediate decision, System 1 is
probably the ticket. Otherwise, the
effort of System 2 will likely have a good payoff.
But using
System 2 is not necessarily hugely burdensome.
Sometimes a quick back-of-the-envelope analysis, or a moment of
reflection, is all you need. After all,
that is what you did in reading the digital clock. You can train for it.
For more on
Systems 1 and 2, there is no better source than Thinking, Fast and Slow, by Daniel Kahneman.
No comments:
Post a Comment