How to Change Your Mind When Decision-Making

A few years back, I wrote a couple of pieces for this blog on how to change people’s minds, even if what they believe is categorically wrong. Cook and Lewandowsky’s (2011) debunking handbook was discussed as a potential set of guidelines, as were considerations over people’s existing cognitive schemas, (emotional) relationship with the erroneous information, and willingness and disposition towards thinking. I also wrote about how it’s important to consider changing your own mind about things, which, unfortunately, is often just as difficult a task.

A useful way of looking at changing one’s mind isn’t about being wrong; rather, it is a means of updating your knowledge. An example I often refer to applies here: recall a time when we were taught that there were nine planets in our solar system. Then, in 2006, Pluto was reclassified as a dwarf planet, leaving us with the updated knowledge that there are eight planets. It’s not that scientists were wrong and couldn’t count the celestial bodies; instead, they were able to amass so much additional information about the nature of things that they could change their minds for the betterment of knowledge. As such, changing one’s mind is about improvement. It is a step in the right direction. Of course, not everyone approaches the concept of changing their minds in this manner.

The impetus for this post came from a quote that I recently encountered, attributed to Charlie Munger who passed away in November (see ‘Is Avoiding Stupidity Better Than Seeking Brilliance?’). “Any year that you don’t destroy one of your best-loved ideas is probably a wasted year.” The quote exemplifies my points about changing one’s mind. Strip the bias and emotional connection away from the idea and evaluate it as objectively as possible. Dispense the belief if it doesn’t work or is erroneous. Again, this is difficult because we like our ideas, they’re ours! Unfortunately, due to confirmation and self-serving biases, we often overestimate how good our thinking actually is in context.

The inconsistency avoidance tendency
Munger referred to this resistance to changing one’s mind as the inconsistency avoidance tendency. When we make a decision, we stick with it because we don’t want to look weak in our decision-making. You don’t want to be inconsistent in your beliefs, attitudes, and ideas; when you find one you like, you tend to stick with it. Before the integration of video replay consultation by referees in many sports, the refs made a decision and stuck with it. Rarely did they ever change their minds after a decision was made. They don’t want to look indecisive or weak, especially in front of players or coaches, who might try to exploit such weakness in terms of future decisions.

The moment you make a decision, you grow to like it more and more over time—even within seconds—because once it has been generated, we see its potential. Munger further discussed the notion that once an idea is generated and a decision is made around that, we are often reinforced to see that decision through because we have already simulated a reality wherein we have reaped the benefits of it. For example, when I was younger, I would go with my mother to play bingo. On the occasions that I was waiting on one number, she would tell me “You’re not going to win.” She always said that.

Once you believe you’re going to win—some prize, money, new position—you’ve simulated what it would be like to have your reward; thus, making the feeling of losing worse. “Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst,” she’d say.

When you make a decision based on some simulation of what that means, what will come after, et cetera, then you have created a bias in favour of that decision. If you were to change your mind, then it may be that all that comes with your initial decision goes away as well. So, even when you’re evaluating your decision-making, as a critical thinker would, it’s often difficult to find the flaws in your thinking or even look for them as effortfully as you might about someone else’s thinking.

In this context, to change your mind would require that you dispense with the anticipated benefits you believed would result from your decision. Another way of looking at this is in terms of gambling, for example, in poker: once you have thrown your chips into the pot, that money is gone – it’s no longer yours. However, there is a tendency for people to chase after it, as if it was still their money; thus leading them to continue in the game despite their weak hand. Given our aversion to losing (for example, Kahneman, 2011) we chase the win. The point is, that folding the hand does not represent a loss; rather, the person paid to see the cards. Cognitively reframing a situation like this may be beneficial for overcoming such aversion. Likewise, we can apply this to our thinking, beliefs, and attitudes—through changing one's mind. "It’s not the case that I was wrong; rather, I’m updating my knowledge." Similarly, we are not losing our worldviews or beliefs; instead, we are enhancing our knowledge.