Why a Wrong Explanation Can Feel So Right

What I love about psychology is how it presents itself in the everyday experiences we all have. Here’s a little example from me this week that got me thinking about the relationship between feeling and knowing.

As coffee lovers, my partner and I recently purchased a new coffee machine with two independent elements: a filter with a hot plate, and a pod dispenser. Last week, I made a travel-mug quantity of coffee into the jug. My partner then prepared her usual latte using the pod dispenser. When I returned for a second cup, I noticed the hot plate was off. I instantly assumed that using the pod side must switch off the hot plate. This happened again, which strengthened my confidence sufficiently that I told my partner that this was how the machine worked and that she needed to switch the hot plate back on.

The following day, I noticed that preparing a quantity of coffee sufficient for a travel mug didn’t activate the hot plate. So it wasn’t that the two parts of the machine were autonomous; rather, the key variable was the quantity of coffee selected: travel mug quantities don’t activate the hot plate.

My plausible explanation had mutated to established fact before it had even been tested. I had inferred a causal relationship without sufficient actual evidence to support this idea.

When the Stakes Are Higher

This got me thinking about how often we make an observation, infer some meaning or cause, seek confirmation, then develop a degree of confidence in our assumption and communicate this idea to someone else, solidifying it even more.

While this is of little consequence for my coffee machine experience, when we consider examples in life that are more emotionally provoking and relate to health, work, relationships, and our sense of identity, the stakes are somewhat higher.

As I thought about this a little more, it seemed apparent that we frequently assign an immediate explanation to experiences. A difficult relationship could be seen as an attachment problem. Someone behaving in a selfish way can be deemed a narcissist. Fatigue or exhaustion might be seen as evidence of nervous system dysregulation, or difficulty concentrating could be interpreted as ADHD.

Of course, some of these explanations may be true. But that’s not the point I’m making. The more interesting psychological question for me was: Why does an explanation that feels so plausible so easily become an explanation that feels absolute and true?

The question I kept coming back to was: What is this explanation doing beyond simply providing information?

There is some interesting research that might help us understand this. In a series of experiments by cognitive scientist Ruben Laukkonen and colleagues, people were presented with statements about the world while having to solve an anagram connected to completing the sentence. Sometimes solving the anagram produced an “aha” experience internally, the feeling that something has just clicked into place.

But the really interesting part was that the insight derived from solving the anagram provided no evidence that the statement they were reading was actually true. Yet, when people experienced that “aha” moment, they rated the completed statement as more truthful.

This is termed “insight misattribution”: the positive feeling accompanying an insight or discovery that spills over and influences some other belief or statement.

This is not to say that the feeling is always wrong because sometimes it will be right. But we need to be careful, because the feeling that something has clicked into place does not necessarily tell us that what has clicked into place is factually correct.

Why Do We Want To Know?

Sometimes we aren't simply trying to find the right explanation. We're also trying to stop not knowing.

Psychologists Arie Kruglanski and Donna Webster have described this as a need for “cognitive closure.” This essentially means that we have a desire for a definite answer to diminish our uncertainty or ambiguity. Their research suggests something particularly interesting can happen when this need becomes stronger. We can “seize” on an explanation relatively quickly and then “freeze” on it, becoming less receptive to alternative possibilities.

Cognition Essential Reads

Perceiving Stickiness in Augmented Reality

Why Negative Thoughts Get Stuck

There are very good reasons the mind behaves in this way. Life is full of incomplete explanations, yet action is frequently required. We tend to infer, predict, and fill in the gaps, and most of the time this works well. Attempting to implement a scientific approach to every decision we make would be functionally impossible.

The challenge arises when the line blurs between what we observed and what we inferred, particularly when the explanation concerns something of importance.

But I think there's another layer worth exploring. Uncertainty is more than just an intellectual experience; it brings an emotional charge. In a series of experiments, Yoav Bar-Anan and colleagues investigated whether simply feeling uncertain could influence related emotional responses. They found that uncertainty intensified reactions to both unpleasant and pleasant experiences.

Imagine you receive a text from your partner saying, “Can we talk tonight?” The uncertainty will likely generate some internal feelings, and you might find yourself revisiting thoughts in an attempt to uncover a plausible explanation. If, on the other hand, the text reads, “Can we talk tonight about where we go for dinner on Friday?” there is no uncertainty and less emotional charge.

Another example could be receiving a text that says, “I’ve got a surprise for you tonight.” This uncertainty might trigger anticipation and some pleasant emotions. If a second text reveals the nature of the surprise, the pleasant anticipatory emotions may be diminished. That’s why we might say, “Don’t tell me, you’ll spoil the surprise.” Our motivation to resolve uncertainty could depend on the emotional experience that accompanies it.

From a mind-body perspective, I sometimes think of repetitive thinking as an attempt to resolve an uncomfortable state of uncertainty. Additional information or an explanation may close the loop.

Uncertainty that feels threatening can motivate us towards an explanation that closes the loop. But closing that loop doesn’t always end discomfort. There are instances where the explanation gives rise to more negative feelings.

When uncertainty feels threatening, the drive to find an explanation may partly become a drive to change the experience of not knowing. Closure doesn’t necessarily make us feel better, but it does give us something more concrete to feel bad about.

There is an important distinction between how an explanation serves us and what the evidence actually tells us. An explanation can make sense of an uncertain experience, give it meaning and predictability, which in turn could give closure. While these are of great psychological value, they don’t necessarily provide evidence that the explanation itself is true.

Separating Observation From Interpretation

There's an irony here that we should consider. I've just spent the last few minutes offering you an explanation for why explanations can feel convincing. And if something in this post has produced its own little “aha,” then my argument suggests you shouldn't accept it simply because it feels right either.

The useful thing about my coffee-machine explanation wasn't eventually finding another explanation that felt more convincing. It was discovering a way to test which explanation was actually right. My experience taught me that posing some questions can help prevent becoming attached to an observation too quickly. You can ask yourself:

1. What did I directly observe?
2. What feelings are present in my body?
3. What have I inferred from my observation?
4. Which other explanations remain possible?
5. What evidence would cause me to revise my conclusions?
6. What does having an explanation do for me?

Bringing some scientific thinking into our everyday lives can make those assumptions more visible so we can test them before they turn into “fact