Russell Golman, David Hagmann, and George Loewenstein, “Information
Avoidance.” Journal of Economic Literature 55(1): 96-135, March 2017 [pdf].
• Why do you not want to see my outline of this article?
• Rational people in an individual decision-making situation – that is, situations where information possession holds no implications for inter-personal strategic concerns – should always be happy to receive accurate information if it is freely available. But people often actively avoid acquiring such information.
• Patients avoid medical information, teachers don’t read their evaluations, and, in down markets, investors don’t check the value of their portfolios. Golman et al. refer to “active information avoidance” as involving the avoidance of information even if the info is free and the person knows it is available.
• A studied ignorance might lend us moral wiggle room: for instance, if we “don’t know” the conditions on factory farms, we can live with our dining choices. (OK, that example is mine, not in the article.) We might want to maintain plausible deniability as a way to avoid unwelcome responsibilities.
• Even if you learn information, you might (strangely?) choose to ignore it.
• We might have protected beliefs, so we actively avoid information that might challenge those beliefs. We could go so far as to seek to silence dissenters from our views.
• Surely some information avoidance is good: if you will eat dessert anyway, perhaps it is best not to know its caloric load. Perhaps you can live a more pleasant life by not knowing of some looming medical problem, or about your partner’s infidelity.
• When new information becomes universally available, confirmation biases can lead to further polarization of opinions. New (controverting) information might even remind you of (and sustain) the reasons that you held your initial beliefs in the first place.
• Intelligence does not protect people against biased beliefs; rather, it might make it easier to justify one’s preferred beliefs.
• People can self-sabotage – undertake actions not fitted to their abilities, for instance – to avoid learning the quality of their talents.
• People might avoid information because they prefer that compound lotteries (that resolve over time) might best be enjoyed by only learning the final, overall outcome. (Do I want to know the score of the White Sox game in the third inning? If the Sox are behind, I will be sad, and if they are ahead, then the only new “news” I can get later occurs if they lose, and the loss will then be extra painful.)
• Sometimes people are just plain curious, they seek out information that is of no instrumental value to them.
• Humans often are mistaken in thinking that the receipt of bad news will unleash anxiety – and therefore they might be mistaken in trying to shield themselves from bad news. Sometimes the elimination of uncertainty can begin the process of adaptation to the new normal.
• Bad news attracts our attention, and so we might try to avoid potentially bad news as a method to prevent this “distraction” from occurring.
• Regret aversion might lead people to avoid information on how things would have turned out if they had taken a different path.
• People tend to be overly optimistic, and such optimism appears to hold benefits. Information might be avoided or ignored for the sake of sustaining optimism – within individuals as well as groups.
• One reason people might try to maintain existing beliefs is that they are serviceable, even if flawed – you can only rebuild a leaky boat at sea piecemeal, you can’t tear it down and start fresh.
• If you are committed to a belief, you will not want to acquire information challenging it. The belief might even be part of your self-image, your identity.
• Information avoidance might help with self-control issues, such as side-stepping temptations or maintaining motivation.
• Spoiler alert! People might avoid information to maintain pleasant suspense.
• Why do you not want to see my outline of this article?
• Rational people in an individual decision-making situation – that is, situations where information possession holds no implications for inter-personal strategic concerns – should always be happy to receive accurate information if it is freely available. But people often actively avoid acquiring such information.
• Patients avoid medical information, teachers don’t read their evaluations, and, in down markets, investors don’t check the value of their portfolios. Golman et al. refer to “active information avoidance” as involving the avoidance of information even if the info is free and the person knows it is available.
• A studied ignorance might lend us moral wiggle room: for instance, if we “don’t know” the conditions on factory farms, we can live with our dining choices. (OK, that example is mine, not in the article.) We might want to maintain plausible deniability as a way to avoid unwelcome responsibilities.
• Even if you learn information, you might (strangely?) choose to ignore it.
• We might have protected beliefs, so we actively avoid information that might challenge those beliefs. We could go so far as to seek to silence dissenters from our views.
• Surely some information avoidance is good: if you will eat dessert anyway, perhaps it is best not to know its caloric load. Perhaps you can live a more pleasant life by not knowing of some looming medical problem, or about your partner’s infidelity.
• When new information becomes universally available, confirmation biases can lead to further polarization of opinions. New (controverting) information might even remind you of (and sustain) the reasons that you held your initial beliefs in the first place.
• Intelligence does not protect people against biased beliefs; rather, it might make it easier to justify one’s preferred beliefs.
• People can self-sabotage – undertake actions not fitted to their abilities, for instance – to avoid learning the quality of their talents.
• People might avoid information because they prefer that compound lotteries (that resolve over time) might best be enjoyed by only learning the final, overall outcome. (Do I want to know the score of the White Sox game in the third inning? If the Sox are behind, I will be sad, and if they are ahead, then the only new “news” I can get later occurs if they lose, and the loss will then be extra painful.)
• Sometimes people are just plain curious, they seek out information that is of no instrumental value to them.
• Humans often are mistaken in thinking that the receipt of bad news will unleash anxiety – and therefore they might be mistaken in trying to shield themselves from bad news. Sometimes the elimination of uncertainty can begin the process of adaptation to the new normal.
• Bad news attracts our attention, and so we might try to avoid potentially bad news as a method to prevent this “distraction” from occurring.
• Regret aversion might lead people to avoid information on how things would have turned out if they had taken a different path.
• People tend to be overly optimistic, and such optimism appears to hold benefits. Information might be avoided or ignored for the sake of sustaining optimism – within individuals as well as groups.
• One reason people might try to maintain existing beliefs is that they are serviceable, even if flawed – you can only rebuild a leaky boat at sea piecemeal, you can’t tear it down and start fresh.
• If you are committed to a belief, you will not want to acquire information challenging it. The belief might even be part of your self-image, your identity.
• Information avoidance might help with self-control issues, such as side-stepping temptations or maintaining motivation.
• Spoiler alert! People might avoid information to maintain pleasant suspense.
No comments:
Post a Comment