Sway: The Irrestible Pull of Irrational Behavior

• Pages: 08

SWAY: THE IRRESISTIBLE PULL OF IRRATIONAL BEHAVIOR1

REVIEWED BY MAJOR MICHAEL D. O'NEILL2

"What I tell you three times is true."3 This line from a Lewis Carroll story largely sums up the cautionary tale behind Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior, a book by Ori Brafman and his brother, Rom Brafman. Plucking from a myriad of anecdotal and scientific evidence, these two brothers attempt to persuade, or "sway," the reader into believing that even the most capable of minds are all too willing to accept perception over reality whenever emotions are involved.4 This is the "irrational" behavior noted in the book's title. I would contend, however, that much of what the authors term irrational is, in fact, quite rational in a world of limited facts and functional necessity. If we did not act on our perceived realities and instincts, our world would come to a screeching halt.

The Brafman brothers are not new to the study of human behavior. Ori is a self-proclaimed "organizational expert" and his brother Rom holds a doctorate in psychology.5 This book is not, however, an original study by the brothers. Rather, Sway gathers a broad range of behavioral studies performed by others and presents them with simple summaries, free of scientific jargon and complexity. While not perfect, Sway is a quick and enjoyable read that provides several keen insights for anyone called upon to lead, manage, or counsel. Whether you are a parent or a staff judge advocate, you would be wise to allow some sway in your beliefs regarding how you interact with others and how you process your daily judgments.

Sway states its purpose up front. It is intended to make the reader reflect on our natural tendencies to quickly "label a person or a situation."6 Once labeled, according to the authors, we will have shackled ourselves to that initial perception which then becomes our

reality; objectivity is lost and irrational thoughts can win the day. The Brafman brothers assert that virtually all of our daily judgments are influenced by this "irrational" bias.7

The authors never clearly define what it means to be "irrational" in this context, but it is clear that any decision tainted by emotion or bias could fall into that category.8 We must assume, in contrast, that a "rational" decision is the type of decision that would be made by an intelligent computer or Mr. Spock from Star Trek fame.9 One could argue that much of what the authors label as "irrational" is merely risk-taking gone bad. I would suggest that, had the risk-takers succeeded, we would praise their judgment, rather than label it "irrational."

Sway begins the way it ends, by introducing the reader to a wide range of counterintuitive case studies performed over the years. These studies typically fall into two broad categories: hindsight analysis of real life decision making or academic experiments with unwitting subjects and control groups.10 What most of these studies have in common is the advantage of being detached from the emotional decision-making process experienced by the subjects of the study. By looking in from afar, the observers can avoid the emotional ties that have driven a particular decision. No matter the reader's opinion on this type of second guessing, the outcome of these experiments will likely be a surprise.

Most startling were the studies that showed how powerful a placebo effect can be. A placebo effect is the "beneficial effect in a patient following a treatment that arises from the patient's expectations concerning the treatment rather than from the treatment itself."11 The placebo cited in Sway was not a sugar pill substituted for a prescription drug, but false information passed off as authentic to the test subjects.12

As with drug placebos, informational placebos seem to tap into the healing power of the human mind. Sway introduces the reader to a new

twist on the placebo effect-namely, the potential influence of simply being told that you are either elite or substandard without any objective basis for doing so.

The authors label this effect "value attribution." If the studies presented are to be believed, "value attribution" not only engenders bias in the attributor, but enhances or detracts from the actual performance of the subject of the attribution.13 In other words, simply being identified as elite can cause the subject to perform at higher levels on an objective test than he or she may have otherwise.14 In the reverse, being identified as substandard may cause subjects to perform worse.15

One given example of such an "attribution" effect involved Israeli soldiers who were randomly identified to their new military trainers as having "command potential" that was "high, regular," or "unknown."16

Neither the trainees nor their trainers had any knowledge that the designations were phony, but after fifteen weeks of training, those identified as having higher command potential...