Slashdot Mirror
Why It's Easier To Make Decisions For Someone Else (hbr.org)
Evan Polman, writing for HBR: In my research with Yi Liu and Yongfang Liu of East China Normal University in China and Jiangli Jiao of Xinjiang Normal University in China, we looked at how people make decisions for themselves and for others. We were interested in the process and quantity of information a decision maker uses when choosing for others versus choosing for the self. We wanted to know: Is more information searched in the process when people choose for others versus for themselves, and does the way they evaluate that information change based on whom they are choosing for?
To test our hypotheses, we performed eight studies with over a thousand participants. Throughout the series of randomized tests, participants were given a list of restaurants, or job options, or dating profiles -- each with detailed information and then participants were asked to make choices for themselves or for someone else based on that information.
What we found was two-fold: Not only did participants choose differently when it was for themselves rather than for someone else, but the way they chose was different. When choosing for themselves, participants focused more on a granular level, zeroing in on the minutiae, something we described in our research as a cautious mindset. Employing a cautious mindset when making a choice means being more reserved, deliberate, and risk averse. Rather than exploring and collecting a plethora of options, the cautious mindset prefers to consider a few at a time on a deeper level, examining a cross-section of the larger whole.
Upon reflection, these results should feel familiar. Think about the most recent time you asked for a raise. Many people are initially afraid to ask (employing a cautious mindset); however, these same people are often very supportive in recommending to others (such as their friends or colleagues) that they ask (employing an adventurous mindset). When people recommend what others should do, they come up with ideas and choices and solutions that are more optimistic and action-oriented, focus on more positive information and imagine more favorable consequences. Meanwhile, when making their own choices, people tend to envision everything that could go wrong, leading to doubt and second-guesses.
To test our hypotheses, we performed eight studies with over a thousand participants. Throughout the series of randomized tests, participants were given a list of restaurants, or job options, or dating profiles -- each with detailed information and then participants were asked to make choices for themselves or for someone else based on that information.
What we found was two-fold: Not only did participants choose differently when it was for themselves rather than for someone else, but the way they chose was different. When choosing for themselves, participants focused more on a granular level, zeroing in on the minutiae, something we described in our research as a cautious mindset. Employing a cautious mindset when making a choice means being more reserved, deliberate, and risk averse. Rather than exploring and collecting a plethora of options, the cautious mindset prefers to consider a few at a time on a deeper level, examining a cross-section of the larger whole.
Upon reflection, these results should feel familiar. Think about the most recent time you asked for a raise. Many people are initially afraid to ask (employing a cautious mindset); however, these same people are often very supportive in recommending to others (such as their friends or colleagues) that they ask (employing an adventurous mindset). When people recommend what others should do, they come up with ideas and choices and solutions that are more optimistic and action-oriented, focus on more positive information and imagine more favorable consequences. Meanwhile, when making their own choices, people tend to envision everything that could go wrong, leading to doubt and second-guesses.
Why it's easier to make decisions for someone else:
There's less that is personally at stake.
DING DING DING we have a winner. It's basic survival instincts and evolution at play.
If you die, YOU DIE. Game over, you don't get to spread your genes any further.
If your FRIEND dies, you win his mate.
If your friend SURVIVES, he helps you in return, which makes it easier to spread your genes.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
I don't think that's really it, and not everything has to be boiled down to evolutionary biology.
I suspect it's more that there's a difference between, "this is hypothetically a good decision for someone," and "this is actually a good decision for me." When you're thinking about someone else's life, you're free to think more abstractly and just think about it in terms of general principles. When you're making the decision for yourself, and you plan on going through with the decision, you have a wealth of information about yourself and your own life to bring into the analysis, and you're more likely to consider the practical consequences of the decision. Then, for better or worse, they're also more likely to be personally emotionally attached to some of the consequences of those actions.