Everyone has moments when they're absolutely convinced they are right about something but they're actually wrong. The reason is because people often believe they know enough about the topic to be confident in their answer or decision but really they're lacking crucial details. In a new study by researchers at Ohio State, Johns Hopkins University, and Stanford, they refer to this phenomenon as the "illusion of information adequacy."
"We found that, in general, people don't stop to think whether there might be more information that would help them make a more informed decision," said OSU English professor Angus Fletcher. "If you give people a few pieces of information that seems to line up, most will say 'that sounds about right' and go with that."
The illusion of information adequacy is similar in some ways to the Dunning-Kruger effect, a cognitive bias that occurs when people with limited knowledge or competence in a certain area overestimate their abilities.
For the study, the researchers divided more than 1,200 Americans into three groups and given an article about an imaginary school that was experiencing a water shortage.
One group read an article that only gave reasons why the school should merge with another that had adequate water; a second group's article only gave reasons for staying separate and hoping for other solutions; and the third control group read all the arguments for the schools merging and for staying separate.
From OSU:
The findings showed that the two groups who read only half the story – either just the pro-merging or the just the anti-merging arguments – still believed they had enough information to make a good decision, Fletcher said. Most of them said they would follow the recommendations in the article they read.
"Those with only half the information were actually more confident in their decision to merge or remain separate than those who had the complete story," Fletcher said.
"They were quite sure that their decision was the right one, even though they didn't have all the information."
The good news? Many of the study participants changed their minds once they learned more. The bad news?
That may not work all the time, especially on entrenched ideological issues, he said. In those cases, people may not trust new information, or they may try to reframe it to fit their preexisting views.
