The
purpose of this discussion aims at stimulating thought and self
awareness as tools
to help those in recovery
from trauma learn how to make safer
choices. To make the discussion more jocular, we've defined
Cognitive Biases as “CranioRectal
Inversions” (CRI).
On a
practical and personal level, I find that many biases overlap,
allowing us to see the world favorably and in a way that paints us in
a favorable light. As noted in the previous post, we have to trust
our own perceptions as reasonably accurate as a starting point, and
from that assumption, we can adapt and adjust them in light of new
information. If we are healthy and live in optimism, we must trust
in our perceptions until we're given cause to do otherwise. We also
tend to give others the benefit of the doubt until they give us cause
to doubt them.
Cognitive
dissonance occurs when we're challenged by new information that
conflicts with what we already trust to be real and true. Robert
Cialdini highlights how powerful this cognitive dissonance can be
for us, explaining how salesmen can use this predisposition for
consistency
to manipulate us into buying something we don't necessarily want,
just to reduce our stress.
A salesman might say that only the most
conscientious use my product, and people who aren't smart enough to
care will use a cheaper, inferior alternative. We like people to
think of us in the way that we think about ourselves, and we're
likely to buy the product just to prove to ourselves that we're
smart, thoughtful and caring.
A
Helpful Alternative
If I
want to reduce my stress level when confronted with challenging
information and I don't want to comply, I can rely upon confirmation
bias to drop that stress of dissonance created by conflict. Just as
we tend to prefer positive ideas about ourselves, we can also prefer
to believe what we already believe – a prejudice that supports that
which we already trust as truth. This most powerful bias can almost
seem like good judgement, and we can rationalize that only
information that confirms our stance can be reliable.
Anything challenging information or source of it can be dismissed as
false or tainted.
Just as
we select certain items of information, narrowing hundreds of items
down to only a few that we notice, because of our innate tendency
towards confirmation bias, we often screen out pertinent information
to avoid these challenges. We ignore anything that we wish to
dismiss, and we cherry pick only that which supports what we believe.
If
something does happen to get through our filtering process and we
take in the information that we find challenging, we then have the
option of dismissing and discounting it. If it does get past our
first line of the denial of defense, we can analyze it in a way that
gives it little or no value. The tendency also affects our memory
and how we recall information. We believe that we treat all
information equally, but we tend to prefer to recall that which
supports our bias. Our attention, our thought processes, and our
recall all select that which reduces our stress instead of raising
it.
Beware
the Love Bomb!
“Love
Bombing” refers to the show of (genuine or feigned) love and
affection that a motivated individual or group bestows upon their
'mark' in order to endear themselves. The mark, (the person that a
manipulator “marks” or targets as an object to be exploited) in a
very subjective response to the overwhelming, pleasant experience of
the great show of affection, becomes biased towards the manipulator,
preferring only information that paints the people who have been good
to them in a positive light.
The
subtle and very powerful influence exploits deeply personal, very
human needs, wants and desires so that the person who has been
targeted will likely not notice any hint of manipulation. Until
they're given significant and painful cause to doubt their
manipulator, most people will dismiss or deny anything negative about
them. Confirmation bias causes them to prefer the manipulator. Love
bombing encompasses two of Cialdini's weapons of influence:
consistency as well as liking
– aided by our tendency towards confirmation bias.
So many
people have told me that they never would have believed that their
pastor was capable of spiritual abuse if it had not happened to them
personally. Even after the fact, cognitive bias – our preference
for people who we like and want to see in a positive light –
interferes with our recovery. How could we have been so wrong?
The term
“love bombing” actually originated within the Unification Church
and was frequently used by Reverend Moon himself as early as the
1970’s. Other “Bible-based cults” or cultic Evangelical
Christian groups, per the testimony of former members, also used this
very terminology themselves to describe their efforts of evangelism
(i.e., recruitment). Although counter-cult literature makes use of
the term to identify the tactics of reducing one’s resistance to a
manipulative person or group, the term originated from within the
vernacular of cults themselves.
For
Further Reading until the next post:
- Carnegie Mellon's News Archive
- Shermer's The Believing Brain
- Carroll's Skeptic's Dictionary
- Judith Herman's Trauma
and Recovery
