Itβs easier to spot faults in others than to give them credit.
And Duke University researchers think they know why.
While placed in an fMRI machine which monitored their brain activity, participants read different scenarios:
Scenario 1
The CEO knew the plan would harm the environment, but he did not care at all about the effect the plan would have on the environment. He started the plan solely to increase profits. Did the CEO intentionally harm the environment?
π 82% said yes.
Scenario 2
The CEO knew the plan would help the environment, but he did not care at all about the effect the plan would have on the environment. He started the plan solely to increase profits. Did the CEO intentionally help the environment?
π Only 23% said yes.
The only change was one word β harm to help.
But that changed how people perceived his intentionality.
When judging harmful actions, people relied on the amygdala, the emotional βfight or flightβ centre.
But when judging helpful actions, the amygdala stayed quiet, and people relied more on slower, statistical reasoning from the prefrontal cortex.
In short, weβre wired to see negative outcomes as intentional, but positive outcomes as accidental.
And that bias shows up everywhere β at work, at home, in our relationships. Criticism flows quickly, recognition takes effort.
So, knowing this about yourself and those around you, how will you counterbalance it?
Ref: https://today.duke.edu/2015/12/intentionality
π If you found this interesting, let me know! Buy me a virtual coffee β or forward this email βοΈ to someone who also might like it. Your occasional support means I can keep sharing ideas about behavioural science for free.
π§ Learn the science of Influencing Action
π Be shown exactly what to do to get better results for your small business
Hey, are we connected yet?
