Different types of Thinking

Human brain consists of two different ways of thinking – 

System 1 and System 2.

System 1 is fast, automatic, based on impressions, is quick to make associations between events, cannot be switched off and requires little effort or energy to operate. It operates in normal times. System 1 simplifies or assumes ‘what you see is all there is‘(WYSIATI). It is open to cognitive bias – systemic tendencies to deviate from rational calculations.

The biases are:

1) Confirmation Bias: Pick up information that fits into their existing experiences and pay less attention to the contrary information available.

2) Sunk Cost Bias: Administrators often expend effort, time and resources in an Endeavour. Even after all evidences shows that the program is giving astray and results are unlikely to be achieved, they will continue with the earlier course of action.

3. Anchor and insufficient adjustment bias: Administrators take the initial position and rest their decision on this stand and fail to move away from the first point of view.

System 2 is slow, deliberate and requires effort to make it operate; it is lazy and tires easily and prefers to accept what System 1 tells. 

“The view of the man at the bottom of the hierarchy who writes the first note on a file is all important in most instances.” Paul Appleby

Administrators get into adverse situation mainly due to their reliance on System 1. System 1 operated on Heuristics – automatic assumptions based on experiences without having thought through them carefully. System 2 requires effort evaluating those heuristics; thinking slow requires effort. Administrators are prone to think fast or take the path of least resistance.

“Intelligence is not only the ability to reason; it is also the ability to find relevant material in memory and to deploy attention when needed.”

Think “reactively” to accomplish routine tasks. When dealing with complicated task containing value conflicts, engage in “reflective” thinking.

Source: Sameer Sharma, “Using behavior economics will help officers take better decisions.” Economic times, 9 January, 2018