|
Trusting your instincts leads you to the right answer
University
College London press release
A UCL (University College London) study has found that you are more
likely to perform well if you do not think too hard and instead trust
your instincts.
The
research, published online in the journal Current Biology, shows that,
in some cases, instinctive snap decisions are more reliable than
decisions taken using higher-level cognitive processes.
Participants, who were asked to pick the odd one out on a screen
covered in over 650 identical symbols, including one rotated version of
the same symbol, actually performed better when they were given no time
at all to linger on the symbols and so were forced to rely entirely on
their subconscious.
Dr Li Zhaoping, of the UCL Department of Psychology, said: “This
finding seems counter-intuitive. You would expect people to make more
accurate decisions when given the time to look properly. Instead they
performed better when given almost no time to think.
"The
conscious or top-level function of the brain, when active, vetoes our
initial subconscious decision – even when it is correct – leaving us
unaware or distrustful of our instincts and at an immediate
disadvantage. Falling back on our inbuilt, involuntary subconscious
processes for certain tasks is actually more effective than using our
higher-level cognitive functions.”
The study shows an instance when our rational mind is more likely to
perform worse than our subconscious – but the conscious mind still
tends to veto the subconscious.
Ten participants were asked to locate the only back to front version of
a repeated symbol on screen and were given between zero and 1.5 seconds
from the moment their eyes had landed on the odd one out to scrutinize
the image.
Participants
had to decide whether the odd one out was on the left or the right-hand
side of the screen. The researchers found that participants scored
better if they were given no scrutinizing time at all.
With only a tiny fraction of a second for scrutinizing the target,
subjects performed with 95 per cent accuracy. With over a second to
scrutinize the image, subjects were only 70 per cent accurate. With
more than four seconds, accuracy was recovered.
In this test, the instinctive decisions were more likely to be correct
because the subconscious brain recognises a rotated version of the same
object as different from the original, whereas the conscious brain sees
the two objects as identical. For the conscious brain, an apple is
still an apple whether rotated or not.
So
while the lower-level cognitive process spots the rotated image as the
odd one out, the higher-level function overrides that decision and
dismisses the rotated object because it is the same as all the other
symbols.
When
subjects were given the time to engage their higher-level functions,
their decisions were therefore more likely to be wrong.
Dr Zhaoping said: “If our higher-level and lower-level cognitive
processes are leading us to the same conclusions, there is no issue.
Often though, our instincts and higher-level functions are in conflict
and in this case our instincts are often silenced by our reasoning
conscious mind.
Participants
would have improved their performance if they had been able to switch
off their higher-level cognition by, for example, acting quickly.”
Tracking participants’ eye movements, the team controlled the time
allotted to each individual’s search for their target. The visual
display screen was switched off at various time intervals either before
or after the subjects’ eyes landed on the target.
When
the on-screen image was hidden immediately after the subjects’ eyes had
landed on the target, the subjects often believed they were just
guessing where the odd one out was. They were unaware that their gazes
had shifted to the target just before the image was hidden and their
answers weren’t guesswork at all.
Dr Zhaoping said: “Our eye movements are often involuntary. What seems
like a random darting of the eye is often an essential subconscious
scanning technique that allows us to pick out unique and distinctive
features in a crowd – such as colour or orientation.
"Soon
after our eyes have fixed on a target, the conscious or top-down part
of cognition engages and examines whether the candidate really is the
target or not. If the target is not distinctive enough in the ‘eyes’ of
the conscious, failure of identification can occur.”
Notes for
Editors
1. For
more information, please contact Alex Brew in the UCL Media Relations
Office on tel: +44 (0)20 7679 9726.
3.
‘Interference with bottom-up feature detection by higher-level object
recognition’ is published online in the journal ‘Current Biology’ on 8
January and in print on 9th January. Journalists can obtain copies of
the paper by contacting the UCL Media Relations Office.
4. The
study was funded by the Gatsby Charitable Foundation.
9 January
2007 Source: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/media/library/instinct
~ ~ ~
Related book: Blink
- by Malcolm Gladwell: "What is going on in inside our heads when we
engage in rapid cognition? When are snap judgments good and when are
they not? What kinds of things can we do to make our powers of rapid
cognition better?"
Related
Talent Development Resources pages:
awareness -
thinking
intuition /
instinct
intuition /
instinct : articles sites books
creativity enhancement
articles
article topics index
article
authors
~ ~ ~
|