A similar effect arises when people are asked questions about right and wrong rather than politics. Recent research by Francis Flynn, a psychology professor at Stanford, and Scott Wiltermuth, a doctoral student there, looked at people in tight-knit workplace and graduate-school settings. The researchers found that people assumed, often unquestioningly, that their responses to a series of ethical dilemmas were shared by the majority of their close colleagues. In reality they often were not. More strikingly, it was the more socially connected among the test subjects who were more likely to be wrong. (The resulting paper has been accepted by the Academy of Management Journal but not yet published).
The problem, Flynn says, is that interacting with people and sharing experiences with them doesn't necessarily translate into knowing lots of things about them. The main hurdle is the way we talk to those we're close to: our conversations are usually meant not so much to gather information as to establish rapport and to bond - in short, to make friends. And we do that by focusing on areas of agreement and avoiding topics that might cause friction. Our natural tendency toward comradeship makes us, ironically, leery of learning too much about the people we're befriending.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Storytelling, communication, and limits
From What You Don't Know About Your Friends by Drake Bennett. Read the whole thing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment