Amid growing problems and rampant disinformation, we must think more thoughtfully before making consequential choices such as voting for the U.S. president and other public officials.
Source: iStockphoto
People formed opinions about candidates in this election cycle well before voting began. If you still need to vote, it’s worth rethinking those early but persistent impressions because candidates, circumstances, and the news have changed dramatically.
Voting “Correctly”
We all make intuitive decisions that we hope are good but prove to be anything but. A study of 10 U.S. presidential elections showed that 26 percent of voters later realized they had voted for a candidate who didn’t match their political beliefs or expectations.
Here, I describe a psychological bias that frequently prevents what political scientists call correct voting: choosing the candidate most likely to do what a voter wants. The self-sabotaging bias—call it one-and-done thinking—is a voter opinion based on an early reaction to a single dominant reason. The initial opinion—truth-based or not—persists and determines the vote even when new information contradicts voters’ beliefs.
Overcoming the one-and-done bias helps voters choose the candidate who best fits their needs and desires.
One-and-Done Thinking
What causes the one-and-done bias? In psychological terms, confirmation bias and motivated reasoning support and sustain established opinions. In practical terms, causes include relying too heavily on biased information sources, missing helpful information, not having time to gather information or think thoroughly, and other barriers to changing routines and habits.
Repeated confirmations of the original opinion by others and oneself—whether valid or not—drive the belief deeper, making opinion change even more difficult and less likely.
Common examples of one-and-done thinking include voting based on political party membership, a single issue or policy (for example, the economy, immigration, or abortion), or identity politics featuring gender, race, profession, faith, demography, or others.
Other examples are a candidate’s perceived characteristics (charisma, appearance, age, backward- versus forward-looking, friends and foes, leadership style, uniter or divider, or fill-in-the-blank). Sometimes, the dominating reason is voter belief about whom the candidate will lead: their base, a party, an inner circle, donors, a country, or the world.
A special category of one-and-done thinking is attributing to a single candidate a great success or terrible failure. While assigning total responsibility—credit or blame—to one person for complex economies or wars could be warranted, it usually oversimplifies greatly or is outright mistaken.
The one-and-done bias is efficient; it is a shortcut that saves time and can be harmless in a low-risk, benign situation. However, for consequential decisions including voting, one-and-done thinking can easily cause bad decisions and bad results.
Even if one-and-done thinking causes no direct harm, it hinders subsequent thinking and learning as we miss, ignore, misinterpret, and reject new information. We repeat mistakes, become more stubborn, and become severely polarized. We repeat old ways and fail to change in helpful ways. Citizens who care about governance regret voting the way they did.
Sometimes people overcome the bias; it requires effort, but it certainly is possible.
Beating the Bias
Overriding the one-and-done bias begins with an awareness of its prevalence and harmful influence. You can identify supporting evidence and doubts about your opinion, seek others’ opinions and discuss with an open mind, consider what new information would be helpful, nudge yourself to reflect deeply and broadly, and remind yourself of the costs and benefits of thinking again before deciding.
Further, you can learn more about the near-term financial, personal, and societal impact of candidates’ proposals and their far-reaching implications. You will likely find more than one consequence, for better or worse, in each category.
Leading Effectively
Every leader makes mistakes; all are imperfect, and there is no reliable way to predict success in a demanding job. Very few, if any, actions benefit public officials and all their constituents. A useful exercise is to consider how you define a president’s success beyond winning an election. One thing is sure: No single criterion consistently predicts success, meaning that one-and-done thinking is a weak approach if voters want to choose well.
Effective leadership requires engaged followers as well as good leaders. Two admirable leadership qualities—character and competence—are crucial, although how to define them is debatable. Over time, they are more vital than charisma, which can earn fans, followers, and votes but doesn’t provide the substance and skills to sustain high performance in difficult jobs.
As voters, it’s worth recognizing two underused mindsets that deserve more attention in leadership. One is realism: Facing and communicating facts, recognizing our most pressing issues, and knowing how the world works. The other is the willingness to think thoroughly, including rethinking, before making important decisions and taking consequential action. These principles can help us deliberate well by avoiding the one-and-done bias and future regrets.
