• Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

Tammy Lenski

Conflict resolution for business, team, and personal relationships

  • Hello
  • Books
  • Courses
  • Archives
  • Subscribe
  • Contact

Quick to blame but slower to give credit? Beware of this thinking error

9 February 2016 by Tammy Lenski

When an action has bad impact, how you think about that impact can play a significant role in triggering and escalating blame and conflict. And despite how rational you believe you are, there’s a thinking error that can lead you down a very irrational path. It’s called the Knobe Effect.

Cognitive (thinking) errors are thought patterns that cause you to reach conclusions that are skewed, inaccurate, and/or irrational. These errors can create and reinforce beliefs you have about yourself, another person, or situation. They bolster the righteous mind and can be fodder for conflict that otherwise might not have existed or escalated.

One such thinking error is the Knobe Effect, named after experimental philosopher Joshua Knobe. In 2003 Knobe presented research subjects with two scenarios. This was the first:

The vice president of a company went to the chairman of the board and said, “We are thinking of starting a new program. It will help us increase profits, but it will also harm the environment.” The chairman of the board answered, “I don’t care at all about harming the environment. I just want to make as much profit as I can. Let’s start the new program.” They started the new program. Sure enough, the environment was harmed.

Did the chairman of the board intentionally harm the environment?

The second scenario changed just one verb and its variants — “harm” became “help”:

The vice president of a company went to the chairman of the board and said, “We are thinking of starting a new program. It will help us increase profits, but it will also help the environment.” The chairman of the board answered, “I don’t care at all about helping the environment. I just want to make as much profit as I can. Let’s start the new program.” They started the new program. Sure enough, the environment was helped.

Did the chairman of the board intentionally help the environment?

That single word change had quite an impact on responses. In the first scenario, 82% of respondents said yes, the CEO intentionally harmed the environment. But in the second scenario just 23% of respondents said yes, the CEO intentionally helped the environment.

That doesn’t seem very logical, does it? If the environment was harmed, most participants decided the chairman intentionally caused the damage. But if the environment was helped, most participants decided the chairman did not intentionally caused the good impact.

The Knobe Effect proposes that people seem considerably more willing to say that a side-effect was brought about intentionally when they regard the side-effect as bad than when they regard it as good.

In subsequent studies by Knobe and others, the effect has been observed across other languages than English, in cultures outside the U.S., and in children as young as four. The roots of the Knobe Effect are more elusive, however, with myriad theories to explain the assymetry in responses.

Recently, a team of Duke researchers offered neurological insights about the Knobe Effect, concluding that people actually use two different mechanisms to judge action, effect, and intention.

If the action produced a negative effect it was more likely to activate the amygdala, a pair of brain structures associated with processing negative emotions. But if the action produced a positive effect, people relied less on the emotional centers of their brain and more on rational reasoning of a statistical nature. They reasoned that because board chairs commonly aim to make money, helping the environment was an unintentional side-effect.

As with other thinking errors, forewarned is forearmed. When you find yourself casting blame quickly or concluding someone did something with bad impact on purpose (or you observe others doing so), you would do well to pause and challenge that thinking.

I know that when I feel most sure, that’s when I need to be most cautious. In conflict and blame, irrational certainty feeds the righteous mind and helps keep us good and stuck.

To read more about the Knobe Effect, try these:

  • Academic articles by Joshua Knobe
  • The Good, the Bad and the Intentional by Dan Jones
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Filed Under: Mental models in problem solving, The space between

Footer

Disagree better

Get The Disagree Better Guide + free road-tested conflict resolution tools delivered to your inbox monthly

Uncopyright   ·   Site policies   ·   Search

Forgive the intrusion...
We use cookies to improve your browsing experience.
We like to eat them, too. Read the policy here.
I ACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.

Non-necessary

Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.

Click to see the next question. Questions load randomly. Some have links for a deeper dive.

It's real but is it true?
What is the next right thing?
What's holding my attention?
Why am I this angry?
What is the problem WE are trying to solve here?
Am I being seen? Am I seeing?
A week from now, will this have mattered?
What would love do now?
Who do I want to be?
What is the wish behind the criticism?
What else could this be?
How has this affected me?
What's the most important thing?

QueryCards ©2021 Myiaccord LLC. All rights reserved.

image of the email series

7 ways to disagree better today

Seven proven practices you can use immediately. One a day for a week + monthly road-tested conflict resolution tools delivered to your inbox. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.

This companion download for the book is free — along with a free subscription to my monthly conflict resolution tools — when you register. Register just once to get full access to all downloads in my Resource Library:

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.