Fallacies and Cognitive Biases: The Fundamental Attribution Error ~ by Ransom

This article is part of an ongoing series that began with Fallacies and Cognitive Biases.

The above picture is a detail from "50 Cognitive Biases to be aware of so you can be the very best version of you"

"We judge others on their personality or fundamental character, but we judge ourselves on the situation."

This cognitive bias happens when we hold others to higher standards than ourselves.  When we screw up it was a bad day & we tried the best we could.  When they screw up they just don't have what it takes.

This is a risk management tool.

It may sound harsh but why should we weigh others on the same scale as ourselves anyway?  Because someone says it's "fair?"  Even if we ascribe to the same principles of fairness why is fairness the right measure in this situation?  Is the goal to pass the test of a disinterested third party by considering oneself in the abstract?

I say no.  This comes down to knowledge, responsibility, and survival.

You know yourself, what you have & can do.  You do not know what others will do, only what they have done.

You control your behavior.  You do not control the behavior of others.  The only control you have over others is your decision whether or not you rely on them.

Your responsibility to yourself is higher than your responsibility to most others (wife & children excluded).

Relying on the unreliable comes at a high potential loss.  Not relying on the reliable forfeits potential gain.

We can forgo gain if we're doing okay now.  Loss means losing what we have now, perhaps catastrophically.

A unit of loss is usually worse than a forfeited unit of gain.

You do not know who is unreliable (ongoing behavior) but only who was unreliable (past action).  In the absence of perfect knowledge how do you make a decision?

It is safer to accidentally mistrust some reliable people & most of the unreliable people than it is to trust most of the reliable people & some of the unreliable people.

Therefore prudence dictates that you judge others by their behavior harsher than yourself.

This is not to condone being a jerk or to say that ethics are "situational" (whatever that means).  Rather, the Fundamental Attribution Error is one valid tool for managing risk in a low information environment.

Errata 1: I do not think the Fundamental Attribution Error is symmetrical.  That is, I do not think we attribute good behavior the same way we attribute bad behavior.

I think the Fundamental Attribution Error establishes a floor of trust.  Dropping below the floor in a single area is a failure.  Overperformance must be consistent for the trust floor to rise.

Errata 2: Because the Fundamental Attribution Error is a risk management tool I expect it will see less use in consequential environments -- environments where behavior has ongoing corrective feedback.

The Fundamental Attribution Error is probably most powerful in one-off encounters or when interacting with those who have weak or nonexistant social ties, such as strangers or those from other cultures (culture is rules proven by time).


Errata 3: Obviously, other people are going to use the Fundamental Attribution Error on you as well.  While you weigh the misbehavior of others heavier than your own, excusing yourself is not good for long-term success.