Warm Tip: Click the blue text above "FMCG Distributor Professional Consulting" to learn more about marketing and distributor internal management.
1. Birdcage Logic Hang a beautiful birdcage in the most conspicuous place in a room, and within a few days, the owner will inevitably make one of two choices: throw away the birdcage or buy a bird to put in it. This is the birdcage logic. The process is simple: imagine you are the owner of the room. As soon as someone enters and sees the birdcage, they can't help but ask, "Where's the bird? Is it dead?" When you answer, "I've never kept a bird," people will ask, "Then why do you have a birdcage?" In the end, you have to choose one of the two options because it's much easier than endless explanations. The reason for birdcage logic is simple: most of the time, people think in habitual patterns. So it's important to cultivate logical thinking in life and work.
2. Broken Window Effect In psychology research, there is a phenomenon called the "broken window effect." That is, if a window in a house is broken and no one repairs it, soon other windows will also be inexplicably broken by others. If a wall has some graffiti that isn't cleaned off, soon the wall will be covered with messy, unsightly things. In a very clean place, people are embarrassed to litter, but once there is garbage on the ground, people will throw trash without hesitation or shame. This is a very strange phenomenon.
Psychologists study this "tipping point": how dirty does the ground have to be before people think, "It's already this dirty, a bit more doesn't matter"? How bad does a situation have to get before people give up on themselves and let it rot completely? Any bad thing, if not stopped at the beginning, can become a trend that can't be changed, like a river embankment: a small gap not repaired in time can cause a collapse, resulting in millions of times more loss.
Crime is actually the result of disorder. In New York City in the 1980s, there was robbery everywhere, murder every day, and even walking on the street in broad daylight was frightening. The subway was even worse: dirty cars, covered with obscene graffiti, and everyone sitting in the subway felt at risk. But later, New York's appearance and reputation improved significantly. A city that was sinking managed to revive and rise. A criminologist explained that New York used the broken window theory from books: first improve the environment to make crime less likely, then gradually catch criminals and restore order.
At the time, this approach was criticized as too slow, "washing the deck while the ship is sinking," but New York started by keeping subway cars clean and handcuffing fare evaders, lining them up on the platform to publicly demonstrate the government's determination to clean up. It turned out to be very effective.
Police found that people were indeed less likely to commit crimes in clean places, and that catching fare evaders was productive because one in seven fare evaders was a wanted criminal, and one in twenty carried a weapon. So police were willing to seriously pursue fare evasion, which made criminals afraid to evade fares or carry weapons, to avoid losing more than they gained. Thus, New York started from the smallest, easiest places, broke the chain of crime, and stopped the vicious cycle.
3. Responsibility Diffusion Effect At 3:20 a.m. on March 13, 1964, in front of an apartment in a New York suburb, a young woman named Kitty Genovese was stabbed while walking home from her bar job. When she screamed desperately, "Someone's trying to kill me! Help! Help!" hearing the cries, nearby residents turned on lights and opened windows, and the attacker fled. When things calmed down, the attacker returned. When she screamed again, residents turned on lights again, and the attacker fled again. When she thought it was safe and went upstairs to her home, the attacker appeared again and killed her on the stairs. During this process, despite her loud cries for help, at least 38 of her neighbors went to the window to watch, but no one came to her rescue, and no one even called the police. This incident caused a sensation in New York society and drew the attention and reflection of social psychologists. This phenomenon of many bystanders not helping is called the responsibility diffusion effect.
Psychologists conducted numerous experiments and surveys to understand the causes of the responsibility diffusion effect. They found that this phenomenon cannot be simply attributed to cold-heartedness or moral decay. In different situations, people's helping behavior is indeed different. When a person faces an emergency and is the only one who can help, they are clearly aware of their responsibility and will help the victim. If they don't help, they will feel guilt and remorse, which is a high psychological cost. But if many people are present, the responsibility to help is shared among everyone, causing responsibility diffusion. Each person bears little responsibility, and bystanders may not even be aware of their own share, leading to a "I won't save, someone else will" mentality, resulting in "collective indifference." How to break this situation is an important topic psychologists are studying.
4. Parkinson's Law The famous British historian Cyril Northcote Parkinson, after long-term research, wrote a book called "Parkinson's Law." In it, he explained the causes and consequences of institutional expansion: an incompetent official has three possible paths: first, resign and give the position to a capable person; second, hire a capable person to assist; third, hire two people less capable than himself as assistants. The first path is absolutely not to be taken because it would lose many rights; the second path is also not to be taken because that capable person would become a rival; it seems only the third path is most suitable. So, two mediocre assistants share his work, while he stays above giving orders, and they won't threaten his rights. Since the two assistants are incompetent, they follow suit and each find two even more incompetent assistants. And so on, forming a bloated, overstaffed, inefficient leadership system full of buck-passing.
5. Halo Effect The famous Russian writer Pushkin suffered greatly due to the halo effect. He passionately fell in love with Natalia, known as "the first beauty of Moscow," and married her. Natalia was stunningly beautiful but had nothing in common with Pushkin. Whenever Pushkin read his poems to her, she would cover her ears and say, "Don't listen! Don't listen!" Instead, she always wanted Pushkin to accompany her to amusements, lavish parties, and balls. Pushkin neglected his writing, ran up debts, and eventually died in a duel for her, causing a literary star to fall prematurely. In Pushkin's view, a beautiful woman must also have extraordinary wisdom and noble character, but that wasn't the case. This phenomenon is called the halo effect.
The so-called halo effect is when one prominent feature of a person in interpersonal interactions overshadows other features, causing obstacles in interpersonal perception. In daily life, the halo effect often quietly influences our perception and evaluation of others. For example, some elderly people, seeing a young person's minor flaws or their dress or habits, think they are worthless; some young people, admiring a friend's one lovable trait, see them as lovable in every way, truly "one beauty covers a hundred flaws." The halo effect is a subjective psychological guess that takes a part for the whole. Its errors are: first, it easily seizes on individual features and habitually generalizes from the individual to the whole, like the blind men and the elephant; second, it links unrelated personality or appearance traits, asserting that one trait necessarily implies another; third, it says all good if one thing is good, and all bad if one thing is bad, an absolutist tendency dominated by subjective bias. In short, the halo effect is a cognitive obstacle that greatly affects interpersonal perception. We should try to avoid and overcome its side effects in interactions.
6. Hawthorne Effect This is an experimenter effect in psychology. In the 1920s-1930s, American researchers discovered the experimenter effect in experiments on working conditions, social factors, and production efficiency at the Hawthorne Works of the Western Electric Company in Chicago, and called it the Hawthorne effect.
The first phase of the experiment, starting in November 1924, studied the relationship between working conditions and production efficiency, with an experimental group and a control group. The result was that whether lighting was increased or decreased, the experimental group's output rose, and the control group with constant lighting also increased output. Additionally, experiments with wage compensation, rest breaks, daily work hours, and weekly work days showed no direct impact of these conditions on production efficiency. The second phase, led by Harvard professor Elton Mayo, focused on the relationship between social factors and efficiency. It found that the increase in efficiency was mainly due to a huge psychological change in the subjects. The workers in the experiment were placed in a special laboratory and led by researchers, changing their social status. They received attention from all sides, forming a sense of participation, feeling they were an important part of the company, which motivated them socially and boosted output.
This effect tells us that when students or we ourselves receive public attention or gaze, the efficiency of learning and interaction increases greatly. Therefore, in daily life, we should learn to get along well with others, understand what behaviors are accepted and appreciated by classmates and teachers, and only by continuously increasing our good behaviors in life and study can we gain more attention and appreciation, and make our learning progress and be confident!
7. Learned Helplessness Experiment The learned helplessness effect was first discovered by Overmier and Seligman, and later widely explored in animal and human studies. Simply put, many experiments show that after training, dogs can jump over barriers or engage in other behaviors to escape electric shocks from the experimenter. But if dogs previously received unpredictable (not knowing when) and uncontrollable shocks (e.g., whether the shock stops does not depend on the dog's behavior), when later given the opportunity to escape, they become unable to escape. Moreover, the dogs show other deficiencies, such as feeling depressed and low initiative.
The reason dogs show this condition is that they learned a sense of helplessness early in the experiment. That is, they realize that no matter what they do, they cannot control the termination of the shock. In each trial, the termination of the shock is under the experimenter's control, and the dog learns that it cannot change this external control, thus learning a sense of helplessness.
If a person develops learned helplessness, it becomes deep despair and sadness. Therefore, in our studies and lives, we should broaden our perspective, see the true determining factors behind events, and not let ourselves fall into despair.
8. Witness Memory Witnesses, in our understanding, are usually people who provide objective evidence, telling what they saw and heard truthfully. However, psychological research shows that many witnesses' testimonies are not very accurate, or are biased, carrying personal views and consciousness.
The finding that witnesses' confidence in their testimony does not determine its accuracy is surprising. Psychologists Perfetto and Hollins decided to study this conclusion further. To examine whether witness testimony has something special, they compared witness memory with memory for general knowledge.
They showed subjects a short video about a girl being kidnapped. The next day, they asked subjects questions about the video's content, asked them to rate their confidence in their answers, and then did a recognition memory test. Next, using the same method, they used general knowledge questions selected from encyclopedias and popular reading.
As before, Perfetto and Hollins found that in the accuracy of witness recall, those who were very confident in their answers were not actually better than those who were less confident, but for general knowledge, this was not the case: high-confidence people recalled much better than low-confidence people.
People have self-knowledge about their strengths and weaknesses in general knowledge, so they tend to adjust their confidence ratings. General knowledge is a shared database among individuals with recognized correct answers, and subjects can measure themselves. For example, people know whether they are better or worse at sports questions. But witnessed events are not affected by this self-knowledge. For example, overall, they are unlikely to know whether they are better or worse at remembering the hair color of participants in an event.
9. Rosenthal Effect American psychologist Robert Rosenthal and others conducted a famous experiment in 1968. They went to an elementary school, selected three classes from each grade from first to sixth, and gave a "test to predict future development" with great fanfare. Then the experimenters informed teachers of the students who were thought to have "excellent development potential." In reality, this list was not based on test results but was randomly selected. It was an "authoritative lie" to hint to teachers, thereby mobilizing teachers' expectations for those students. Eight months later, the intelligence test results showed that the listed students' scores generally improved, and teachers gave them good conduct comments. This experiment achieved miraculous results. This phenomenon, where teachers' subtle psychological influence on students leads to progress expected by teachers, is called the "Rosenthal effect," also commonly known as the Pygmalion effect (Pygmalion is a king of Cyprus in ancient Greek mythology who fell in love with a statue of a maiden, and his passion eventually turned the statue into a real person, and they fell in love and united).
Educational practice also shows that if teachers like certain students and have high expectations for them, after a period, students feel the teacher's care, love, and encouragement; they often treat the teacher, learning, and their own behavior with a positive attitude, becoming more self-respecting, self-confident, self-loving, and self-reliant, evoking a positive and upward passion. These students often achieve the progress teachers expect. Conversely, students who are ignored or discriminated against by teachers will, over time, feel the teacher's "partiality" from their words, actions, and expressions, and will treat the teacher and their own learning with a negative attitude, ignoring or refusing to follow the teacher's requirements; these students often get worse day by day and eventually become social misfits. Although there are exceptions, the general trend is like this, and it also serves as a wake-up call for teachers.
10. False Consensus Bias We usually believe that our preferences are the same as most people's. If you like playing computer games, you might overestimate the number of people who like computer games. You also typically overestimate the number of people who would vote for a classmate you like, overestimate your prestige and leadership in a group, etc. This tendency to overestimate the number of people who share your behaviors and attitudes is called "false consensus bias." Some factors affect the strength of this bias:
(1) When external attribution is stronger than internal attribution; (2) When the current behavior or event is very important to someone; (3) When you are very certain or firm about your viewpoint; (4) When your status or normal life and study are threatened; (5) When it involves some positive quality or personality; (6) When you see others as similar to yourself.
Like this article? Feel free to click the top right corner to share it to your Moments.
About us: WeChat Name: FMCG Distributor Professional Consulting Management Account Introduction: 20 years of FMCG distributor operation and management experience, professionally targeting distributor departments: We understand distributors better than manufacturers, and we understand internal management better than distributors. Senior marketing experts help your business develop.
Learning and Exchange QQ Group: 344257092