Why did the chicken cross the road? Chicken: "Quit questioning my motives!"

"Walk a mile in their shoes." Or, in most cases, 1.6 kilometers.

As Doctor House will tell you: Asking them will only show you what they are willing to TELL you about their motives.

"Just ask them." I tried that quite a few times. With many people that results in them telling me that they don't want to explain their motives/are annoyed by someone questioning them.

Ask me what I'm thinking... and you won't get an answer, because suddenly I'm evaluating the options of what I might tell you, and suddenly 90% of my thoughts from the moment you asked me are unaccessible even to me

This is a great video! It tackles the fact that we judge people. A lot. And sometimes, that's not bad, but a lot of the time it is because of our own bias we think others are biased.

I think the fact that we assume we should be good at inferring other peoples motives all the time is already crazy. We are so good at perspective taking, empathy, and compassion compared to basically all other animals. Why would we ever dare to assume we know what's going on in someone else's endlessly complex mind?

I've always thought that writing fiction often is a good way to develop your theory of mind. Maybe that's just because I do it, but it also seems to make sense to me: without a good theory of mind, all your characters will either be flat or extremely similar to each other (and usually to the author), which doesn't make for compelling stories. So the more you learn to write better stories, the more you need to learn how other people think -- even if they're only fictional. More on the real-world relevance, I feel like this problem occurs extremely often in important political "discussions". Pro-gun-regulation people tend to assume that pro-gun-freedom people don't care if children die, because it's "obvious" to them that more guns = more deaths (which is supported by statistics, but I won't go there now). Meanwhile, pro-gun-freedom people tend to assume that pro-gun-regulation people are more willing to let children die because they're convinced more guns will *save* more people. In the end, they're both wrong: everyone wants to save lives, they're just not in agreement on the best way to do that. But if they try to sit down and have discussions about it, because they assume the other side is working from a totally different motivation than they actually are, the conversations often end up going nowhere. I mention gun control specifically because I once attended a gun control march with a friend who had asked me. I'd never been to one, but I'm in favor of the cause, so I went. While there, one man who was pro-gun-freedom and counter-protesting was getting harassed by people around him. They were making a point to ignore every word he said, covering up his signs, taking pictures with them blocking him, etc. I thought it would be a good opportunity to have a conversation with him, learn about why he was against gun control, maybe explain why I'm for it, etc. We had an interesting conversation, where I learned that he just assumed no one at the rally knew anything about guns, and therefore any opinions they had about guns were invalid. (My friend's mother chimed in to mention she has a concealed weapons permit and understands more than he thinks, after which he changed his idea to "well, 90% of you don't.") He also bought into the "good guys with guns will save people from bad guys with guns" idea, and when I told him that other countries' regulations show that to be false, he dismissed it with "but those aren't America, it's a different culture, it won't work here". In the end, I had to fight to shake his hand as another protester was busy yelling in his face. But here's the thing: my friend's mother got mad at me for talking to the man. She was legitimately upset that I tried to have a two-way conversation, because she said she "knew" that "people like him" don't care about reasoning, they don't care about empathy, they don't care about saving people. She "knew" all they cared about was lobbying for groups like the NRA. I tried to tell her that's not what it sounded like from our conversation, but she insisted that "they all say that, but it's lies". I refused to apologize for trying to communicate with people and understand them. After all, isn't the whole point of a protest to convince "the other side" that we're right? Why bother yelling without a care if only the people who already agree with us will listen? If our goal is to persuade, then we must first understand why others don't already agree with us and show them where they're mistaken, not just yell "YOU HATE CHILDREN, YOU ARE A MURDERER, DO WHAT WE SAY!" Anyway, long story short: politics is like 90% people not understanding others' motivations and dismissing evidence in favor of their own opinions about what they think is best instead of what the evidence shows is actually best.

I bet she made this video to become wildly popular, and rich, and famous, and eventually take over the world. All the pieces fit.

I care little about people's motives. I care a lot more about the results of their actions.

I think most people are bad at guessing other people’s motives because most people don’t even understand their own motives for doing things.

"Just ask them." Doesn't work for me. They either refuse to answer or can't explain their thought process.

Binge watching SciShow with the cat? SciShow hacked my webcam?!

Like when people think I'm a flirt when I'm actually just a raging buffoon that likes to goof around. I rarely ever actually try to flirt with people. Some people automatically assume that when you're a girl that likes to be silly, laugh, smile & joke a lot - you're a flirt. In actuality I'm not attracted to or interested in many people in that way.

Sooo... consider others complexly?

I don't think of you as one dimensional.. my screen has length AND height.

I love that you not only tell us the facts, but the studies they come from

2:27 I’ve never gone out and partied, nor I want to...

“If you’re not sure just ask them” Next episode: “Why we often lie about our motives”

The biggest hinderance is people being unable to accept that a similar action can spring from different motivations and intentions in other people as it does from themselves. For example, person A says such-and-such thing needs to be done, and person B asks "why?" Person A cannot accept that all person B meant is literally "why?" Because if person A had asked that, it wouldn't be seeking information, it would be a passive-aggressive challenge to the other person's authority and an implied-insult that such-and-such thing is stupid and unnecessary. Person B explains they truly are only seeking more information, but person A thinks they're a liar because "everyone knows asking 'why' is really just being rude!" Because "why" has become coded-language used to be superficially polite while also passive-aggressively challenging others' authority. As an autistic person, I can accept that other people think differently and therefore may have different reasons to perform similar actions as I do - it's perfectly logical. I am me, they are not. But I've found neurotypical people are extremely attached to the idea that their perceptions are everyone's reality because of the mistaken belief that everyone else has internalized the same unspoken-rules that they have and act on them the same way. They reject any idea that this is not so as "lying" and "manipulation". And this a giant pain in the *ss for literal-minded, detail-oriented autistics, btw. >: { So a lot of being bad at guessing other peoples' motivations just comes from the guesser refusing to analyze what behaviours are actually being demonstrated, and/or weigh that data against previously acquired information about a person in particular or people in general... but instead, seeing/hearing/reading something and immediately ascribing the motivation for that to whatever would cause the *guesser* to act in that way.

I agree here with those comments that suggest we struggle to understand other's intentions due to the fact that we barely and only poorly understand our own motivations. I think this has to do with a fundamental misconception which says that there is a single and indivisible self. Rather, I think we have a sort of narrative self, the self that fabricates internal stories that are loosely based in our objective reality. These stories help to rationalize, rather than accurately explain, our existence. Then there is the experiential self, the self that is narrowly concerned with our present state of being irrespective of this grand narrative. So, try as we might to understand ourselves, we, I would, argue are inevitably doomed in our attempts to understand the intentions of others -- those of whom are incapable of objectively mapping their own consciousness. The best solution I think is a heavy dose of humility based on the premise that we all generally want to be good people coupled with perhaps an overly charitable interpetation of other's intentions.

I confess! I have indeed stayed home with the cat and binge-watched Sci Show!

A person, who wants to move to Florida: It's so nice and sunny; that's why it's called the Sunshine State! Me, a person who lives in Florida: It's always raining, humidity is high; why the {quack} is it called a Sunshine State?

One of the best episodes ever. Congrats for choosing this wonderful topic.

this is the trick of not having an ego, walking a mile in everyones shoes so much you dont own a pair yourself anymore. works wonders, made me happier i could ever imagine. I still hold opinions myself, but now i never gat angry at people, or frustrated when they dont get me, if anything i get a bit frustrated at myself when i cant explain my point fully and in terms they might emphathize more with.

"most of us aren't walking around with brain scanners in our pockets"... I am?

Man I love this channel

Thanks for subtitles, really soothing for eyes

I don't doubt people's intentions as much as their comprehension.

I have an unending amount of respect and appreciation for this Channel's ability to make content relevant to tense current events without aggotating the situation

Why do I keep forgetting, that I already liked this video?

Just guessing here, but in these experiments I'm assuming people were given the one piece of information about the subject and then asked to predict their future behavior. What ELSE would they do but go with the one piece of information they had been given? If I'm right about this, then it really says little about what people do in "real life."

The "assumed similarity bias" really throws a wrench into the works here. If you accept that you can't rely on the idea that others make decisions like you, then how is trying to "walk a mile in someone's shoes" as a way of understanding them better supposed to work?

This is the reason why I think parting ways with my first lab PI was a good thing. She and her grad students kept guessing at my motives, which all ended up to be wrong. In reality, I was not the kind of unpleasant person they thought I was, even though I go out of my way to let them know whatever assumptions they had about me was wrong. Now I'm in another lab, and the post docs are much more mature about things. I'm liking this much better.

"Just ask them!" O.o Because people NEVER lie... of course!

always excited to see new videos!

I love binge watching SciShow.

I work with Social Security claimants and doing this is SO HARD. But it IS worth doing. This job has taught me patience when nothing else in my life has ever worked.

So *Cliche* and *Trite* are synonymous. Thanks for enriching my vocabulary!

Great video. You're very good at this, you know?

Try walking in my shoes. You'll stumble in my footsteps

You never truly understand someone till you walk ten miles in their shoes, but by then it doesn't even matter. Because they're ten miles away and you've got their shoes!

Im literally binge watching scishow videos with my cats. Exactly as she said! Lol

For half of those biases I thought to myself:"Wow this is so me"

Here in my very religious country people think I speak out against religion just to bring people down or because I'm a know it all but the reason is because I internalized the very negative ripple effects it has on the world and feel bad for all the suffering it causes to many people.

*what she thinks he's thinking* "He's crying because he knows I'm going to break up with him..." *what he's actually thinking* "I haven't fed my Tamagotchi in 15 years...."

Knowing the limits of your own mind helps counter these biases.

IMO, the best way to judge whether or not you want to further a friendship with someone is to place them in high pressure, uncomfortable situations. If you're ok with the results, resume your friendship, if not, drop them. Rinse and repeat every few years.

We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are.

This Sunday will be election day in Brazil, and I can say this video is very fitting with the moment!

Don't forget the Illusion of Asymmetric Insight, which says that you assume that you can tell more about people than they can tell about you.

Good episode! Very important. We should think twice before assuming the worst about another's motivations, especially when politics is involved. We all just want the best for our country at the end of the day, and we just disagree on how to do it. That's ok, as long as we can discuss our ideas without our personal character being attacked for expressing them when it's not merited

Love that shirt #P4A2017 ❤️

Amazing channel 👏🏻👍🏻

I find this to be a very informative video!! Thank you for touching on this subject. 👍

If only everyone would take the time to watch this video. It has great fundmental value.

Why you hating on vanilla ice-cream?!? I'll have you know that vanilla is the byproduct of a rare central american orchid. Both vanilla and chocolate were brought to Europe at the SAME time by the Spanish Conquistador Cortés. Neither one is better than the other!!!

People don't give other's enough credit and thy give themselves too much.

great video! my social psyc professor showed it to us in class

Many people are close minded, ignorant, not empathetic and more judgemental on others than themselves.

"If you want to know what a person is really thinking, just ask them". That's probably the worst way to find out.

Alternate title: Why stories are able to exist.

2:38 How about being the cat that binges SciShow episodes? xD =^,^= Meow

I discovered ( probably exists ) I sociological skill to find out peoples weaknesses, or what hurts them, verbally, and I have this thing i do unintentionally where I manipulate people, but don’t in the negative way. In a way that benefits me and doesn’t affect them, when I do this may seem dumb to them in the process but it’s really affective, I use these two methods to understand people which actually really helps me read their motives

"Surefire," huh?

i love the video. by far the best i have seen this month. ;) and i am biased to your biased view of bias. Whilst my bias is positive in relation to your bias, it does bias on atleast a few biased ideas of your bias. I really hope to stay unbiased in all this, but my bias laments!!!

Genuine question: It's related to people assuming that others will make similar choices to the ones they made in the past. Actually, I have 2 questions now. 1. Do people alter or base their choices off of what others expect them to do? 2. Is this why people don't believe that others can and do change their behaviors and choices over time?

"Hostile attribution bias" That seems to happen a lot on the Internet.

Shoot, I failed my sense motive check.

I am sitting at home with my cat as I watch this, instead of going to work.

You lost me when you said it's unreasonable to assume someone who recently went to a lake likes to go to the lake.

Ultimate attribution error = Majority of journalists on the New York Times.

"Just ask them." Right, like they're going to be honest with me! ;-)

"...aren't walking around with brain scanners in our pockets..." OK, forget hoverboards. My newest technological lament: "Where's my freakin' brain scanner????"

Walk a mile in a someone's shoes, after that who cares? You are a mile away, and you have their shoes! lol

What?! Of course you’re more likely to go on nature vacations if that’s what you enjoy. Of course you can still go to the city but that’s just logical. So this study is essentially saying people pick their vacation destinations randomly?

I think people have a natural tendency to assume everyone thinks like them, but in reality people are radically different in their minds an personality and desire completely different things in life.

"There's always one surefire way to find out what someone's thinking: Just ask them." Because humans don't lie at all, and certainly not several times a day, as I'm often told by "science" (maybe not the most scientific of science, but still...).

I think that this is totally normal.. not just that, but actually contributing to our society being growing.. Who agrees???

Is all this jargon going to be on the test? Cuz I already forgot half of them.

Wonderful comments all over the place!

Walk a mile in their shoes.. gotcha.. I'll steal the shoes then use it as my own. But in their shoes.

According to Wikipedia, the Correspondence Bias's existence was challenged by a 2006 meta-analysis: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error I also think that it's important to mention that the original experiment was done on lest than 100 total students all enrolled in an introductory psychology course at Duke, lol

Hey why don't you do a series on crash course channel? Also, a few more graphics would be great.

kAvAnAuGh or however you spell his name *grabs popcorn*

Great host!

Vanilla is the superior ice-cream taste. Anyone denying that is a fool!

Do these studies control for individualistic societies vs collectivistic ones, like do these results hold in japan, china, or the middle east? Cause I wanna know if these results are true about all humans, or are they different based on what culture you grew up in. (I'm assuming these were conducted on american/western subjects)

I ended up learning the hard way that you simply had to ask people. example: some times I go out just so my family doesnt bother me and thinks im busy. so instead of assuming my friend does that too, i ask, are you going out for this reason or just for your enjoyment or why? ya know?

Informative.

I love the t-shirt 👍 where can I get one?

Alternative solution: Stop asking why people do the things that they do, and sleep more soundly at night.

I’ve said something similar before but I love Brit as a host. She’s a pleasure to watch and I don’t mean in some creepy way. Her inflections, emphasis on words, and her easy going style and rhythm of her speech, not to mention the tone of her voice, is really kind of cool. And I hate to say it Hank, because you’re fun to watch too, but I think she just might be better than you😂

That's a good intro.

'Why would I do this'

Who wouldn't order a vanilla ice cream ?

sometimes i actually try to ask people about their motives and reasons for their actions, but it never goes well. especially if its about religion or emotions.

On that ending note: "When all else fails, just ask them." Like that leftist journalist who actually interviewed "Trump voters" and said "I just expected you all to just be a bunch of racists."...while eating at their table.

Where do you even draw the line between who someone is and what's happening in their lives?

Wondering if any of these studies on biases, errors, etc. are consistent across a wide variety of cultures, or if a lot of the Psychology field is mostly Western-based studies... :/