Egocentric Heuristic in Communication
Language users rely on an egocentric heuristic, using their own perspective as a default rather than constantly adjusting for mutual knowledge. This is efficient and usually successful but leads to systematic egocentric errors when perspectives diverge.
THE IDEA
HEURISTICS IN LANGUAGE USE
The belief that language users rely on mutual knowledge when they communicate stems from the assumption that in order to communicate successfully they should rely on what they know about the other’s perspective. Therefore, the general assumption has been that error-free communication is the optimal and desired goal of language users, and that in order to achieve this goal, they should focus on a mutual perspective.
This normative-optimality assumption does not take into account the way the mind deals with uncertainty, of which language use is a particular case. As in the domain of decision making, the behavior of language users reflects an important tradeoff between optimality and efficiency. When solving problems, the mind takes shortcuts and uses heuristics (e.g., Tversky, & Kahneman, 1974). In this way, mental resources are conserved and solutions are reached in a short amount of time. Given that the solutions are not always optimal, they show a systematic error pattern. The benefit of such a system, though, might generally outweigh its cost, except when an egocentric misunderstanding has serious consequences.
What we consistently find is that language users do not do what they “should” do according to common sense and current theory. For example, they do not routinely use readily available information about the perspective of the other. The reason is twofold. First, information about perspective is not only knowledge, it is metaknowledge: It is knowledge about who knows what. Such higher-level information typically takes more cognitive resources and more time to use. By relying on an egocentric interpretation in the case of understanding, and an egocentric plan in the case of speaking, the language user is taking a shortcut that is cheap in mental resources and relatively fast.
The second reason we rely on an egocentric process is that it is typically successful. In many cases, the overlap between the foci of the speaker and the addressee is such that an egocentric process would be sufficient for successful communication. Information that is in mutual focus is also in the egocentric focus of each interlocutor. Consider as an example the small candle in Fig. 8.1. In our experiment, we distinguished between the two perspectives by preventing the director from seeing the smallest candle. However, when people normally sit around a small table, they typically share access to all the objects that are on the table. When perspectives overlap in this way, the metaknowledge about perspective becomes superfluous. One no longer need evaluate perspective because information about who knows what would be redundant. In these cases, it is most cost effective to have a system that does not take perspective into account at all. In the typical case of perspective overlap, then, the more “expensive” monitoring and adjustment process would play no role, reaping the benefits of the quick egocentric process without paying the price of correction.
A heuristic approach to language use has another advantage. It accounts for the systematicity of errors. The normative assumption that language users rely on mutual knowledge can only explain miscommunication as a result of random errors, noise, and unpredictable failures of attention or memory. In contrast, the perspective adjustment model predicts that when perspectives diverge or the cognitive system is overtaxed, errors will be systematically egocentric. It explains these errors as a result of insufficient adjustment. In many cases, then, miscommunication is not random and unpredictable; rather, it reflects directly the heuristic processing that underlies both how we speak and how we understand language.
When to use it
Teaching: When a teacher explains a complex concept, they might use jargon and assume students have the same background knowledge, leading to confusion.
Customer support: A support agent might assume a customer knows basic troubleshooting steps, but the customer may not, causing frustration.
Team collaboration: Team members might assume everyone is aware of project updates or shared context, leading to misaligned tasks.
Writing documentation: Technical writers often struggle to avoid egocentric assumptions about the user's knowledge level.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
The Small Candle Experiment
In the arrangement described here, the addressee could see a small candle that the director could not see. The perspective-adjustment model predicts a risk that the addressee will interpret an instruction using that privately visible candle before adjusting for the director’s view.
Egocentric Assumption in Directions
When giving directions, people often mention landmarks they are familiar with without considering the listener's perspective. For example, saying 'turn left at the Starbucks' assumes the listener knows that Starbucks. If the listener is new to the area, this egocentric assumption can cause confusion and miscommunication.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Can you recall a time when you assumed someone understood you because they shared your perspective, but it turned out they did not? How did the egocentric heuristic play a role?
How might awareness of the egocentric heuristic change the way you give instructions or explain concepts to others?
In what contexts is the egocentric heuristic most likely to lead to communication breakdown? Consider scenarios where perspectives are obviously different (e.g., expert vs. novice).
Often confused with
References
- Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases — Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974)
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Heuristics and Biases The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment (Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin, Daniel Kahneman)