The Speaker’s Illusion of Transparency
The illusion of transparency is a cognitive bias in which speakers overestimate how clearly their intentions are conveyed, due to anchoring in their own intended meaning. This leads to a failure to recognize the ambiguity in their own utterances, both in speech and in writing.
THE IDEA
The Speaker’s Illusion of Transparency
The task of speakers is to translate their intentions into linguistic forms. To ensure they have conveyed their intentions successfully, speakers monitor their own utterances. Sometimes they recognize an utterance as ambiguous and attempt a repair or correction. However, if speakers anchor in their own intention in the process of monitoring and evaluating their own utterances, the intended meaning of their own ambiguous utterances might seem relatively transparent to them. If this is true, then the illusion of transparency is an inherent element in communication that stems from the heuristic processing of language.
One implication of the illusion of transparency is that people do not fully realize the ambiguity of their own utterances. It is particularly surprising to find such ambiguities in written text because writing can be edited. The day in September 1997 when the rock band the Rolling Stones performed in Chicago’s Soldier Field, the city put up a large sign on the highway that said, “AVOID LSD TONIGHT.” The city authorities were not attempting to provide advice about drug use, but instead to advise against using Lake Shore Drive in the vicinity of Soldier Field. Likewise, the owner of a pharmacy in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, adamantly rejected the idea that the sign above his store had dual meaning. The sign read: “Lyon’s Pharmacy: We dispense with accuracy.”
Part of the difficulty of writing is that when we write we are engrossed in a specific physical, emotional and mental context. It is difficult to take into account the variety of contexts that a future reader could have, contexts which might alter the meaning of what we write. More than 400 years ago, in his essay “Man Can Have No Knowledge,” Montaigne described how even the same reader can interpret the same text differently on separate occasions (Frame, 1943):
When I pick up books, I will have perceived in such-and-such a passage surpassing charms which will have struck my soul; let me come upon it another time, in vain I turn it over and over, in vain I twist it and manipulate it, to me it is a shapeless and unrecognizable mass. (p. 425)
When to use it
When composing professional emails, re-read from the recipient’s perspective to identify potential ambiguities.
During presentations, check for understanding by asking clarifying questions rather than assuming clarity.
When designing public signage or instructions, test them with a sample audience to catch unintended interpretations.
When giving feedback, be explicit about your intent to avoid miscommunication that could arise from the illusion of transparency.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
Road Sign Ambiguity
In September 1997, during a Rolling Stones concert in Chicago, a highway sign read “AVOID LSD TONIGHT.” The city intended to advise drivers to avoid Lake Shore Drive (LSD) near Soldier Field, but the same wording could be read as a warning against the drug LSD.
Pharmacy Slogan Ambiguity
A pharmacy in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, had a sign that read “Lyon’s Pharmacy: We dispense with accuracy.” The owner saw it as a statement of precise service, but customers could interpret it as “we do not require accuracy” (dispense with meaning “do without”).
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
Recall a situation where you assumed your message was clear, but it was later misunderstood. How might the illusion of transparency have contributed?
When writing an important email or document, what steps can you take to account for the varied contexts of your readers?
Think of a public sign or advertisement that had an unintended double meaning. How does the illusion of transparency explain why the creator did not notice the ambiguity?
References
- Man Can Have No Knowledge — Michel de Montaigne (1943)
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Heuristics and Biases The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment (Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin, Daniel Kahneman)