What do you think?
Rate this book
Why We're Wrong About Nearly Everything: A Theory of Human Misunderstanding
Originally published in 2018 by Atlantic Books in Great Britain.
304 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 6, 2018
278 people are currently reading
3354 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 137 reviews
August 28, 2019
How we see the world is not the way it really is. There have been several books based on this premise in the last few years, from Hans Rosling's impressive Factfulness to the distinctly fanciful The Case Against Reality by Donald Hoffman. In The Perils of Perception, Bobby Duffy takes an approach that is similar to Rosling's in surveying large numbers of people in different countries (in fact, one chapter of the book specifically references Rosling), but rather than concentrate as Rosling does on the specific topic of development, Duffy takes a much wider sweep of coverage of our perceptions of our world - and just like Rosling finds that most of us are way off on our appreciation of how things really are.
Whether we're dealing with politics and immigration, finance, climate change, sex or crime, Duffy shows that the majority of people tend to get things wrong. (I think I've read too many of these books, as I tended, if anything, to err in the opposite direction to the average respondent.) Like Rosling, Duffy often finds that we're over-pessimistic, but discovers a number cases where we over-apply the rose-tinted specs.
It seems – not entirely surprisingly – that topics with a strong emotional content are more likely to produce incorrect perceptions, and these are perceptions which will continue to be held despite contrary evidence. For example, in most countries, people think that the percentage of immigrants in the population, often an emotionally loaded topic, is considerably greater than it really is.
Like Rosling, Duffy looks for reasons for the difference between reality and perception and how the gap varies around the world. He agrees that we have a strong inbuilt protective bias to negativity, but suggests that cultures which put a strong emphasis on emotional content to argument (such as Italy and the US) tend to exaggerate values to make their point, while cultures that tend to be unemotional in their arguments (such as Sweden and Germany) tend to have perception that is closer to reality. We always have to bear in mind, though, that correlation is not causality, and though there seems a kind of logic to a tendency to exaggerate if you are imbuing an argument with emotion, the causal link has not been proved.
Overall, a good addition to our appreciation of how and why we get our understanding of the world so very wrong.
Whether we're dealing with politics and immigration, finance, climate change, sex or crime, Duffy shows that the majority of people tend to get things wrong. (I think I've read too many of these books, as I tended, if anything, to err in the opposite direction to the average respondent.) Like Rosling, Duffy often finds that we're over-pessimistic, but discovers a number cases where we over-apply the rose-tinted specs.
It seems – not entirely surprisingly – that topics with a strong emotional content are more likely to produce incorrect perceptions, and these are perceptions which will continue to be held despite contrary evidence. For example, in most countries, people think that the percentage of immigrants in the population, often an emotionally loaded topic, is considerably greater than it really is.
Like Rosling, Duffy looks for reasons for the difference between reality and perception and how the gap varies around the world. He agrees that we have a strong inbuilt protective bias to negativity, but suggests that cultures which put a strong emphasis on emotional content to argument (such as Italy and the US) tend to exaggerate values to make their point, while cultures that tend to be unemotional in their arguments (such as Sweden and Germany) tend to have perception that is closer to reality. We always have to bear in mind, though, that correlation is not causality, and though there seems a kind of logic to a tendency to exaggerate if you are imbuing an argument with emotion, the causal link has not been proved.
Overall, a good addition to our appreciation of how and why we get our understanding of the world so very wrong.
February 13, 2025
Não é um bom livro. Cheio de lugares comuns, perde-se no início na apresentação de múltiplos estudos de opinião efectuados em mais de uma vintena de países para no final elaborar - as pessoas têm uma percepção muito diferente da realidade. Nisto gasta mais de metade do texto, quase 2/3 para chegar a uma conclusão sobreponível à de Hans Roseling (Factfulness) de uma década atrás. Porém, como sempre, o original supera a cópia. Dir-se-ia que os estudos apresentados eram de um rigor tal que justificavam a sua compilação. Mas, nem isso se verífica. Quase sempre parcos de informação metodológica, denotam mesmo uma tentativa de forçar a interpretação para uma dada narrativa. Dizer por exemplo sobre as vacinas que, quem questionado sobre a relação destas com o autismo, afirma desconhecê-la, é no mínimo tendencioso para não dizer desonesto. Desconhecer não é negar. Como este encontrei vários.
O que procurava neste livro era uma análise do porquê de haver essa dissociação entre a realidade e a percepção. Era o ir além das banalidades, era procurar as suas causas. E já muito para o final o autor aborda esta questão. Teve um ponto mais por isso.
Diz Bobby Duffty que no mundo atual as percepções da realidade estão muito polarizadas. As nossas respostas são determinadas pelas nossas preocupações alimentadas por cobertura noticiosa e debates enviesados. As pessoas não se convencem com estatísticas mas com histórias e narrativas.
Num mundo em que 70% dos inquiridos acha que o mundo está a piorar. Qual é o racional deste sentimento?
Diz o autor, e citando Daniel Kahneman, que o pensar demasiado rápido, ser emotivo, leva a que as respostas surjam alinhadas com as nossas emoções e os juízos prévios que fazemos sobre um dado assunto. A nossa bolha, a voracidade pela vertigem da reação, a intoxicação pela imagem, e uma certa dose de cultura do narcisismo leva a que procuremos respostas que estejam alinhadas com o nosso modo de pensar. Diria mesmo que é por isso que procuro activamente informação em papel, que é por isso que dou primazia aos livros, em particular aos já sedimentados e é por isso que tenho no Goodreads uma das poucas redes sociais que frequento.
O que procurava neste livro era uma análise do porquê de haver essa dissociação entre a realidade e a percepção. Era o ir além das banalidades, era procurar as suas causas. E já muito para o final o autor aborda esta questão. Teve um ponto mais por isso.
Diz Bobby Duffty que no mundo atual as percepções da realidade estão muito polarizadas. As nossas respostas são determinadas pelas nossas preocupações alimentadas por cobertura noticiosa e debates enviesados. As pessoas não se convencem com estatísticas mas com histórias e narrativas.
Num mundo em que 70% dos inquiridos acha que o mundo está a piorar. Qual é o racional deste sentimento?
Diz o autor, e citando Daniel Kahneman, que o pensar demasiado rápido, ser emotivo, leva a que as respostas surjam alinhadas com as nossas emoções e os juízos prévios que fazemos sobre um dado assunto. A nossa bolha, a voracidade pela vertigem da reação, a intoxicação pela imagem, e uma certa dose de cultura do narcisismo leva a que procuremos respostas que estejam alinhadas com o nosso modo de pensar. Diria mesmo que é por isso que procuro activamente informação em papel, que é por isso que dou primazia aos livros, em particular aos já sedimentados e é por isso que tenho no Goodreads uma das poucas redes sociais que frequento.
July 16, 2024
A random non-fiction plucking from a library shelf is my usual remedy for a reading slump, allowing me the chance to sober up from a month-long binge of glorious fiction with the hard slap of fact. This book from a polling wonk at IPSOS presents a series of charts and glosses on those charts showing how wrong people are when called upon to make assumptions based on no prior data. As I discovered reading this detailed pseudo-academic thesis, the world of people making inaccurate assumptions about issues with no prior data is far less interesting than I previously assumed—20% less tedium, 40% more intellectual fireworks, and 80% quicker reading time were my predictions—meaning I will lower my expectations around social science books from polling wonks on how wrong people are when they are asked to make assumptions from a position of ignorance in future. Lesson learned.
December 29, 2024
Psihologii vorbesc despre "raționamente motivate direcțional", care ne fac să căutăm informații care ne reconfirmă preferințele ("prejudecată de confirmare") și să negăm informațiile care ne contrazic preferințele ("prejudecată de contrazicere"). Rob Dobelli denumește acest grup de efecte "mama tuturor concepțiilor greșite și tatăl tuturor reționamentelor incorecte".
în general, nu vom ajunge prea departe în incercarea de a corecta percepțiile greșite ale oamenilor doar oferindu-le mai multe fapte. Asta pentru că nu am abordat problema de bază, ce ține, mai degrabă, de emoții și de simțul de identitate. Dacă le spunem oamenilor că se înșală, s-ar putea doar să-i facem să devină și mai rigizi în convingeri ("efect de recul").
Un exemplu de percepție greșită este așa-numita "imigrație imaginată". De regulă, oamenii au supraestimat populația de imigranți din țara lor. Imigrația a fost o temă importantă în campaniile pentru BREXIT și pentru alegerea lui Trump (cartea a fost publicată în 2018).
Recomand
în general, nu vom ajunge prea departe în incercarea de a corecta percepțiile greșite ale oamenilor doar oferindu-le mai multe fapte. Asta pentru că nu am abordat problema de bază, ce ține, mai degrabă, de emoții și de simțul de identitate. Dacă le spunem oamenilor că se înșală, s-ar putea doar să-i facem să devină și mai rigizi în convingeri ("efect de recul").
Un exemplu de percepție greșită este așa-numita "imigrație imaginată". De regulă, oamenii au supraestimat populația de imigranți din țara lor. Imigrația a fost o temă importantă în campaniile pentru BREXIT și pentru alegerea lui Trump (cartea a fost publicată în 2018).
Recomand
November 21, 2019
“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there be a greater number and weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet these it either neglects and despises, or else by some distinction sets aside and rejects, in order that by this great and pernicious predetermination the authority of its former conclusions may remain inviolate.” – Francis Bacon, 1620
Confirmation bias, or the tendency to seek out information that confirms what one already believes—and to ignore or reject the rest—was recognized at least 400 years ago by Francis Bacon. Today, Rolf Dobelli calls it “the mother of all misconceptions and the father of all fallacies.” It lies at the center of all of our misconceptions and delusions.
Why is confirmation bias so prevalent? To prevent cognitive dissonance, or the state of uncertainty and doubt regarding one’s beliefs. This unpleasant feeling is easy to avoid simply by surrounding yourself only with those that think like you and by consuming only the information that supports what you already believe.
So we use confirmation bias to prevent cognitive dissonance; we avoid cognitive dissonance because we don’t want to change our beliefs; and we don’t want to change our beliefs because they are tied to our identity. Ideally, we would all orient our identities around the pursuit of truth, rather than in conformance to a chosen tribe, but that’s not the way things usually work.
What’s my proof for this grand assertion? The entirety of Bobby Duffy’s latest book.
I hope it doesn’t go underappreciated the wealth of information this book contains. Drawing on over 100,000 surveys across up to 40 countries, Duffy compares average perceptions against reality on a host of important social, economic, and political issues and metrics. With this information, we can get a sense of how informed the public is concerning important topics, in essence testing the hypothesis that confirmation bias (and associated biases and fallacies) essentially creates mass delusion.
So what do the 100,000+ surveys tell us? The conclusion is clear: most of us don’t know the first thing about health, finance, wealth, immigration, taxation, poverty, violence, risk, and just about anything else of social or political importance, as Duffy so masterfully explains. Duffy takes the reader through an analysis of the surveys, a comparison of perceptions to reality, a tour of the several biases and fallacies that lead to the discrepancies, and a comparison of the performance of different countries, making for a highly fascinating and timely read. Duffy even reveals in the penultimate chapter which country performed the worst.
I won’t spoil the numbers, because part of the fun of reading the book is trying to make your own guesses regarding some metric and comparing that guess to both the reality and the average survey response. Suffice to say that most people are way off on just about every measure of importance.
Which says two things. First, the voting public is massively misinformed. It’s hard to know what to do about an issue when you have no clue as to the current state of affairs. In France, for example, the average person thinks that the top 1 percent should receive more of the share of wealth (as a percentage) than they currently get in reality, despite also thinking that the 1 percent already have too much. This is because the French massively overestimate the share of wealth for the top 1 percent in the first place.
Second, the source of many misconceptions is a lack of basic statistical and scientific literacy in the population, which I consider to be a failure of the public school system. When a significant percentage of people estimate that their retirement account need only be around 50,000 to receive an annual salary of 25,000 during their retirement years, there is a big problem.
It’s easy to blame others for this. Common targets are the media, politicians, or technology, but as Duffy suggests, we for the most part get the journalism and politicians we deserve or demand. Scientifically illiterate people vote for scientifically illiterate politicians and consume statistically meaningless and sensationalistic news stories that revolve entirely around anecdotes. Sure, journalists and politicians are partly to blame (by never covering statistics or trends), but our delusions are the result of a complex mix of factors that begins with our own emotional innumeracy and biases, chief among them confirmation bias.
In the final chapter, Duffy outlines several potential solutions to the problem, all oriented around better, deeper, and more intellectually honest engagement with the issues. I share Duffy’s optimism that facts still matter and that people can and do change their minds. While we will never eradicate bias completely, we can make progress, in part by demanding more sophisticated coverage of issues by journalists and politicians that includes scale and trends in the data.
The bottom line seems to be this: if we want to improve the state of the world, the problem is ignorance, and the solution is better education (public and self-directed) that centers on critical thinking, statistical literacy, and awareness of common biases. This book is an excellent step in that direction.
Confirmation bias, or the tendency to seek out information that confirms what one already believes—and to ignore or reject the rest—was recognized at least 400 years ago by Francis Bacon. Today, Rolf Dobelli calls it “the mother of all misconceptions and the father of all fallacies.” It lies at the center of all of our misconceptions and delusions.
Why is confirmation bias so prevalent? To prevent cognitive dissonance, or the state of uncertainty and doubt regarding one’s beliefs. This unpleasant feeling is easy to avoid simply by surrounding yourself only with those that think like you and by consuming only the information that supports what you already believe.
So we use confirmation bias to prevent cognitive dissonance; we avoid cognitive dissonance because we don’t want to change our beliefs; and we don’t want to change our beliefs because they are tied to our identity. Ideally, we would all orient our identities around the pursuit of truth, rather than in conformance to a chosen tribe, but that’s not the way things usually work.
What’s my proof for this grand assertion? The entirety of Bobby Duffy’s latest book.
I hope it doesn’t go underappreciated the wealth of information this book contains. Drawing on over 100,000 surveys across up to 40 countries, Duffy compares average perceptions against reality on a host of important social, economic, and political issues and metrics. With this information, we can get a sense of how informed the public is concerning important topics, in essence testing the hypothesis that confirmation bias (and associated biases and fallacies) essentially creates mass delusion.
So what do the 100,000+ surveys tell us? The conclusion is clear: most of us don’t know the first thing about health, finance, wealth, immigration, taxation, poverty, violence, risk, and just about anything else of social or political importance, as Duffy so masterfully explains. Duffy takes the reader through an analysis of the surveys, a comparison of perceptions to reality, a tour of the several biases and fallacies that lead to the discrepancies, and a comparison of the performance of different countries, making for a highly fascinating and timely read. Duffy even reveals in the penultimate chapter which country performed the worst.
I won’t spoil the numbers, because part of the fun of reading the book is trying to make your own guesses regarding some metric and comparing that guess to both the reality and the average survey response. Suffice to say that most people are way off on just about every measure of importance.
Which says two things. First, the voting public is massively misinformed. It’s hard to know what to do about an issue when you have no clue as to the current state of affairs. In France, for example, the average person thinks that the top 1 percent should receive more of the share of wealth (as a percentage) than they currently get in reality, despite also thinking that the 1 percent already have too much. This is because the French massively overestimate the share of wealth for the top 1 percent in the first place.
Second, the source of many misconceptions is a lack of basic statistical and scientific literacy in the population, which I consider to be a failure of the public school system. When a significant percentage of people estimate that their retirement account need only be around 50,000 to receive an annual salary of 25,000 during their retirement years, there is a big problem.
It’s easy to blame others for this. Common targets are the media, politicians, or technology, but as Duffy suggests, we for the most part get the journalism and politicians we deserve or demand. Scientifically illiterate people vote for scientifically illiterate politicians and consume statistically meaningless and sensationalistic news stories that revolve entirely around anecdotes. Sure, journalists and politicians are partly to blame (by never covering statistics or trends), but our delusions are the result of a complex mix of factors that begins with our own emotional innumeracy and biases, chief among them confirmation bias.
In the final chapter, Duffy outlines several potential solutions to the problem, all oriented around better, deeper, and more intellectually honest engagement with the issues. I share Duffy’s optimism that facts still matter and that people can and do change their minds. While we will never eradicate bias completely, we can make progress, in part by demanding more sophisticated coverage of issues by journalists and politicians that includes scale and trends in the data.
The bottom line seems to be this: if we want to improve the state of the world, the problem is ignorance, and the solution is better education (public and self-directed) that centers on critical thinking, statistical literacy, and awareness of common biases. This book is an excellent step in that direction.
August 24, 2019
This is an immensely interesting book steeped in research and anecdotal information. Cognitive bias and heuristics shape our perceptions much more than we are aware. Why We're Wrong About Nearly Everything: A Theory of Human Misunderstanding is a thought-provoking book perfect for readers interested in what shapes societal misconceptions and popular beliefs.
December 1, 2019
Meh. Picked up this book because of a recommendation in a magazine (don’t remember which one). Maybe because I listened to it, maybe because I’ve already read Thinking Fast and Slow a couple times, and have read everything Malcolm Gladwell and the Freakonomics guys have written...I wasn’t blown away by this. The stories and stats were interesting and a couple things were “new” to me—the international comparisons were a nice addition. I felt like it addressed the “how” we are wrong about nearly everything more than the “why.” The end with some recommendations for how to be less wrong was good.
Also, I found the perspective a little schizophrenic—mostly, it seemed like it was written from a UK-centric view, but then there was a lot of US focus. The narrator had an American accent, but the currency was usually (always) pounds...There was a disconnect that I found distracting.
Also, I found the perspective a little schizophrenic—mostly, it seemed like it was written from a UK-centric view, but then there was a lot of US focus. The narrator had an American accent, but the currency was usually (always) pounds...There was a disconnect that I found distracting.
December 26, 2019
Bobby Duffy hace un muy interesante y entretenido tour acerca de las muchas áreas de nuestro conocimiento del mundo en el que, simplemente, no tenemos ni reputa idea. El libro está desglosado en diversas áreas en las que estamos equivocados, abarcando de nuestra política a nuestra salud, pasando por nuestra vida sexual, nuestras ideas religiosas y, sobre todo, lo equivocados que estamos acerca de lo que creen los demás, así como nuestra tendencia a caer en bulos y noticias falsas.
No le pongo cinco estrellas simplemente porque muchos de los sesgos y fenómenos que describe son ya para mí viejos conocidos, y la sección final sobre qué podemos hacer para combatirlo se me queda un poco breve y floja. Pero está escrito de modo ameno, soberbiamente documentado, y merece mucho la pena. Recomendado sin reservas.
No le pongo cinco estrellas simplemente porque muchos de los sesgos y fenómenos que describe son ya para mí viejos conocidos, y la sección final sobre qué podemos hacer para combatirlo se me queda un poco breve y floja. Pero está escrito de modo ameno, soberbiamente documentado, y merece mucho la pena. Recomendado sin reservas.
November 3, 2019
Not bad by any means but any study of fallacious thinking needs to have a far deeper discussion of ideology/discourse and their shaping of common sense to be genuinely credible. The various biases discussed are quite interesting, but the techniques used to arrive at the statistics cited are not examined in enough detail to make them all that convincing. A complete lack of longitudinal data, as far as I could see, means that today's results and the conclusions drawn from them may have no resemblance to next year's. In other words I think we're seeing the results made to fit the theory in a lot of cases.
June 15, 2021
Simpatică foc cartea asta. E plină de date statistice interpretate iar referințele și notele îi dau aura unei veritabile lucrări de cercetare cu valoare descriptivă. Apreciez destul de mult vulgarizarea sociologiei mai ales în acest mod și deși mi-a arătat puține lucruri noi, mi-a confirmat multe lucruri deja știute într-o manieră simplistă și cu cifre actualizate.
Pentru cei care pretind că știu sociologie, cartea e un duș rece. Și nu numai pentru aceștia, e pentru oricine ascultă prea mult de emoții când privește lumea din jur și nu pune niște filtre raționale.
Partea chiar tristă e că în 2-3 ani va deveni cam depășită. Ar fi mișto actualizarea acestui studiu măcar o dată la zece ani, în acest format.
”Capitolul” despre România e o glumiță care doar repetă tot ce s-a scris deja anterior lui.
Pentru cei care pretind că știu sociologie, cartea e un duș rece. Și nu numai pentru aceștia, e pentru oricine ascultă prea mult de emoții când privește lumea din jur și nu pune niște filtre raționale.
Partea chiar tristă e că în 2-3 ani va deveni cam depășită. Ar fi mișto actualizarea acestui studiu măcar o dată la zece ani, în acest format.
”Capitolul” despre România e o glumiță care doar repetă tot ce s-a scris deja anterior lui.
November 7, 2019
I learned a lot from this book, not only data/anecdata, but also just the reminder that it's good to question what you accept is true. I found myself picking up the book periodically, not reading straight through. If you are going to be seated next to your know-it-all uncle at Thanksgiving this year, read this book before you go. He'll be shocked to learn that the Great Wall of China is not actually visible from space. :)
Thanks to the publishers and NetGalley for a digital ARC!
Thanks to the publishers and NetGalley for a digital ARC!
May 17, 2025
best part of this book were the graphs. other than that, the title kind of says it all? it’s not a book that will surprise you by any means, but I did enjoy the comparisons between countries in particular sex differences are soooo crazy to me. ofc the stats are from 2017/2018 tho so a bit old now.
January 20, 2025
“É mais urgente do que nunca tomar medidas práticas para controlar o que nos é dito e ajudar a capacitar as pessoas para porem em causa o modo como pensamos.”
October 16, 2018
We are wrong about most things. That may be a bitter pill to swallow but as The Perils of Perception proves, it’s true. This non-fiction book is an intriguing study into just how ignorant our society is. It draws on 100,000 interviews from forty countries. The take home message? We should be afraid. Very afraid.
Bobby Duffy is the managing director of the IPSOS MORI Social Research Institute and works at Kings College in London. Duffy is a man who has quizzed many people on basic facts. These studies were conducted online, so there may be some questions about whether these samples are truly representative. But as Duffy proves, internet usage is actually much more common than we think. It is one of the many ideas he challenges us on, forcing a re-evaluation of our own, often deeply held, beliefs.
In this book, Duffy is mining the same kind of territory that Hans Rosling and his family covered in their book, Factfulness. What all of these researchers found was, that irrespective of education level, most people fail multiple-choice tests about various facts. It could be about the level of worldwide inequality, or immigration rates, or the incidence of obesity. Rosling even went on to compare the results from humans with the random answers from monkeys. We may be loath to admit it, but the animals come out on top.
Duffy uses his book to describe how our perceptions are distorted. He says that this happens through a prism of how we think and what we’re told. The former includes our critical skills: in mathematics, statistics and our ability to reason well. The latter encompasses what we are presented through the media, by politicians and others in positions of power. Humans have a tendency to seek out information that confirms our own existing views; this is also known as confirmation bias and is taught in Psychology 101. Our prejudices are further exacerbated online where algorithms filter our content, meaning our pre-existing thoughts are constantly re-affirmed.
We humans also find it difficult to perceive slow, positive changes. This is a good coping mechanism, because it means we aren’t overloaded with information. But this also results in our tendency towards more negative notions and extremes. The media also often fail to report on the small, incremental changes taking place in the world. Instead they are more likely to highlight an attention-grabbing story or factoid. This is becoming worse in our post-truth world.
This book is a fascinating one which breaks down all of our mistakes. The content is rich and includes many things we should all be mindful of. Throughout the book Duffy offers plenty of practical examples, along with the ramifications of our misjudgments. In the case of obesity, it can be detrimental to our health, as people ignore this growing issue. For anti-vaccinators who disregard the science and information about their debunked claims, it means they continue to spread misinformation.
Duffy’s work is easy-to-read and will help us better comprehend human foibles with respect to perceptions. The topics are presented in an interesting way and are supported by colourful graphics. It is heartening to know that we are all susceptible to these mistakes. But thanks to people like Duffy and Rosling all is not lost, because their books help guide us away from the path of general ignorance.
Bobby Duffy is the managing director of the IPSOS MORI Social Research Institute and works at Kings College in London. Duffy is a man who has quizzed many people on basic facts. These studies were conducted online, so there may be some questions about whether these samples are truly representative. But as Duffy proves, internet usage is actually much more common than we think. It is one of the many ideas he challenges us on, forcing a re-evaluation of our own, often deeply held, beliefs.
In this book, Duffy is mining the same kind of territory that Hans Rosling and his family covered in their book, Factfulness. What all of these researchers found was, that irrespective of education level, most people fail multiple-choice tests about various facts. It could be about the level of worldwide inequality, or immigration rates, or the incidence of obesity. Rosling even went on to compare the results from humans with the random answers from monkeys. We may be loath to admit it, but the animals come out on top.
Duffy uses his book to describe how our perceptions are distorted. He says that this happens through a prism of how we think and what we’re told. The former includes our critical skills: in mathematics, statistics and our ability to reason well. The latter encompasses what we are presented through the media, by politicians and others in positions of power. Humans have a tendency to seek out information that confirms our own existing views; this is also known as confirmation bias and is taught in Psychology 101. Our prejudices are further exacerbated online where algorithms filter our content, meaning our pre-existing thoughts are constantly re-affirmed.
We humans also find it difficult to perceive slow, positive changes. This is a good coping mechanism, because it means we aren’t overloaded with information. But this also results in our tendency towards more negative notions and extremes. The media also often fail to report on the small, incremental changes taking place in the world. Instead they are more likely to highlight an attention-grabbing story or factoid. This is becoming worse in our post-truth world.
This book is a fascinating one which breaks down all of our mistakes. The content is rich and includes many things we should all be mindful of. Throughout the book Duffy offers plenty of practical examples, along with the ramifications of our misjudgments. In the case of obesity, it can be detrimental to our health, as people ignore this growing issue. For anti-vaccinators who disregard the science and information about their debunked claims, it means they continue to spread misinformation.
Duffy’s work is easy-to-read and will help us better comprehend human foibles with respect to perceptions. The topics are presented in an interesting way and are supported by colourful graphics. It is heartening to know that we are all susceptible to these mistakes. But thanks to people like Duffy and Rosling all is not lost, because their books help guide us away from the path of general ignorance.
February 20, 2020
Wow. Quite a bit of reasons why people are really bad with numbers.
October 12, 2022
The fascinating thing of psychological studies and findings is that, it menifests the facts of how grateful we should be for the most sofisticated maschine we have possessed, from our birth as human beings, and, how sorry we should feel for that, we have hardly put it in use approperiately.
The statistics those the writer provided in this book, such as how our emotion blinds or manipulates our perception, even if they are not astonishing, at least of all, are good reminders for our fair enough rational well beings.
Besides, as a personal preference, I like the tune, which seems not so obviously trying to please anybody.
After all, life is not a valueless free gift, which worth no cherish, and, the quality of our lives, is primarily set upon our perception.
Coincidentally, I have read a quote of ‘positive thinking’ somewhere online this morning, which looks quite fitting to the suggestions the writer gave us, for avoiding misperceptions in the world we are living——
Look back, for learning from experiences;
look forward, for exploring hopeful possibilities;
look around, for finding various perspectives of reality;
look within, for observing and getting to know oneself better.
After all, while our worldview contributes shaping the world inevitably to certain extent, it affects, portraits and benefits ourselves the most and immediate, if it doesn't annoy or disgust the others.
The statistics those the writer provided in this book, such as how our emotion blinds or manipulates our perception, even if they are not astonishing, at least of all, are good reminders for our fair enough rational well beings.
Besides, as a personal preference, I like the tune, which seems not so obviously trying to please anybody.
After all, life is not a valueless free gift, which worth no cherish, and, the quality of our lives, is primarily set upon our perception.
Coincidentally, I have read a quote of ‘positive thinking’ somewhere online this morning, which looks quite fitting to the suggestions the writer gave us, for avoiding misperceptions in the world we are living——
Look back, for learning from experiences;
look forward, for exploring hopeful possibilities;
look around, for finding various perspectives of reality;
look within, for observing and getting to know oneself better.
After all, while our worldview contributes shaping the world inevitably to certain extent, it affects, portraits and benefits ourselves the most and immediate, if it doesn't annoy or disgust the others.
April 6, 2020
This reads like a sequel to Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow with no additional theoretical concepts. Infact concepts from T,F&S are quoted at multiple places with examples of biases grouped by themes such as politics, finance, health.
The anecdotes though are fairly recent and interesting, e.g. Brexit, the 2016 US elections, social media filter bubbles, perceived threat of immigration and religious terror.
The core of this book is a massive survey dataset of 500,000 responses across 40 countries over 4 years done by the market research firm, Ipsos which does throw interesting insights. Typical examples would be:
- The share of immigrants in population and crime is perceived to be ~4x higher across countries.
- The crime rates are perceived to have gotten worse in the last 20 years while they have halved actually.
- Costs of raising a child are underestimated by 2.5X
- Internet penetration is perceived to be significantly higher than actual
- Women representation in politics is perceived to be ~2X higher than it actually is.
The anecdotes though are fairly recent and interesting, e.g. Brexit, the 2016 US elections, social media filter bubbles, perceived threat of immigration and religious terror.
The core of this book is a massive survey dataset of 500,000 responses across 40 countries over 4 years done by the market research firm, Ipsos which does throw interesting insights. Typical examples would be:
- The share of immigrants in population and crime is perceived to be ~4x higher across countries.
- The crime rates are perceived to have gotten worse in the last 20 years while they have halved actually.
- Costs of raising a child are underestimated by 2.5X
- Internet penetration is perceived to be significantly higher than actual
- Women representation in politics is perceived to be ~2X higher than it actually is.
April 26, 2020
I wanted to give this 3.5 stars. It's a great book, but I would have liked to have seen more of a discussion about if and how the media influences us. For example he debunks the Leave Campaign misleading statistic that the UK gave £350M a year to the EU and states how many leavers and remainers believed the stat. But there is no discussion on how many people voted with that as an issue. Somethings in this book are just taken for granted. But overall I recommend this to everyone.
April 19, 2019
A careful and readable account of just how poor our intuitions often are, unreliable and biased, and how we need to slow down and check things out properly. And a great discussion of 'fake news' and other kinds of manipulation.
January 1, 2021
This is a interesting and thought provoking book.
I was challenged at times by the insights but ultimately that is on the learnings that despite the fact we might want to make better decisions than others in likelihood we won’t.
The book helpfully offers a thoughtful list of 10 things we can do to improve our decision making. It’s an interesting end to a curious and richly complex book.
If you want to find the answer on whether ‘fake news’ is affecting us a citizens’ - spoiler it isn’t - and other curiosities this is the book for you.
I enjoyed it.
I was challenged at times by the insights but ultimately that is on the learnings that despite the fact we might want to make better decisions than others in likelihood we won’t.
The book helpfully offers a thoughtful list of 10 things we can do to improve our decision making. It’s an interesting end to a curious and richly complex book.
If you want to find the answer on whether ‘fake news’ is affecting us a citizens’ - spoiler it isn’t - and other curiosities this is the book for you.
I enjoyed it.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 19, 2025
One of the essential books to read, especially in these times when scientificly scepticism and critical thinking is most needed.
February 25, 2023
Our perceptions are often wrong, partly due to the news always reporting the extraordinary, partly our inherent biases. So we think too many teens get pregnant (actually only 5%), we wrongly think immigrants commit more crimes (locals more), we think there are many more immigrants than the case. And we thus react to these views.
There are no good solutions, but some includes acknowledging our ignorance, be skeptical, and read from the other points of view.
I think a simple google whenever we have a question will remove most of our biases. We just need to ask these questions more often.
There are no good solutions, but some includes acknowledging our ignorance, be skeptical, and read from the other points of view.
I think a simple google whenever we have a question will remove most of our biases. We just need to ask these questions more often.
October 12, 2022
Another good book for fighting the Dunning-Kruger effect by teaching us how few we know and how few we get right.
I read this book together with my wife and on the one hand it is a little bit re-assuring that we are slightly less wrong than the average fellow human (so our strife for self-improvement has not entirely been in vain) and on the other hand re-assuring that we are often still quite wrong and therefore share the blind spots that are so common to our species: we're all standing on large enough common ground, which may not only be a base for mutual understanding, but can serve as a base camp for further self-education as well as attempts for increasing our sense of tolerance.
I read this book together with my wife and on the one hand it is a little bit re-assuring that we are slightly less wrong than the average fellow human (so our strife for self-improvement has not entirely been in vain) and on the other hand re-assuring that we are often still quite wrong and therefore share the blind spots that are so common to our species: we're all standing on large enough common ground, which may not only be a base for mutual understanding, but can serve as a base camp for further self-education as well as attempts for increasing our sense of tolerance.
October 7, 2019
Prima dată când am citit titlul și, mai ales, subtitlul cărții lui Bobby Duffy, în ciuda dublei mele pregătiri academice și practice (sunt sociolog și psiholog), am ridicat și eu o sprânceană. Cum să te înșeli aproape în orice privință? – mi-am spus, agățându-mă ca de o ultimă speranță de acel „aproape”. Apoi m-am oprit asupra exemplului cu care se deschide cartea: crezi sau nu că Marele Zid Chinezesc se vede din spațiu?
Dacă spui „da”, sunt șanse mari să mai fi auzit informația asta de câteva ori până acum. Probabil că deja ai în fața ochilor această lungă și șerpuitoare minune arhitectonică și nu ți se pare chiar imposibil ca ea să fie vizibilă chiar și de pe Lună. Doar e vorba de Marele Zid, nu? Sistemul 1 a preluat controlul.
Restul review-ului este aici: https://blog.publica.ro/2019/05/13/al...
February 1, 2019
Data driven and storytelling
With a great number of data metrics and statistics the author tells a story in his own personal tone: we have bias, we are stubborn, the world is better than before but a long way to fix things, and give the reader some tools to deal with and to dialogue with others. I like that it has a solid argumentation that the bias issue is not new and we are not dealing with a crisis on post truth reality: always we have been there. Balanced because it address up front what’s wrong and the impact of new technologies on making some issues more difficult to solve.
With a great number of data metrics and statistics the author tells a story in his own personal tone: we have bias, we are stubborn, the world is better than before but a long way to fix things, and give the reader some tools to deal with and to dialogue with others. I like that it has a solid argumentation that the bias issue is not new and we are not dealing with a crisis on post truth reality: always we have been there. Balanced because it address up front what’s wrong and the impact of new technologies on making some issues more difficult to solve.
June 12, 2019
This book is interesting, and provides a lot of new survey evidence about just how wrong we are on a range of issues. However, the key takeaways and main theoretical insights are available elsewhere, in other books that go into far greater depth, like Thinking, Fast and Slow and Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress.
October 18, 2022
Not recommended, unless you are interested in a very long report on results from a large survey. This is the essence of the book.
"Our survey was conducted online, so, by definition, everyone who answered it had Internet access, even in countries with low Internet penetration."
This is on page 191. If that information had been provided earlier, I probably would have stopped reading the book there and then.
There are problems with generalizing to whole populations of different countries from online survey respondents.
Random quote that I liked:
"At its core, surveillance is the business model that supports our largely free-of-charge Internet."
"Our survey was conducted online, so, by definition, everyone who answered it had Internet access, even in countries with low Internet penetration."
This is on page 191. If that information had been provided earlier, I probably would have stopped reading the book there and then.
There are problems with generalizing to whole populations of different countries from online survey respondents.
Random quote that I liked:
"At its core, surveillance is the business model that supports our largely free-of-charge Internet."
October 15, 2019
Why We're Wrong About Nearly Everything is a interesting read. It can be a bit dry in some spots, but it has some unique ideas.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 137 reviews