Coin Flips, Constipation, and Presidential Politics


You flip a coin three times in a row. All three times, it comes up heads. How do you predict the next toss would land? The pessimist will suggest that the pattern is bound to break. Their best guess is tails. The optimist will think, “Hey, I’m on a roll! Heads all the way, baby!”

Of course, the actual answer in both cases is always the same: 50/50 for heads or tails.

The mental quirk that sees patterns in coin tosses once kept us alive. Back on the  savannah, when your ancestors saw that bush rustle up ahead, their pattern-seeking brains gave them pause, calculating that if a lion had been there before, it could be there again. Maybe this time it was only the night breeze, but why take the chance? It only took one mistake to become dinner.

These days, unless you live near a wildlife preserve or a low-security zoo, that rustling is pretty much always gonna be the wind. But those ancient instincts are still with us, conjuring pattern mirages from nowhere. Think Vegas; there’s a reason why it’s filled with giant fake pyramids and opulent palaces. They serve as shrines to our misguided notion of predictability. Stir in a dollop of loss aversion and you have a surefire recipe for a one-way money transfer from your pocket to casino coffers.

But it’s not just Sin City. The same holds true in the stock market; your last buy has no bearing on the success of your next buy. And while basketball fans swear up and down in the “hot hand” phenomena, in between shouting at the point guard to get the ball to the shooter on fire, the success of one basket in no way influences the next one.

Last night, along with millions of other pattern-seeking brains, I watched the presidential debate. The Republicans were certain their man Romney’s firmly set jaw and steely-eyed stare was proof of a pattern to lead. The Democrats were equally comforted by a President radiating a cool but reserved demeanor, suggesting a man you should trust, a man in control. Meanwhile, the Independent lay in wait behind the metaphorical bush, waiting and watching with the eyes of a hunter for telltale signs of strength or weakness.

Remember Richard Nixon’s five o’clock shadow and sweaty brow during the Kennedy debates, or George Bush senior checking his watch? And then there’s Al Gores infamous sighs, and Bill Clinton’s wading out from behind the podium to feel the pain of the televised audience. Like palm readers searching for the deep meaning in the crease of the hand, we tend to believe these signs represent patterns portending something much larger. We strain for that momentary drive-by view into the candidate’s soul.

Is it possible that a bad Philly cheesesteak earlier in the day could spell doom for a candidate the night of the debate? “He just wasn’t himself tonight; he appeared disengaged.” According to the smart people at Metamucil, when things go bad in the colon--well, they can go very bad indeed.

Is this really the way we choose the man that will occupy the highest office in the land? Does it all come down to a facial tick, a poorly timed nose wipe, or an unfortunate bout of constipation?

The answer, of course, is yes.

Studies show people vote less on the meat of the issues, and more on the plating technique. The numbers are startling: roughly 65% of a voter’s decision is based on body language, 28% on the candidate’s tone of voice, and only 7% on the words they use. And that’s not even factoring in the unavoidable pre-debate bias.

Maybe we should just acknowledge the truth about how we humans make even our most crucial decisions.  What if we turned the sound down and let the professional sports casters call the debate?

“That’s right Frank--his mouth is moving but his eyes tell a different story. Did you see that body English on that head fake, and whoa, was that a full side shrug? He’s definitely showing the kind of flexibility that makes for a great commander in chief, we all know agility is the name of the game.”

I can almost hear the crowd roar as the coin leaves the referee’s hand and spins high into the glare of the television lights. A hush falls as the coin tumbles down towards the stiff red stage carpet.  You can cut the tension with a knife.

What’s it gonna be, America? Heads or tails?

Check out Robb’s new book and more 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Robert Frost Quandary, or How Irrational Thinking Might Save Your Life

Image
You stumble out of the wilderness, having had no contact with humans for at least ten days. You’re weak from hunger and fatigue and you find yourself at a crossroads, power lines stretching out along each of the separate roadways. It’s decision time. You think about Robert Frost’s poem, and wonder if his advice to take the road less traveled might not just lead to your demise. What do you do, or more importantly, which brain system should you use to make this crucial decision? Daniel Kahneman, famed psychologist, winner of the Nobel prize for prospect theory and author of Thinking Fast and Thinking Slow might be the one guy to call, assuming your existential crossroads gets cellphone reception. Kahneman explains that we have two systems for making decisions. He refers to them simply as System 1 and System 2. System 1 is reflexive, automatic, and impulsive. It takes a constant reading of your surroundings and generates short-term predictions, all operating on a level beneath yo
Read more

Who Are You: Does Personality Change as We Age?

Image
Are you the same “you” that you were twenty years ago? Thirty? Forty? What about fifty years ago? While science still struggles to quantify, measure, and categorize personality, some have a different question: how stable is personality in the first place? Do the high school version of yourself and the retiree version of yourself still have some common immutable core? It depends how you look at it , says a paper by lead author Rodica Damian of University of Houston and her co-authors Marion Spengler of the University of Tuebingen in Germany, Brent W. Roberts of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and UH grad student Andreea Sutu. The paper in question goes by the catchy title “Sixteen going on sixty-six: A longitudinal study of personality stability and change across 50 years.” Damian and her colleagues compared the results for 1,795 U.S. adults who had taken a personality test as teenagers and then again, five decades years later. The team found that yes, there is a
Read more

The Best Painkiller Isn't What You Think It Is

Image
When we say that listening to the right song makes us feel better, usually we mean it in terms of emotions. However, a new study from the University of Utah Health suggests that combining certain painkillers with certain music boosts the pain-fighting effect of the medication a measurable amount. This recent bit of research was conducted specifically on models recreating two types of pain: inflammatory and post-surgical. (Nerve pain, or neuropathic pain, was not addressed.) Low doses of four medications were explored: ibuprofen, cannabidiol, levetiracetam, and NAX 5055. As for music, the researchers went with one artist only, while the control groups were given one of the four drugs and subjected to white noise. What music would you choose for optimal painkilling effect? The experimenters went with Mozart. (Interestingly, the phrase “Mozart therapy” already exists, referring to the beneficial effect ol’ Amadeus can have on patients with epilepsy. For instance, a 2018 st
Read more