Why are we so easy to get cheated? -By Liu weipeng

Why are we so easy to get cheated?

 

By Liu weipeng

 

In October April 26, at the autumn science fair in the state of Arizona, a high school student program from yingshi middle school won a first prize.

In his plan, he urged people to sign a document that required strict control or the destruction of a substance called "HYDROXIDE. This has enough reason, because

1. This kind of substance causes excessive sweat and vomiting.

2. It is the main component of acid rain.

3. He may cause severe burns in the gas.

4. It takes your life to breathe in.

5. It is the culprit of corrosion.

6. It will reduce the brake efficiency of the car.

7. It was found in cancer patients with advanced cancers.

He asked 50 people if they supported prohibiting such substances. 43 people said they supported the service. 6 people did not show their attitudes. Only one person knew that this material was water.

The above story is taken from the reading Weitang. The original title is "How easy are we to be cheated ?", But I don't think that's more important. That is,"Why are we so easy to get cheated?"

Let's review the above sentences and their impressions in the brain:

1. This kind of substance causes excessive sweat and vomiting. -- Association: sweating and vomiting? => Bad!

2. It is the main component of acid rain. -- Association: Acid Rain? => Bad!

3. He may cause severe burns in the gas. -- Association: burns? => Bad!

4. It takes your life to breathe in. -- Join: fatal? => Bad!

5. It is the culprit of corrosion. -- Association: Corrosion? => Bad!

6. It will reduce the brake efficiency of the car. Association: damage the brakes? => Bad!

7. It was found in cancer patients with advanced cancers. Association: advanced cancer? => Bad!

Facts have proved that human cognitive processes are irrational. The first response of the brain to external information is usually conditional reflection, which is a "shortcut" (or "association") left behind in the brain based on past experience "). "Shortcuts" are powerful weapons for people to cope with complex external information. They can help the brain make "no difference" decisions instantly.

However, people who are good at exploiting psychology can also cheat on membership, because the weakness of "Shortcuts" is that they are only established on most or some common premise. For example, once I went to the station to buy a ticket, I didn't buy it. I asked my wife to guess why. First, guess the most common situation: the ticket is sold out. I said no. Then I guess I won't open the ticket office. I said no, it's open. Then I can't guess. In fact, tickets are still working, and tickets are not sold out. The problem is that the ticket vending machine is down. Everyone is waiting for the machine to recover. I will be back soon. In daily experience, opening a ticket is equal to selling tickets ". This shortcut allows the brain to save the burden on the rare premise of memory. For example, the machine must be good, the conductor must not be ill, and the ticket office should not be robbed...

There are a lot of wonderful examples in "influence" about psychological shortcuts and how to use psychological shortcuts. For example, if the price is set high, more people will buy them, in most cases, "high price" is equal to "Good Quality" (as the saying goes, "too much money for goods"), a prerequisite for a causal shortcut.

Another typical example: Bob goes to the toilet and many people are waiting in front of him. In the first case, he said, "Sorry, Can I copy it first? Because I have an emergency ." At this time, 94% of the people put him in front. In the second case, he said, "I'm sorry. Can I copy it first ?", Only 60% agreed to him.

But the most interesting thing is the third case. He said, "I'm sorry, can you copy it first,BecauseI have five pages to copy ." In the result, 93% of the people agreed to his request. The experiment proves that people agree to the request not because of the "urgent" message, but because of the"Because. The word immediately stirred up a voice in the brain of the listener. "Well, this guy has something ".

If you pay attention to your conversations with others, you may notice the fact that:Most of the time, we accept or acknowledge a truth not because it is impeccable, but because the speaker's words seem justified. 

Those who are well versed in Persuasion know how to use some joins ("because", "Moreover", "not to mention", "plus "... The information carried by these words and the conditioned reflection aroused by these words are "the following is an equivalent or even more important reason (In fact, you can put a reason that is not a reason at all in a clause to achieve the same effect.) "), Sentence patterns (usually strong persuasion when the rhetorical question is used properly), words (" no doubt "," of course "," how can it be impossible "... The information carried by these words is "the following facts are clear, please do not need to think more") and even the tone (aggravated, questioned, incomprehensible ...) And so on, to stimulate the "Shortcuts" in the listener's brain. when the other party has not been able to use their senses, it will be thoroughly destroyed at the irrational perception level.

If you want to convince someone, and you have not enough reasons, you may wish to put the strongest one first, start with a long sentence of "You think about it", and then put a weak, or simply fabricated, plausible reason behind it with a slightly higher tone "and, one is suffixed with a "not to mention" ("more" to emphasize). If you are not enough, you can add a "Wow ...", Of course, you should pay attention to the last reason, because the attention of the listener often falls on the two reasons at the beginning and end. After finishing the process, prepare to enjoy the expression of the other party :)

Most people simply do not use pure reason. Their reason is actually composed of such shortcuts. This is normal, because "Shortcuts" have important survival significance (see "influence" for details). However, once there are some subtle disputes, taking the "shortcut" will easily lead to circular arguments or misunderstandings.

"Shortcuts" are not logic.

Return to the original example. Whether or not the facts stated in the example are true does not matter, it is important to associate the unknown hydroxide with words (or perceptible) such as "bad", "bad", and "harmful. How to associate? "Vomit", "Acid Rain", and "tumor". When we see these words, the reader's subconscious reaction is, of course, "All vomiting, acid rain, and tumors. Is this a good thing ?". Of course this is not good, but don't forget the premise is "in most cases ". If you use rational thinking, you will find that "finding in a tumor" cannot be deduced at all. "This is the thing that causes a tumor." or "this is definitely related to a tumor ".

What's more, add a "Late Stage "...