Pattern-seeking

Humans have evolved a formidable ability to recognize patterns, however, this very useful ability also brings along with it evolutionary baggage in that sometimes we see patterns where there are none – illusory correlation can be seen as an instance of this “misfiring”.

Sometimes referred to as the face-in-the-clouds effect or inkblot thinking†, certain kinds of pattern-seeking are obvious as just that, for example, over the course of human history people have gazed up at the moon and, in addition to our present day “man-in-the-moon”, seen a girl with a basket on her back, a rabbit, and a four-eyed jaguar.

This propensity to ‘find’ patterns turns up across a variety of areas and claims, for example, in 

ðBeliefs about statistical sequences: an impression or idea often held in which people assume that the pattern of a population will be replicated in all of its subsets, combined with the operation of a “corrective bias” when the sequence varies too much from what actors' expect of a ‘fair’ sequence, the Gambler's fallacy, together dubbed The Law of small numbers (http://repositories.cdlib.org/iber/econ/E00-282/) by Kahneman & Tversky;

ðMoon madness: an asserted pattern of human behaviour, usually said to concern the full moon having an affect on things like an increase of criminal acts or hospital admissions. Very little, if any, credible scientific support is available for this ‘pattern’, though many investigations have been undertaken;

ð‘Uncanny’ presidential co-incidences: that there are eerie and strange parallels in the lives of U.S. presidents, specifically, between John Kennedy and Abraham Lincoln – a chilling and disturbing ‘pattern’ – it may not surprise to note that conscientious researchers have been able to show similar patterns between other presidents, for example, McKinley and Garfield. But of course seeing these “patterns” also depends upon other factors, such as exactly what we will accept as constituting an eerie, disconcerting co-incidence and the nature of statistical probabilities against the background of available data points;

ðPredictions of that celebrated ‘seer’ Nostradamus: something which should give pause to the disciples of this “late, great prophet” is the observation that no-one seems able to consistently and accurately (or even actually) ‘see’ an alleged prediction from the sage until a given meaningful event takes place, For example, the horrifying September, 2001 attacks, the assassination of President Kennedy or Martin Luther King or Senator Kennedy, the death of Princess Diana, etc., then, “post facto”, with much casting of a long bow – hey presto – the sage one is ‘discovered’ to have known-it-all-along – classic inkblot thinking – adherents are usually astonished to hear that Nostradamus’ writings refer to his own time (as well as likely earlier) – a true pattern which does not seem to interest these followers in the least;

ðBiorhythms: not to be confused with scientifically-established circadian rhythms, biorhythms are said to be precise patterns or cycles of the human organism which enable those in-the-know to predict with 100% accuracy a person’s ‘down’ and ‘at-risk’ days. Unfortunately for this brand of pseudo-science it has been found to be fresh out of credible evidence – here’s a particularly accurate prediction – anyone who rigourously examines biorhythm ‘theory’ (it hardly deserves to be referred to as such) will find it to be an empty, worthless ‘pattern’;

†refers to psychological 'projective tests' of personality, such as the Rorschach, in which subjects gaze at (ten) abstract inkblot designs, with analysis of their recorded interpretations in an attempt to measure the subjects’ emotional and intellectual functioning – of dubious efficacy. Supposedly “projective” in that subjects are presumed to transpose their own personality characteristics onto their interpretation of the inkblot images.

(see also: cognitive illusion, expectation, Law of large numbers, Multiple endpoint fuzziness, Seeking structure in chance and randomness...)

» Return to belief, judgement, and clear thinking »