Is Getting More Information Always Better?

The Internet is an amazing information ocean.  For any decision – what to buy, how to research medical problems, deciding where you stand on a public issue, where to invest your money – you can spend hours (days actually) gathering and sifting information.  But is there a point of diminishing returns – a point where time and effort not only is being wasted but makes your decision either no better or even worse?

In a 1974 study, psychologist Paul Slovic probed this question.  Seasoned horserace handicappers were given five pieces of data of their choice about each horse in 40 races.  They picked the winner 17 percent of the time.  In subsequent rounds, they were given first 10, then 20 and then 40 pieces of data they wanted about each horse.  Their performance didn’t improve, yet they became more confident of their prediction each time they got more data.  After all, they reasoned, more information yields a better decision.

Pieces of Data About Each Horse in the Race

We’re psychologically programmed to think more information is always better.  But as Slovic found that’s not always true.  Many of us experience this after hours of Internet searches with no better understanding of what to do. More information is often just more. This is at the heart of information bias – the belief that getting more information necessarily leads to better action. 

Several factors foster information bias. One is evolution. We’re an information seeking species, wired to seek new information to help us navigate our world.  Getting new information leads to a spurt of the neurotransmitter dopamine in the brain.  Dopamine is released when something pleasurable happens and “trains” the brain to want more of it.  Dopamine is at the heart of addictions, such as to drugs and alcohol.  “News junkie,” it turns out, is a metaphor anchored in reality.   

Another driver of information bias is emotions, which play a large role in decision making and are often in the driver’s seat.  Brain scans by neuroscientist Joshua Greene of subjects engaged in moral decision making revealed that the logic processing parts of the brain are sometimes just used to come up with reasons for what the emotional parts have already decided.  In Slovic’s study, it’s quite possible that handicappers’ emotions were driving the desire for more information to support their prior commitment to a particular horse.  Called confirmation bias this underlies the fact that people committed to anything - from a vacation spot to a conspiracy theory - love searching for information to back up their belief.  More information doesn’t make decisions better; sometimes it just makes confidence in and commitment to them stronger.

Information bias also can overload the brain’s logic circuits.  In a study by Temple University’s Angelika Dimoka, subjects were asked to participate in auctions where the goal was to pay the lowest possible price for a combination of items, like 100 landing slots at an airport.  She found that as the amount of information subjects were given to consider increased, the part of the brain involved with logical processing became more active.  So far so good.  But as the amount of information continued to grow, the brain’s logical processing capability began shutting down.   The result was poorer decisions resulting from information overload.  Another result was increased anxiety and frustration that came with more than the brain could handle. 

The information overload associated with information bias can also lead to suppressing subconscious brain signals. In an experiment by the University of Virginia’s Tim Wilson, one group of college students was asked to taste and then rank five different jams.  Their ratings generally aligned with those by Consumer Reports.  A second group was given the same task but had to fill out a questionnaire after tasting each jam to analyze and justify their evaluation.  This forced them to pile more information into their decision making.  The result: they rated Consumer Reports’ two worst-tasting jams as their first preferences.   Dealing with so much information appears to have suppressed their subconscious reactions to the taste of the jams.

We can contain the danger of information bias.  One strategy, suggested by Swarthmore College professor Barry Schwartz, is to focus on being a decision “satisficer” rather than a “maximizer.”  The former gathers information to reach a decision that is just good enough, like what flat screen TV to buy.  The latter can’t stop until their information gathering leads to a “perfect” decision. That unlimited searching can lead to stress, a poor decision and later on the nagging feeling that “if I just knew more I could’ve made a better choice.”

Another technique is taking a “time out” from information gathering.  This lowers stress and rests the brain’s logical processing ability.  It also gives a chance to ask: Do I have enough information now?  Is the investment of my time and energy to gather more worth it?  Combining a “time out” with a diverting activity that requires little mental energy can also allow the subconscious more free reign.

T.S. Eliot in his 1934 The Rock asks “Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?”    Gathering ever more information doesn’t always mean we’re wiser or make better decisions.

Photo Credit: bwatwood.edublogs.org