Self-deception as self-signaling: a model and experimental evidence Kyle Krueger, Michael Ritchie, and Lance Braud

Self-Deception  Gur & Sackeim’s (1979) definition An individual:  holds two contradictory beliefs  holds them simultaneously  is unaware of holding one of the beliefs  is motivated to remain unaware of that belief

Motivational Bias Explanation  There is no conscious intention to self-deceive. Instead, an individual makes judgments based on unconscious motivations.  Examples  Self-serving bias Attributing successes to internal factors, and failures to external factors  Confirmation bias Tendency to interpret events (our own actions) in ways that confirm our beliefs

Self-Signaling Theory  Our choices affect our beliefs  A choice not only causes an action, it also expresses a belief  Levels of Belief  Deep belief  State belief  Experienced belief

Self-Signaling Theory  Levels of Belief  Deep belief  Stated belief  Experienced belief  If stated belief does not match deep belief, then there is attempted self-deception  If experienced belief is equal to stated belief, it is a successful self-deception.

Self-Signaling vs Motivational Bias  Motivational bias does not account for three characteristics of self-deception  Defensiveness associated with challenged beliefs  The special significance of beliefs about the self You wouldn’t state that someone was guilty of self-deception if they were convinced the moon landing wasn’t real  Self-deception can fail A bias should necessarily alter belief

The Self-Signaling Formal Model  Bodner & Prelec (1995)  Model of non-causal motivation  Three primary assumptions 1.There exists a characteristic that is personally important 2.This is not possible to introspectively evaluate 3.It can be examined through one’s actions

The Formal Model of Self-Signaling V(x, θ O ) = u(x, θ O ) + λ∑ θ u(x,θ)p(θ|x)

The Self-Signaling Formal Model  x = the action or outcome  θ O = the “deep” belief about some characteristic  θ = the experienced belief about some characteristic  λ = the individual’s level of self-deception V(x, θ O ) =u(x, θ O ) +λ∑ θ u(x, θ )p( θ |x) The total utility of an action is equal to the generated utility of an action, plus the diagnostic utility of an action

Diagnostic Utility λ∑ θ u(x, θ )p( θ |x)  This must account for two emerging paradoxes 1.The static state paradox The ability to hold two opposing beliefs Explained by our two separate terms, θ O and θ 2.The dynamic paradox The ability to remain unaware of a held belief To explain this, there must be two variants of self-signaling Face-value Rational

Diagnostic Utility λ∑ θ u(x, θ )p( θ |x)  Face-value  Our knowledge of θ O is a probability distribution, p( θ )  p( θ |x) = our inferred value of θ O given the action x This is derived with the assumption that our action is to solely provide maximum outcome utility “By choosing x I demonstrate deep beliefs such that x maximizes standard expected utility given these deep beliefs”

Diagnostic Utility λ∑ θ u(x, θ )p( θ |x)  Rational  Inferences about motivation are exactly the same as in an interpersonal scenario  Only paradoxical if action and belief are inconsistent As such, belief θ influences the action x, and action x derives belief θ  Not ignorant of diagnostic utility and so can be mitigated rationally. This variation is through λ

The Formal Model Revisited  x = the action or outcome  θ O = the “deep” belief about some characteristic V(x, θ O ) =u(x, θ O ) +λ∑ θ u(x, θ )p( θ |x) The total utility of an action given the deep belief of a characteristic is equal to the outcome utility of an action given a deep belief, plus The diagnostic utility of an action, as determined by susceptibility of self- deception, the utility of an action given an experienced belief, and the change in our experienced belief given that action

The Experiment

Purpose  Designed to induce self deception in individuals, where self deception has a cost.  Designed to examine failed self deception, where the subject is aware of their own attempted self deception.

Design Female rated symbols Male rated symbols

Phase one  85 subjects view 100 Korean symbols.  The subject classifies the symbol as male or female and then rates their confidence on a 5 point scale.  Subjects are awarded $0.02 for every correct classification.

Phase Two  The subjects are asked to predict the gender of a symbol, then they are shown the symbol and asked to confirm or reject their prediction.  Again subjects rate their confidence.  $0.02 are awarded for every correct prediction and correct guess.

$40.00 bonus  In Phase two a $40.00 bonus is awarded to 3 individuals in two different groups.  In the first test group it is awarded to the subjects with the highest number of correct post – prediction classifications.  In the second group it was awarded to the subjects with the highest rates of correct predictions.

“In the absence of self- signaling the subject will categorize the sign as male if, and only if the probability of male is greater than.5. With self - signaling, one has to factor in the diagnostic utility of selecting male.”  The subjects desire for their prediction to be accurate prompts them to self deceive.  This deception makes the subject less likely to correctly confirm or reject their prediction.

Application of the Formal Model  Stated simply:  A subject will choose a confirmatory response if there is more total utility in a confirmatory response  We know there is no optimal outcome utility, so we must examine the individual components of the equation V(x=m, θ O ) -V(x=f, θ O )> 0 The total utility of a confirmatory response minus The total utility of a disconfirming response Is great than zero

Application of the Formal Model c( θ O m - θ O f ) + λa(E( θ m |x=m) - E( θ m |x=f)) The reward for choosing correctly * (the deep belief that the character is male - the deep belief that the character is female) The degree of self-deception * the reward for correct anticipation * ((The experienced belief that the character is male given that you choose male) – (The experienced belief that the character is male given that you choose female)) Outcome UtilityDiagnostic Utility

What does this mean? λa(E( θ m |x=m) - E( θ m |x=f))  Face-value  As mentioned earlier, in this system x implies θ m, therefore, self-deception occurs  Rational  Given rational discounting of (E( θ m |x=m), the effect may be diminished, but will always be positive. There will always be confirmatory self-deception to some arbitrary degree.

Results  The inconsistent responses give a baseline for subject error.  There are proportionately more self deceptive classifications than the error baseline.  The effect is greater in the anticipation group.

Results  Red: Anticipation bonus  Green: Classification bonus  At p= % of the subjects in classification group, and 45% of people in the anticipation group are self deceptive.

Results  Looking at individual changes in confidence between phase one and two:  Moderately self deceptive individuals show an increase in confidence following confirmation  High self deceptive individuals show a decrease in confidence following disconfirmation  It is expected that a confirming response will decrease confidence.

Results  Figure 3 shows that confirmation gives a confidence boost at moderate rates.

Results  High self deception correlates with fast response time, implying a suppression of evidence.

Discussion

 Self-deception can be induced when a large, financial award is offered  People who have statistical bias achieve higher confidence by self-deception – to a point  Moderate self-deception possibly related to increased self-esteem and mental health  Many participants exhibited a statistical bias  This model can be applied to intrapersonal self- deception as well as interpersonal deception

Two Agents  An actor  An observer  Evolutionary explanation  It is easier to deceive others in a mental state that is ignorant of the individual’s true beliefs  Goal-setting argument Two mental structures are required for successful goal setting: one to choose which actions to take, one to evaluate and reward the self for performance.

Alternative explanations  Perceptual bias  Motivationally biased perception of characters  Does not explain faster response time and is confounded by randomized presentation of stimuli  Priming  Exposure to one’s prediction makes that gender more salient during the selection phase  Does not explain effects seen in scaling of incentive

Applications  How far does the model extend?  Confirmation bias  Denial  Cognitive dissonance  More?