Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)
By Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson
Reviewed by Steve Baker

During the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings/circus, it seemed that both Justice Thomas and his accuser, Anita Hill, were absolutely convinced of the truth and accuracy of their testimony in spite of the vast differences between their individual accounts. Having now had the pleasure of reading Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts (Harcourt, 2007, $25.00), it seems even more likely that this was indeed the case.

Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson offer a very useful expansion on the theme of Jerry Harvey’s Abilene Paradox: Why do individuals and groups do foolish and sometimes harmful things in the face of compelling evidence that it is the wrong road to take? Why do we cling tenaciously to clearly discredited beliefs? The authors provide a wealth of examples.

In 1847, Ignac Semmelweiss urged fellow physicians to wash their hands before seeing each patient. While he was able to conclusively demonstrate vastly lower rates of infant mortality, the medical community resisted his advice.

Henry Kissinger conceded that "mistakes were quite possibly made by the administrations in which I served." He conveniently neglected the fact that he was part of the administration.

Hundreds of lives have been shattered as a result of the Recovered Memory craze despite solid evidence that major traumatic events are rarely, if ever, forgotten. The remaining practitioners, though few and marginalized, remain stalwart "defenders of the faith."

The availability of conclusive DNA testing has cleared hundreds of wrongfully-convicted people, including many on Death Rows. Law enforcement officials generally refuse to apologize, voicing the belief that they are all "...guilty of something." "Persons of interest" remain at high risk, even if innocent.

The war in Iraq continues despite clear evidence that "mistakes may have been made," and the premises upon which the conflict is based are false. Yet we "stay the course."

The consequences of these types of behavior range from the merely silly to the disastrous on a global scale. But, they all exemplify a critical defense mechanism that allows us to get through our lives. For instance, imagine never being sure whether you had chosen the right car, mate, career or wallpaper for the living room. Imagine a shadow of doubt over your every decision. It would make even shopping for shoes or groceries a daunting prospect, and cause many a sleepless night.

This uncertainty is reduced by what the authors call "self-justifying behavior," behavior that helps protect us from cognitive dissonance, or the conflict that arises from holding psychologically inconsistent ideas (e.g., smoking will kill me; I smoke two packs a day.) Convincing ourselves of the rightness of our actions, that "God is on our side" and that success will come to those who persevere helps banish that uncertainty. Unfortunately, it also tends to encourage us to ignore danger signs and push on regardless.

The key question posed by Mistakes Were Made is how to ensure that our decisions are based on verifiable facts, not the reality that we wish was in place. The authors have several suggestions. First, in an interesting parallel with other studies on successful parenting, the authors cite research that suggests a 5:1 ratio as the point at which the nature of relationships change. Relationships that feature at least five positives to every negative exchange tend to be successful, foster forgiveness for missteps and weather the bumps in the road. Dropping below that rate seems to put the relationship at risk, to move it toward the point at which every mistake is taken as proof of the other person’s lack of commitment and/or animosity. It seems likely that this same ratio will generalize to relationships at work as well.

On an organizational level, Tavris and Aronson suggest making key decisions in an open, transparent manner. This involves making sure that disinterested parties, such as independent boards of directors, financial auditors and organizational customers, have maximum opportunities for input and review since they will suffer no cognitive dissonance. Finally, learning to admit mistakes and ask for forgiveness may be the most important safety valve of all.

Mistakes Were Made is a marvelous book, one that makes sense of a lot of nonsensical behavior. Those on the conservative side of the political spectrum will probably not appreciate the war analogy, but would be mistaken to reject the rest of the volume on that basis.