Democratic U.S. presidential nominee and former Vice President Joe Biden puts his face mask back on after answering questions following a speech on the effects on the U.S. economy of the Trump administration's response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic during a campaign event in Wilmington, Delaware, U.S., September 4, 2020.
REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
The response to the COVID-19 pandemic will soon become the responsibility of President-elect Biden. As is clear to anyone who honestly looks, the past 10+ months of this pandemic have been a disastrous litany of mistakes, wrong actions, and misinformation.
The result has been the deaths of 240,000 Americans, economic collapse, disruption of routine healthcare, and inability of Americans to pursue their values without fear of contracting or spreading a deadly infectious disease. With the looming change in administration, many proposals will be suggested for the path forward.
Indeed, the Biden campaign published their own plan. This plan encompasses many of the actions my colleagues and I in the public health and infectious disease fields have been arguing for since January. Several of these points, I think, bear emphasis and should be aggressively pursued to help the U.S. emerge from the pandemic.
Support More and Faster Tests
<p>When it comes to an infectious disease outbreak the most basic question that must be answered in any response is: "Who is infected and who is not?" Even today this simple question is not easy to answer because testing issues continue to plague us and there are voices who oppose more testing -- as if by not testing, the cases of COVID cease to exist. While testing is worlds better than it was in March – especially for hospital inpatients – it is still a process fraught with unnecessary bureaucracy and delays in the outpatient setting. </p><p>Just this past week, friends and colleagues have had to wait days upon days to get a result back, all the while having to self-quarantine pending the result. This not only leaves people in limbo, it discourages people from being tested, and renders contact tracing almost moot. A test that results in several days is almost useless to contact tracers as <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/29/health/bill-gates-testing-trnd/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><u>Bill Gates has forcefully argued</u></a>. <br></p><p>We need more testing and more actionable rapid turn-around tests. These tests need to be deployed in healthcare facilities and beyond. Ideally, these tests should be made available for individuals to conduct on themselves at home. For some settings, such as at home, rapid antigen tests similar to those used to detect pregnancy will be suitable; for other settings, like at a doctor's office or a hospital, more elaborate PCR tests will still be key. These last have been compromised for several months due to <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-19-testing-is-hampered-by-shortages-of-critical-ingredient-11600772400" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><u>rationing of the reagent supplies</u></a> necessary to perform the test – an unacceptable state of affairs that cannot continue. Reflecting an understanding of the state of play of testing, the President-elect recently <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/07/biden-pandemic-response-434701" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><u>stated</u></a>: "We need to increase both lab-based diagnostic testing, with results back within 24 hours or less, and faster, cheaper screening tests that you can take right at home or in school."</p>
Roll Out Safe and Effective Vaccine(s)
<p>Biden's plan also identifies the need to "accelerate the development of treatments and vaccines" and indeed Operation Warp Speed has been one solitary bright spot in the darkness of the failed pandemic response. It is this program that facilitated a distribution partnership with Pfizer for 100 million doses of its mRNA vaccine -- whose preliminary, and extremely positive data, was just <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/09/health/covid-vaccine-pfizer.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><u>announced</u></a> today to great excitement.<br></p><p>Operation Warp Speed needs to be continued so that we can ensure the final development and distribution of the first-generation vaccines and treatments. When a vaccine is available, it will be a Herculean task that will span many months to actually get into the arms (twice as a 2-dose vaccine) of Americans. Vaccination may begin for healthcare workers before a change in administration, but it will continue long into 2021 and possibly longer. Vaccine distribution will be a task that demands a high degree of competence and coordination, especially with the extreme cold storage conditions needed for the vaccines.</p>Anticipate the Next Pandemic Now
<p>Not only should Operation Warp Speed be supported, it needs to be expanded. For too long pandemic preparedness has been reactive and it is long past time to approach the development of medical countermeasures for pandemic threats in a proactive fashion.<br></p><p>What we do for other national security threats should be the paradigm for infectious disease threats that too often are subject to a mind-boggling cycle of panic and neglect. There are an estimated 200 outbreaks of viral diseases per year. Luckily and because of hard work, for many of them we have tools at our hands to control them, but for the unknown 201<sup>st</sup> virus outbreak we do not –as we've seen this year. And, the next unknown virus will likely appear soon. A new program must be constructed guaranteeing that we will never again be caught blindsided and flatfooted as we have been with the COVID-19 pandemic. </p><p>A new dedicated "Virus 201" strategy, program, and funding must be created to achieve this goal. This initiative should be a specific program focused on unknown threats that emanate from identified classes of pathogens that possess certain pandemic-causing characteristics. For example, such a program could leverage new powerful vaccine platform technologies to begin development on vaccine candidates for a variety of viral families before they emerge as full-fledged threats. Imagine how different our world would be today if this action was taken after SARS in 2003 or even MERS in 2012.</p><blockquote>Biden should remove the handcuffs from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and allow its experts to coordinate the national response and to issue guidance in the manner they were constituted to do without fear of political reprisal.</blockquote>
Resurrect Expertise
<p>One of the most disheartening aspects of the pandemic has been the denigration and outright attacks on experts in infectious disease. Such disgusting attacks were not for any flaws, incompetence, or weakness but for their opposite -- strength and competence – and emanated from a desire to evade the grim reality. Such nihilism must end and indeed the Biden plan contains several crucial remedies, including the restoration of the White House National Security Council Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense, a crucial body of experts at the White House that the Trump administration bafflingly eliminated in 2018.<br></p><p>Additionally, Biden should remove the handcuffs from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and allow its experts to coordinate the national response and to issue guidance in the manner they were constituted to do without fear of political reprisal.</p>Shore Up Hospital Capacity
<p>For the foreseeable future, as control of the virus slips away in certain parts of the country, hospital capacity will be the paramount concern. Unlike many other industries, the healthcare sector is severely constrained in its ability to expand capacity because of regulatory and financial considerations. Hospital emergency preparedness has never been prioritized and until we can substantially curtail the spread of this virus, hospitals must remain vigilant.<br></p><p>We have seen how suspensions of "elective" procedures led to alarming declines in vital healthcare services that range from childhood immunization to cancer chemotherapy to psychiatric care. This cannot be allowed to happen again. Hospitals will need support in terms of staffing, alternative care sites, and personal protective equipment. Reflecting these concerns, the Biden plan outlines an approach that smartly uses the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs assets and medical reserve corps, coupled to the now-flourishing telemedicine innovations, to augment capacity and forestall the need for hospitals to shift to crisis standards of care.</p><p>To these five tasks, I would add a long list of subtasks that need to be executed by agencies such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, the Food and Drug Administration, and many other arms of government. But, to me, these are the most crucial. </p><p>***</p><p>As COVID-19 has demonstrated, new deadly viruses can spread quickly and easily around the globe, causing significant loss of life and economic ruin. With nearly 200 epidemics occurring each year, the next fast-moving, novel infectious disease pandemic could be right around the corner. </p><p>The upcoming transition affords the opportunity to implement a new paradigm in pandemic response, biosecurity, and emerging disease response. The United States and President-elect Biden must work hard to to end this pandemic and increase the resilience of the United States to the future infectious disease threats we will surely face.</p>
Keep Reading
Keep Reading
Dr. Adalja is a Senior Scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security. His work is focused on emerging infectious disease, pandemic preparedness, and biosecurity. He has served on US government panels tasked with developing guidelines for the treatment of plague, botulism, and anthrax in mass casualty settings and the system of care for infectious disease emergencies, and as an external advisor to the New York City Health and Hospital Emergency Management Highly Infectious Disease training program, as well as on a FEMA working group on nuclear disaster recovery. Dr. Adalja is an Associate Editor of the journal Health Security. He was a coeditor of the volume Global Catastrophic Biological Risks, a contributing author for the Handbook of Bioterrorism and Disaster Medicine, the Emergency Medicine CorePendium, Clinical Microbiology Made Ridiculously Simple, UpToDate’s section on biological terrorism, and a NATO volume on bioterrorism. He has also published in such journals as the New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of Infectious Diseases, Clinical Infectious Diseases, Emerging Infectious Diseases, and the Annals of Emergency Medicine. He is a board-certified physician in internal medicine, emergency medicine, infectious diseases, and critical care medicine. Follow him on Twitter: @AmeshAA
October 14 | 2020
Why Your Brain Falls for Misinformation – And How to Avoid It
Understanding the vulnerabilities of our own brains can help us guard against fake news.
Unsplash
This article is part of the magazine, "The Future of Science In America: The Election Issue," co-published by LeapsMag, the Aspen Institute Science & Society Program, and GOOD.
Whenever you hear something repeated, it feels more true. In other words, repetition makes any statement seem more accurate. So anything you hear again will resonate more each time it's said.
Do you see what I did there? Each of the three sentences above conveyed the same message. Yet each time you read the next sentence, it felt more and more true. Cognitive neuroscientists and behavioral economists like myself call this the "illusory truth effect."
Go back and recall your experience reading the first sentence. It probably felt strange and disconcerting, perhaps with a note of resistance, as in "I don't believe things more if they're repeated!"
Reading the second sentence did not inspire such a strong reaction. Your reaction to the third sentence was tame by comparison.
Why? Because of a phenomenon called "cognitive fluency," meaning how easily we process information. Much of our vulnerability to deception in all areas of life—including to fake news and misinformation—revolves around cognitive fluency in one way or another. And unfortunately, such misinformation can swing major elections.
<p><strong>The Lazy Brain</strong></p>
<p><a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/Thinking_Fast_and_Slow.html?id=ZuKTvERuPG8C&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0#v=onepage&q&f=false" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Our brains are lazy</a>. The more effort it takes to process information, the more uncomfortable we feel about it and the more we dislike and distrust it. </p>
<p>By contrast, the more we like certain data and are comfortable with it, the more we feel that it's accurate. This intuitive feeling in our gut is what we use to judge what's true and false. </p>
<p>Yet no matter how often you heard that you should trust your gut and follow your intuition, that advice is wrong. You should <a href="https://disasteravoidanceexperts.com/nevergut" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">not trust your gut</a> when evaluating information where you don't have <a href="https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6447634" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">expert-level knowledge</a>, at least when you don't want to screw up. Structured information gathering and decision-making processes <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bdm.486" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">help us avoid</a> the numerous errors we make when we follow our intuition. And even experts can make <a href="https://journals.lww.com/anesthesia-analgesia/FullText/2019/06000/Anesthesiologists__Overconfidence_in_Their.14.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">serious errors</a> when they don't rely on such decision aids.</p><br>These mistakes happen due to mental errors that scholars call "<a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1996-01780-007" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">cognitive biases</a>." The illusory truth effect is one of these mental blindspots; there are <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">over 100 altogether</a>. These mental blindspots impact all areas of our life, from <a href="https://leapsmag.com/science-fact-vs-science-fiction-can-you-tell-the-difference/" target="_self">health</a> and <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/how-to-fight-alternative-facts-in-politics/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">politics</a> to <a href="https://disasteravoidanceexperts.com/blindspots/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">relationships</a> and <a href="https://www.top10.com/blog/posts/what-really-drives-you-to-buy-what-you-buy" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">even</a><a href="https://www.top10.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> shopping</a>.
<blockquote>We pay the most attention to whatever we find most emotionally salient in our environment, as that's the information easiest for us to process.</blockquote>
<p><strong>The Maladapted Brain</strong></p>
<p>Why do we have so many cognitive biases? It turns out that our intuitive judgments—our gut reactions, our instincts, whatever you call them—aren't adapted for the modern environment. They <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781119125563.evpsych241" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">evolved</a> from the ancestral savanna environment, when we lived in small tribes of 15–150 people and spent our time hunting and foraging. </p>
<p>It's not a surprise, when you think about it. Evolution works on time scales of many thousands of years; our modern informational environment has been around for only a couple of decades, with the rise of the internet and social media. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, that means we're using brains adapted for the primitive conditions of hunting and foraging to judge information and make decisions in a very different world. In the ancestral environment, we had to make quick snap judgments in order to survive, thrive, and reproduce; we're the descendants of those who did so most effectively. </p>
<p>In the modern environment, we can take our time to make much better judgments by using structured evaluation processes to protect yourself from cognitive biases. We have to train our minds to go against our intuitions if we want to <a href="https://disasteravoidanceexperts.com/author-page/the-truth-seekers-handbook-a-science-based-guide/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">figure out the truth and avoid falling for misinformation</a>. </p>
<p>Yet it feels very counterintuitive to do so. Again, not a surprise: by definition, you have to go against your intuitions. It's not easy, but it's truly the only path if you don't want to be vulnerable to fake news.</p>
<p><strong>The Danger of Cognitive Fluency and Illusory Truth</strong></p><p>We already make plenty of mistakes by ourselves, without outside intervention. It's especially difficult to protect ourselves against those who know how to manipulate us. Unfortunately, the purveyors of misinformation excel at exploiting our cognitive biases to get us to buy into fake news. </p><p>Consider the illusory truth effect. Our vulnerability to it stems from how our brain processes novel stimuli. The first time we hear something new to us, it's difficult to process mentally. It has to integrate with our existing knowledge framework, and we have to build new neural pathways to make that happen. Doing so feels uncomfortable for our lazy brain, so the statement that we heard seems difficult to swallow to us.</p><p>The next time we hear that same thing, our mind doesn't have to build new pathways. It just has to go down the same ones it built earlier. Granted, those pathways are little more than trails, newly laid down and barely used. It's hard to travel down that newly established neural path, but much easier than when your brain had to lay down that trail. As a result, the statement is somewhat easier to swallow.</p><p>Each repetition widens and deepens the trail. Each time you hear the same thing, it feels more true, comfortable, and intuitive.</p><p>Does it work for information that seems very unlikely? <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13423-019-01651-4" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Science says yes</a>! Researchers found that the illusory truth effect applies strongly to implausible as well as plausible statements.</p><p>What about if you know better? Surely prior knowledge prevents this illusory truth! Unfortunately not: even if you know better, <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/buy/2015-38275-001" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">research shows</a> you're still vulnerable to this cognitive bias, though less than those who don't have prior knowledge.</p><p>Sadly, people who are predisposed to more elaborate and sophisticated thinking—likely you, if you're reading the article—are <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1053810019301977" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">more likely</a> to fall for the illusory truth effect. And guess what: more sophisticated thinkers are <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fa0028857" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">also likelier</a> than less sophisticated ones to fall for the cognitive bias known as the bias blind spot, where you ignore your own cognitive biases. So if you think that cognitive biases such as the illusory truth effect don't apply to you, you're likely deluding yourself.</p><p>That's why the <a href="https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/truth-isnt-truth-giuliani-borrows-from-the-climate-denial-tobacco-company-playbook/" target="_blank">purveyors of misinformation rely on</a> repeating the same thing over and over and over and over again. They know that despite fact-checking, their repetition will sway people, even some of those who think they're invulnerable. In fact, believing that you're invulnerable will make you more likely to fall for this and other cognitive biases, since you won't be taking the steps necessary to address them.</p>
<p><strong>Other Important Cognitive Biases</strong><br></p><p>What are some other cognitive biases you need to beware? If you've heard of any cognitive biases, you've likely heard of the "<a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/buy/1998-02489-003" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">confirmation bias</a>." That refers to our tendency to look for and interpret information in ways that conform to our prior beliefs, intuitions, feelings, desires, and preferences, as opposed to the facts. </p><p>Again, cognitive fluency deserves blame. It's much easier to build neural pathways to information that we already possess, especially that around which we have strong emotions; it's much more difficult to break well-established neural pathways if we need to change our mind based on new information. Consequently, we instead look for information that's easy to accept, that which fits our prior beliefs. In turn, we ignore and even actively reject information that doesn't fit our beliefs. </p><p>Moreover, the more educated we are, the more likely we are to engage in such active rejection. After all, our smarts give us more ways of arguing against new information that counters our beliefs. That's why <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/114/36/9587" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">research demonstrates</a> that the more educated you are, the more polarized your beliefs will be around scientific issues that have religious or political value overtones, such as stem cell research, human evolution, and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/14/upshot/climate-change-by-education.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">climate change</a>. Where might you be letting your smarts get in the way of the facts?</p><p>Our minds like to interpret the world through stories, meaning explanatory narratives that link cause and effect in a clear and simple manner. Such stories are a balm to our cognitive fluency, as our mind constantly looks for patterns that explain the world around us in an easy-to-process manner. That leads to the "<a href="https://www.gpb.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/The-Narrative-Fallacy.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">narrative fallacy</a>," where we fall for convincing-sounding narratives regardless of the facts, especially if the story fits our predispositions and our emotions. </p><p>You ever wonder why politicians tell so many stories? What about the advertisements you see on TV or video advertisements on websites, which tell very quick visual stories? How about salespeople or fundraisers? Sure, sometimes they cite statistics and scientific reports, but they spend much, much more time telling stories: simple, clear, compelling narratives that seem to make sense and tug at our heartstrings. </p><p>Now, here's something that's actually true: the world doesn't make sense. The world is not simple, clear, and compelling. The world is complex, confusing, and contradictory. Beware of simple stories! Look for complex, confusing, and contradictory scientific reports and high-quality statistics: they're much more likely to contain the truth than the easy-to-process stories.</p><p>Another big problem that comes from cognitive fluency: the "<a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/1845/behavioral-and-physiological-bases-of-attentional-biases-paradigms-participants-and-stimuli" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">attentional bias</a>." We pay the most attention to whatever we find most emotionally salient in our environment, as that's the information easiest for us to process. Most often, such stimuli are <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272735817304014?via%3Dihub" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">negative</a>; we feel a lesser but real attentional bias to <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-42376-001" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">positive</a> information.</p><p>That's why fear, anger, and resentment represent such powerful tools of misinformers. They know that people will focus on and feel more swayed by emotionally salient negative stimuli, so be suspicious of negative, emotionally laden data.</p><p>You should be especially wary of such information in the form of stories framed to fit your preconceptions and repeated. That's because cognitive biases build on top of each other. You need to learn about the most dangerous ones for <a href="https://disasteravoidanceexperts.com/how-to-evaluate-unconscious-bias-caused-by-cognitive-biases-at-work/" target="_blank">evaluating reality clearly and making wise decisions</a>, and watch out for them when you consume news, and in other life areas where you don't want to make poor choices.</p>
<p><strong>Fixing Our Brains</strong></p>
<p>Unfortunately, knowledge only weakly protects us from cognitive biases; it's important, but far from sufficient, as the study I cited earlier on the illusory truth effect reveals.</p>
<p>What can we do? </p>
<p>The easiest decision aid is a personal commitment to twelve truth-oriented behaviors called the Pro-Truth Pledge, which you can make by signing the pledge at <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ProTruthPledge.org</a>. All of these behaviors stem from cognitive neuroscience and behavioral economics research in the field called debiasing, which refers to <a href="https://disasteravoidanceexperts.com/12-mental-skills-to-defeat-cognitive-biases/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">counterintuitive, uncomfortable, but effective strategies to protect yourself from cognitive biases</a>. </p>
<p>What are these behaviors? The first four relate to you being truthful yourself, under the category "share truth." They're the most important for avoiding falling for cognitive biases when you share information:</p>
<p><strong><em>Share truth</em></strong></p><ul><li><strong>Verify: </strong><a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/threading-fact-checking-needle/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">fact-check</a> information to confirm it is <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/misinformation" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">true</a> before accepting and sharing it</li><li><strong>Balance:</strong> share the whole truth, even if some aspects do not support my opinion<strong></strong></li><li><strong>Cite:</strong> share my sources so that others can verify my information</li><li><strong>Clarify:</strong> distinguish between my <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/facts-opinions-experts/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">opinion and the facts</a></li></ul>
<p>The second set of four are about how you can best "honor truth" to protect yourself from cognitive biases in discussions with others:</p>
<p><em><strong>Honor truth</strong></em></p><ul><li><strong>Acknowledge:</strong> when others share <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/misinformation" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">true</a> information, even when we disagree otherwise</li><li><strong>Reevaluate:</strong> if my information is challenged, retract it if I cannot verify it</li><li><strong>Defend: </strong>defend others when they come under attack for sharing <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/misinformation" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">true</a> information, even when we disagree otherwise</li><li><strong>Align:</strong> align my opinions and my actions with <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/misinformation" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">true</a> information</li></ul>
<p>The last four, under the category "encourage truth," promote broader patterns of truth-telling in our society by providing incentives for truth-telling and disincentives for deception:</p>
<p><em><strong>Encourage truth</strong></em></p><ul><li><strong>Fix:</strong> ask people to retract information that <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/misinformation" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reliable sources</a> have disproved even if they are my allies</li><li><strong>Educate: </strong>compassionately inform those around me to stop using <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/misinformation" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">unreliable sources</a> even if these sources support my opinion</li><li><strong>Defer:</strong> recognize the <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/facts-opinions-experts/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">opinions of experts</a> as more likely to be accurate when the facts are disputed</li><li><strong>Celebrate: </strong>those who retract incorrect statements and update their beliefs toward the <a href="https://www.protruthpledge.org/misinformation" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">truth</a></li></ul>
<p>Peer-reviewed research has shown that taking the Pro-Truth Pledge is effective for <a href="https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.5210/bsi.v27i0.9127.pdf" target="_blank">changing people's behavior</a> to be more truthful, both in their own statements and in <a href="https://jspp.psychopen.eu/article/view/856" target="_blank">interactions with others</a>. I hope you choose to join the many thousands of ordinary citizens—and over 1,000 politicians and officials—who committed to this decision aid, as opposed to going with their gut.</p><p><em>[Adapted from: Dr. Gleb Tsipursky and Tim Ward, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Pro-Truth-Practical-Putting-Politics/dp/1789043999" target="_blank">Pro Truth: A Practical Plan for Putting Truth Back Into Politics</a> (Changemakers Books, 2020).]</em></p>
<p>[<strong>Editor's Note: To read other articles in this special magazine issue, visit the beautifully designed </strong><a href="https://online.flippingbook.com/view/604426/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"><u>e-reader version</u></a>.]</p>
Keep Reading
Keep Reading
Dr. Gleb Tsipursky is an internationally recognized thought leader on a mission to protect leaders from dangerous judgment errors known as cognitive biases by developing the most effective decision-making strategies. A best-selling author, he wrote Resilience: Adapt and Plan for the New Abnormal of the COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic and Pro Truth: A Practical Plan for Putting Truth Back Into Politics. His expertise comes from over 20 years of consulting, coaching, and speaking and training as the CEO of Disaster Avoidance Experts, and over 15 years in academia as a behavioral economist and cognitive neuroscientist. He co-founded the Pro-Truth Pledge project.