How many times a day do you either cross your fingers, knock on wood, or worry that your good luck will turn on you? When two bad things happen to you, do you cringe in fear of the third unfortunate event? Even those of us who “know better” are readily prone to this type of superstitious thinking. Defying logic, we also readily believe in our own psychic powers. You’re thinking of a friend when all of a sudden your phone beeps to announce a new text from that very person. Proof positive that your thoughts caused your friend to contact you at that very moment. Right?
These are just a few examples of the type of mind tricks to which we so readily fall prey. Psychology writer Matthew Hutson in his book, “The 7 Laws of Magical Thinking,” systematically documents the most common of these. Summarizing a wealth of psychological evidence, he also explains the empirical basis for each. Proving that psychology reading can be entertaining as well as informative, Hutson intersperses his own reflections with snippets of relevant research and amusing observations on our many superstitious foibles.
Before you rush to conclude that your thought processes couldn’t possibly demonstrate even one of these laws, see how long it takes you to recognize some of your own mental foibles in these 7 laws.
1. Objects carry essences.
What’s your memorabilia collection like these days? According to this first rule, we attribute special properties to items that belong or once belonged to someone we love, is famous, or has a particular quality we admire. Perhaps you’ve got a baseball signed by your favorite player or a pen that a rock star used to autograph your concert ticket. The greatness that’s rubbed off onto this memento gives you a sense of connection with your hero and makes you that much more special. Perhaps it’s not even a famous person but someone close to you who’s died. After the death of a loved one, people often find it extremely difficult to get rid of all of their possessions, keeping a special scrap book, dresser drawer, or keepsake chest filled with the most significant of these. The fact of the matter is that the objects are just those, objects, and despite their connection with special people in our lives, they have no inherent ability to transmit those people’s powers to us.
2. Symbols have power.
Humans have a remarkable tendency to impute meaning not only to objects but to abstract entities. We imbue these symbols with the ability to affect actual events in our lives. According to the principle known as the “law of similarity,” we equate a symbol with the thing it stands for. In one experiment testing this idea, people refused to throw a dart at a picture of their own mother’s face but were able to take dead aim at a photo of Hitler. They confused their mother’s image with their mothers. The law of similarity is also expressed as “like produces like.” If you want to roll a high number on a die, you should shake it harder. We might also attribute qualities to an object on the basis of the word used to label it or to a person on what that person is named. Hutson points out that the popularity of the name Britney, for example, peaked after the release of her first album and has dropped ever since. We also don’t want to utter names that we think could cause us to be harmed such as referring to Lord Voldemort In the Harry Potter books as “He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.” Voodoo rituals and magical spells also rely on the power of symbols.
3. Actions have distant consequences.
In our constant search to control the outcomes of events in our seemingly unpredictable lives, we build up our own personal library of favorite superstitious rituals or thoughts. Hutson cites several compelling examples from the lore of fishermen (whose jobs are the deadliest in the U.S). The high stakes lead them to develop all sorts of complicated superstitious rituals. They don’t allow anyone to talk about horses, carry suitcases on board, or leave town on a Friday, to name a few examples. They feel certain that violating any of these rules will cause severe injury if not loss of life. These extreme examples are just instances of the more general tendency that we all have to form “illusory correlations,” in which we assume that when two events co-occur, they are somehow logically connected. You wear a certain hat to a crucial playoff game of your favorite team, and they win. Now, you must wear that hat on all future occasions. If you don’t and the team loses, it’s your fault. Believing that you can jinx yourself into a bad outcome by thinking the wrong thing or taking a good outcome for granted is another example of this type of superstitious thinking.
We’re particularly likely to engage in superstitious thinking when the chances of something bad happening are high. Hutson calls this “error management;” in times of stress, we want to do everything we can to avoid harm. The more stressed or worried you are about having something bad happen to you, the more likely you are to try to move the odds in your favor. Some studies suggest, moreover, that believing that an object or thought is lucky can actually help you to be more successful. For example, participants told that they’d been given a lucky golf ball actually sank the ball more than did people who didn’t receive this false information. It’s possible that this belief in luck causes people to perform better because their inner self-confidence is boosted, even if only for bogus reasons.
4. The mind knows no bounds.
Still convinced you’re a rational being?Let’s put this next belief to the test. As I mentioned earlier, we are often impressed by the apparent coincidence that occurs when a person we’re thinking about suddenly contacts us. For just that moment, we believe the event “proves” that we’re psychic. The more often this happens, the more likely we are to be convinced of our mind’s special powers. One reason we fall for this mental trap is the illusory correlation, but a second is that we’re poor statisticians. We count the hits but not the misses. How many times has your heart ached for an ex-lover to call or email you, only to be met with silence and empty inboxes? If you were to keep an honest score in which you recorded every single instance that your thoughts brought about such a result versus those in which they didn’t, you’d undoubtedly come out with a whoppingly low proportion of true hits. Another manifestation of this rule is our tendency to believe that if we think positive thoughts about a person in trouble, our thoughts can truly help that person, even if that person is thousands of miles physically removed from us.
5. The soul lives on.
On a more serious note, Hutson takes on belief in the afterlife from as much a philosophical as an empirical perspective. Even if you’re not into Cartesian dualism (the idea that the mind and body are two separate entities), you might find interesting the notion that even by the age of 3, children realize that an imagined cookie can’t be eaten. They also know that you can only think of, not see, a flying dog or a talking flower. Why, then, do adults hold on so stubbornly to the belief that the mind can continue even after its seat (the brain) is no longer alive? The answer, in part, comes from the terror that we feel about death, captured in the groundbreaking book, The Denial of Death. It’s our desire to avoid thinking about our own mortality that leads us, according to Becker, to invent and hold onto a belief in the afterlife. Following from Becker’s work, research based on Terror Management Theory carried out over the past few decades has shown that increasing people’s awareness of mortality leads them to shore up their personal defenses against feelings of anxiety. Even feeling identification with your favorite brand name product may be a way of protecting yourself from confronting your mortality.
6. The world is alive.
Adults are supposed to grow out of the stage that Piaget called “preoperational” thinking- which is basically the logic of the child between the ages of about 4 and 7. However, as Hutson shows, we share the young child’s belief in animism, which is one key feature of preoperational thought. In other words, we attribute human-like qualities to everything from our pets to our iPhones. This is because we over-apply what’s known as the theory of mind, which is the process we use to understand and predict what other people are going to do. We read into the faces of our pets all sorts of human emotions such as humor, disappointment, and guilt. If our latest technological toy misbehaves, we yell at it and assume it has some revenge motive it needs to satisfy. Experiments testing our animistic tendencies show that we even impute human-like emotions to simple moving shapes. In one study, college students watched a film in which 3 shapes moved around on a screen. The majority of them described the action of the shapes in human terms. So the next time you look at the “man in the moon,” you might ask yourself why you have this strong need to assume that an object in space has human qualities.