System Two Heuristics

From iStock

I got into an argument with my 4-year old daughter the other day. She wanted to continue licking play-doh and I wanted her to stop. She asked me why she couldn’t and I fell on the classic “because I said so” argument, because, truthfully, I didn’t have an answer. In fact, all I know about play-doh is from that Simpson’s episode where Bart convinces Homer to eat some because it’s labeled non-toxic. 

In fact, it’s probably safe. So what was I arguing?

I realized that it wasn’t about her listening to my commands. I was trying to instill a belief. Better yet, I was trying to give her a heuristic. I don’t actually know if it’s safe to lick play-doh, but if she follows the heuristic “only lick things that were designed for eating” she will be safe, especially since there is no benefit to licking things like play-doh.

The whole situation reminded me how often I invoke heuristics without even realizing I'm doing so. One of the things I try to do on this blog is to become aware of my System One, intuitive mind’s heuristics and to decide if I should use my System Two mind to replace it with a better heuristic.

But I also recognize that this idea doesn’t scale as most people don’t think that way. So sometimes, instead of trying to “educate” people on updating their heuristics I try to think of ways to tweak systems so they don’t have to think about their irrational choices.

For example, some wait staff believe black people are bad tippers, and thus avoid their tables. How do we deal with this? Well, we can try to identify and punish/shame them for being racist. But that will just create an incentive for waiters to find a job where their racism is accepted.

Or, we could replace their heuristic with a better one. Maybe we show them studies that detail how the way a patron dresses signals their class status, and that becomes a better signal for tipping than skin color. But now you’ve just replaced racism for classism. I'm not sure that's solving the problem.

In order to really make a change, you’d have to replace the incentive that causes waiters to favor some patrons over others, which means eliminating the tipping system. 

Waiters are paid below minimum wage, so their ability to make rent depends largely on tips, which means they are incentivized to compete for tables that think will tip well and avoid tables they don't think will tip well. (As I'm typing this, I'm realizing this is the theme of HBO's We Own this City, where the cops' policing behavior is a response to what will earn them the most money.)

So until. you solve problem X (working for tips directs waiters' behavior) you will have externality Y (waiters discriminate based on who they think will tip well). 

Now that I've understood tipping behavior, you'd think I could apply that knowledge to understanding why my daughter wants to lick play-doh. You would be wrong. I'm at a loss. Parenting is hard. The books don't prepare you for the lure of play-doh licking.