The optimism bias | Tali Sharot

Translator: Timothy Covell Reviewer: Morton Bast

Translator: David J. Kreps Finnemann Reviewer: Anders Finn Jørgensen

I'm going to talk to you about optimism --

Jeg vil tale til jer om optimisme --

or more precisely, the optimism bias.

eller mere præcist, den optimistiske tilbøjelighed.

It's a cognitive illusion

Det er en kognitiv illusion

that we've been studying in my lab for the past few years,

som vi har undersøgt i mit laboratorium i løbet af de sidste par år,

and 80 percent of us have it.

og 80 procent af os har den.

It's our tendency to overestimate

Det er vores tendens til at overvurdere

our likelihood of experiencing good events in our lives

vores sandsynlighed for at opleve gode begivenheder i vores liv

and underestimate our likelihood of experiencing bad events.

og undervurdere sandsynligheden for at opleve dårlige begivenheder.

So we underestimate our likelihood of suffering from cancer,

Så vi undervurderer vores sandsynlighed for at lide af kræft,

being in a car accident.

være i et biluheld.

We overestimate our longevity, our career prospects.

Vi overvurderer vores levealder, vores karriere udsigter.

In short, we're more optimistic than realistic,

Kort sagt, er vi mere optimistiske end realistiske,

but we are oblivious to the fact.

men vi er ikke bevidste om det faktum.

Take marriage for example.

Kig for eksempel på ægteskabet.

In the Western world, divorce rates are about 40 percent.

I den vestlige verden, er sandsynligheden for skilsmisse på cirka 40 procent.

That means that out of five married couples,

Det betyder at ud af fem gifte par,

two will end up splitting their assets.

vil der i sidste ende være to par der ender med at dele deres aktiver.

But when you ask newlyweds about their own likelihood of divorce,

Men når man spørger nygifte om deres egen sandsynlighed for skilsmisse,

they estimate it at zero percent.

vurderer de den til at være nul procent.

And even divorce lawyers, who should really know better,

Og selv skilsmisse advokater, der virkelig burde vide bedre,

hugely underestimate their own likelihood of divorce.

undervurderer i høj grad deres egen sandsynlighed for skilsmisse.

So it turns out that optimists are not less likely to divorce,

Så det viser sig, at optimister ikke har lavere sandsynlighed for skilsmisse,

but they are more likely to remarry.

men de har større sandsynlighed for at gifte sig igen.

In the words of Samuel Johnson,

Som Samuel Johnson sagde,

"Remarriage is the triumph of hope over experience."

"At gifte sig igen er håbets triumf over erfaring."

(Laughter)

(Latter)

So if we're married, we're more likely to have kids.

Så hvis vi er gift, er der større sandsynlighed for at få børn.

And we all think our kids will be especially talented.

Og vi mener alle at vores børn vil være specielt talentfulde.

This, by the way, is my two-year-old nephew, Guy.

Dette, forresten, er min to-årige nevø, Guy.

And I just want to make it absolutely clear

Og jeg vil bare gøre det helt klart ,

that he's a really bad example of the optimism bias,

at han er et virkelig dårligt eksempel på optimistiske tilbøjelighed,

because he is in fact uniquely talented.

fordi han er faktisk enestående talentfuld.

(Laughter)

(Latter)

And I'm not alone.

Og det er ikke kun mig.

Out of four British people, three said

Ud af fire britiske folk, sagde tre,

that they were optimistic about the future of their own families.

at de var optimistiske omkring deres egen families fremtid.

That's 75 percent.

Det er 75 procent.

But only 30 percent said

Men kun 30 procent sagde,

that they thought families in general

at de mente, at familier generelt

are doing better than a few generations ago.

klarer sig bedre end for et par generationer siden.

And this is a really important point,

Og det er en virkelig vigtigt pointe,

because we're optimistic about ourselves,

fordi vi er optimistiske om os selv,

we're optimistic about our kids,

vi er optimistiske om vores børn,

we're optimistic about our families,

vi er optimistiske om vores familier,

but we're not so optimistic about the guy sitting next to us,

men vi er ikke så optimistiske om fyren der sidder ved siden af os,

and we're somewhat pessimistic

og vi er noget pessimistiske

about the fate of our fellow citizens and the fate of our country.

om vores medborgere skæbne og vores lands skæbne.

But private optimism about our own personal future

Men privat optimisme om vores egen personlige fremtid

remains persistent.

bliver ved med at være vedholdende.

And it doesn't mean that we think things will magically turn out okay,

Og det betyder ikke at vi mener at tingene på magisk vis bliver ok,

but rather that we have the unique ability to make it so.

men at vi har den specielle evne til at få det til det.

Now I'm a scientist, I do experiments.

Nu er jeg forsker, jeg laver eksperimenter.

So to show you what I mean,

Så for at vise jer hvad jeg mener,

I'm going to do an experiment here with you.

vil jeg lave et eksperiment med jer.

So I'm going to give you a list of abilities and characteristics,

Så jeg vil give jer en liste af evner og karakteristika,

and I want you to think for each of these abilities

og jeg vil gerne have at I for hver af disse evner

where you stand relative to the rest of the population.

tænker over hvor I er, i forhold til resten af befolkningen.

The first one is getting along well with others.

Den første er at komme godt ud af det med andre.

Who here believes they're at the bottom 25 percent?

Hvem her tror på at de er blandt de nederste 25 procent?

Okay, that's about 10 people out of 1,500.

Okay, det er cirka 10 mennesker ud af 1.500.

Who believes they're at the top 25 percent?

Hvem mener de er i de øverste 25 procent?

That's most of us here.

Det er de fleste af os.

Okay, now do the same for your driving ability.

Okay, nu gælder det samme for jeres køreegenskaber.

How interesting are you?

Hvor interessant er du?

How attractive are you?

Hvor tiltrækkende er du?

How honest are you?

Hvor ærlig er du?

And finally, how modest are you?

Og til slut, hvor beskeden er du?

So most of us put ourselves above average

Så de fleste af os, sætter os selv over gennemsnittet

on most of these abilities.

i de fleste af disse evner.

Now this is statistically impossible.

Det er statistisk set umuligt.

We can't all be better than everyone else.

Vi kan ikke alle være bedre end alle andre.

(Laughter)

(Latter)

But if we believe we're better than the other guy,

Men hvis vi mener vi er bedre end den anden fyr,

well that means that we're more likely to get that promotion, to remain married,

så betyder det at der er en større sandsynlighed for at vi får en forfremmelse, at forblive gift,

because we're more social, more interesting.

fordi vi er mere sociale, mere interessante.

And it's a global phenomenon.

Og det er et globalt fænomen.

The optimism bias has been observed

Den optimistiske tilbøjelighed er blevet observeret

in many different countries --

i mange forskellige lande --

in Western cultures, in non-Western cultures,

i vestlige kulturer, i ikke-vestlige kulturer,

in females and males,

hos kvinder og mænd,

in kids, in the elderly.

hos børn, hos de ældre.

It's quite widespread.

Det er ret udbredt.

But the question is, is it good for us?

Men spørgsmålet er, er det godt for os?

So some people say no.

Så nogle mennesker siger nej.

Some people say the secret to happiness

Nogle mennesker siger at hemmeligheden bag lykke

is low expectations.

er lave forventninger.

I think the logic goes something like this:

Jeg tror logikken er noget i denne retning:

If we don't expect greatness,

Hvis vi ikke forventer storslåethed,

if we don't expect to find love and be healthy and successful,

hvis vi ikke forventer at finde kærlighed og være sunde og succesrige,

well we're not going to be disappointed when these things don't happen.

jamen så bliver vi ikke skuffede, når disse ting ikke sker.

And if we're not disappointed when good things don't happen,

Og hvis vi ikke er skuffede når der sker gode ting,

and we're pleasantly surprised when they do,

og vi bliver glædeligt overraskede når de sker,

we will be happy.

bliver vi lykkelige.

So it's a very good theory,

Så det er en meget god teori,

but it turns out to be wrong for three reasons.

men det viser sig at være forkert, af tre årsager.

Number one: Whatever happens, whether you succeed or you fail,

Nummer et: Hvad der end sker, uanset om man lykkedes eller fejler,

people with high expectations always feel better.

har mennesker med høje forventninger det altid bedre.

Because how we feel when we get dumped or win employee of the month

Fordi det vi føler når vi bliver dumpet eller bliver månedens medarbejder,

depends on how we interpret that event.

kommer an på hvordan vi fortolker den begivenhed.

The psychologists Margaret Marshall and John Brown

Psykologerne Margaret Marshall og John Brown

studied students with high and low expectations.

undersøgte studerende med høje og lave forventninger.

And they found that when people with high expectations succeed,

Og de fandt ud af, at når mennesker med høje forventninger har succes,

they attribute that success to their own traits.

tilskriver de den succes deres egne evner.

"I'm a genius, therefore I got an A,

"Jeg er et geni, derfor fik jeg et A,

therefore I'll get an A again and again in the future."

derfor får jeg et A igen og igen i fremtiden."

When they failed, it wasn't because they were dumb,

Da de dumpede, var det ikke fordi de var dumme,

but because the exam just happened to be unfair.

men fordi eksamenen bare var unfair.

Next time they will do better.

Næste gang vil de klare sig bedre.

People with low expectations do the opposite.

Mennesker med lave forventninger gør det modsatte.

So when they failed it was because they were dumb,

Så når de dumper var det fordi de var dumme,

and when they succeeded

og da de bestod

it was because the exam just happened to be really easy.

var det fordi den eksamen bare var rigtig nem.

Next time reality would catch up with them.

Næste gang vil virkeligheden indhente dem.

So they felt worse.

Så de havde det dårligere.

Number two: Regardless of the outcome,

Nummer to: Uanset udfaldet,

the pure act of anticipation makes us happy.

selve forventningen gør os lykkelige.

The behavioral economist George Lowenstein

Adfærds økonomen George Lowenstein,

asked students in his university

bad de studerende ved hans universitet

to imagine getting a passionate kiss from a celebrity, any celebrity.

om at forestille sig at få et følelsesrigt kys fra en kendt, en hvilken som helst kendt.

Then he said, "How much are you willing to pay

Så sagde han, "Hvor meget er I villige til at betale

to get a kiss from a celebrity

for at få et kys fra en kendis

if the kiss was delivered immediately,

hvis kysset blev afleveret med det samme,

in three hours, in 24 hours, in three days,

om tre timer, om 24 timer, om tre dage,

in one year, in 10 years?

om 1 år, om 10 år?

He found that the students were willing to pay the most

Han fandt ud af, at de studerende var villige til at betale mest

not to get a kiss immediately,

for ikke at få et kys med det samme,

but to get a kiss in three days.

men for at få et kys om tre dage.

They were willing to pay extra in order to wait.

De var villige til at betale ekstra, for at få lov til at vente.

Now they weren't willing to wait a year or 10 years;

Nu var de ikke villige til at vente et år eller 10 år;

no one wants an aging celebrity.

ingen vil have en aldrende kendis.

But three days seemed to be the optimum amount.

Men tre dage virkede som den optimale mængde.

So why is that?

Så hvorfor det?

Well if you get the kiss now, it's over and done with.

Jamen, hvis man får kysset nu, er det slut.

But if you get the kiss in three days,

Men hvis man får kysset om tre dage,

well that's three days of jittery anticipation, the thrill of the wait.

jamen det er tre dage med forventning, forventningens glæde.

The students wanted that time

De studerende ville have den tid

to imagine where is it going to happen,

til at forestille sig hvad der sker,

how is it going to happen.

hvordan sker det.

Anticipation made them happy.

Forventningen gjorde dem lykkelige.

This is, by the way, why people prefer Friday to Sunday.

Dette er, i øvrigt, hvorfor folk foretrækker fredag frem for søndag.

It's a really curious fact,

Det er et virkelig besynderligt faktum,

because Friday is a day of work and Sunday is a day of pleasure,

fordi er en arbejdsdag og søndag er en glædens dag,

so you'd assume that people will prefer Sunday,

så man skulle tro at folk ville foretrække søndag,

but they don't.

men det gør de ikke.

It's not because they really, really like being in the office

Det er ikke fordi de virkelig, virkelig godt kan lide at være på kontoret,

and they can't stand strolling in the park

og de ikke kan holde det ud at gå en tur i parken

or having a lazy brunch.

eller have en sen brunch.

We know that, because when you ask people

Det ved vi, fordi når man spørger folk

about their ultimate favorite day of the week,

om deres ultimative favoritdag i ugen,

surprise, surprise, Saturday comes in at first,

surprise, surprise, lørdag er på førstepladsen,

then Friday, then Sunday.

så fredag, så søndag.

People prefer Friday

Folk foretrækker fredag,

because Friday brings with it the anticipation of the weekend ahead,

fordi fredagen bringer forventningens glæde om den foreliggende weekend,

all the plans that you have.

alle de planer man har.

On Sunday, the only thing you can look forward to

Om søndagen, den eneste ting man kan se frem til

is the work week.

er arbejdsugen.

So optimists are people who expect more kisses in their future,

Så optimistiske mennesker, er mennesker der forventer flere kys i deres fremtid,

more strolls in the park.

flere gåture i parken.

And that anticipation enhances their wellbeing.

Og den forventning forstærker deres velbefindende.

In fact, without the optimism bias,

Faktisk, uden den optimistiske tilbøjelighed,

we would all be slightly depressed.

ville vi alle være en smule deprimerede.

People with mild depression,

Mennesker med en mild depression,

they don't have a bias when they look into the future.

de har ikke en tilbøjelighed når de kigger ind i fremtiden.

They're actually more realistic than healthy individuals.

De er faktisk mere realistiske end sunde individer.

But individuals with severe depression,

Men individer med svære depressioner,

they have a pessimistic bias.

de har en pessimistisk tilbøjelighed.

So they tend to expect the future

Så de har en tendens til at forvente at fremtiden

to be worse than it ends up being.

er værre end den ender med at være.

So optimism changes subjective reality.

Så optimisme ændrer den subjektive virkelighed.

The way we expect the world to be changes the way we see it.

Måden hvorpå vi forventer at verden ændrer sig, ændrer måden hvorpå vi ser den.

But it also changes objective reality.

Men det ændrer også den objektive virkelighed.

It acts as a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Det ender som en selvopfyldende profeti.

And that is the third reason

Og det er den tredje grund til,

why lowering your expectations will not make you happy.

hvorfor det at sænke ens forventninger ikke vil gøre en lykkelig.

Controlled experiments have shown

Kontrollerede eksperimenter har vist

that optimism is not only related to success,

at optimisme ikke kun relaterer sig til succes,

it leads to success.

det fører til succes.

Optimism leads to success in academia and sports and politics.

Optimisme fører til succes i den akademiske verden, sportsverden og den politiske verden.

And maybe the most surprising benefit of optimism is health.

Og måske er den mest overraskende fordel ved optimisme helbredet.

If we expect the future to be bright,

Hvis vi forventer at fremtiden er lys,

stress and anxiety are reduced.

bliver stress og angst reduceret.

So all in all, optimism has lots of benefits.

Så, alt i alt, optimisme har mange fordele.

But the question that was really confusing to me was,

Men det spørgsmål der virkelig forvirrede mig var,

how do we maintain optimism in the face of reality?

hvordan fastholder vi optimismen på trods af virkeligheden?

As an neuroscientist, this was especially confusing,

Som forsker i neurovidenskab, var det specielt forvirrende,

because according to all the theories out there,

fordi ifølge alle teorierne derude,

when your expectations are not met, you should alter them.

når ens forventninger ikke bliver indfriet, burde man ændre dem.

But this is not what we find.

Men det er ikke det vi fandt ud af.

We asked people to come into our lab

Vi bad mennesker om at komme ind i vores laboratorium,

in order to try and figure out what was going on.

for at prøve at finde ud af hvad der skete.

We asked them to estimate their likelihood

Vi bad dem om at evaluere deres sandsynlighed

of experiencing different terrible events in their lives.

for at opleve forskellige forfærdelige begivenheder i deres liv.

So, for example, what is your likelihood of suffering from cancer?

Så, for eksempel, hvad er din sandsynlighed for at få kræft?

And then we told them the average likelihood

Og så fortalte vi dem den gennemsnitlige sandsynlighed

of someone like them to suffer these misfortunes.

for at en person lider disse uheldige skæbner.

So cancer, for example, is about 30 percent.

Så kræft, for eksempel, er cirka 30 procent.

And then we asked them again,

Og så spurgte vi dem igen,

"How likely are you to suffer from cancer?"

"Hvor stor er sandsynligheden for at du kommer til at få kræft?"

What we wanted to know was

Det vi ville finde ud af var,

whether people will take the information that we gave them

om mennesker tager den information vi gav dem

to change their beliefs.

og ændrede deres holdninger.

And indeed they did --

Og det gjorde de --

but mostly when the information we gave them

men for det meste når den information vi gav dem

was better than what they expected.

var bedre end det de forventede.

So for example,

Så for eksempel,

if someone said, "My likelihood of suffering from cancer

hvis nogen sagde, "Min sandsynlighed for at få kræft

is about 50 percent,"

er cirka 50 procent."

and we said, "Hey, good news.

Og vi sagde, "Hey, godt nyt.

The average likelihood is only 30 percent,"

Den gennemsnitlige sandsynlighed er 30 procent,"

the next time around they would say,

den næste gang ville de sige,

"Well maybe my likelihood is about 35 percent."

"Jamen måske er min sandsynlighed cirka 35 procent."

So they learned quickly and efficiently.

Så de lærte hurtigt og effektivt.

But if someone started off saying,

Men hvis nogen begyndte med at sige,

"My average likelihood of suffering from cancer is about 10 percent,"

"Min sandsynlighed for at få kræft er cirka 10 procent,"

and we said, "Hey, bad news.

og vi sagde, "Hey, dårligt nyt.

The average likelihood is about 30 percent,"

Den gennemsnitlige sandsynlighed er 30 procent,"

the next time around they would say,

den næste gang ville de sige,

"Yep. Still think it's about 11 percent."

"Yep. Tror stadig den er cirka 11 procent."

(Laughter)

(Latter)

So it's not that they didn't learn at all -- they did --

Så det er ikke fordi de ikke lærte noget -- det gjorde de --

but much, much less than when we gave them

men meget, meget mindre end når vi gav dem

positive information about the future.

positiv information om fremtiden.

And it's not that they didn't remember the numbers that we gave them;

Og det er ikke fordi de ikke huskede de tal vi gav dem;

everyone remembers that the average likelihood of cancer

alle kan huske at den gennemsnitlige sandsynlighed for at få kræft

is about 30 percent

er cirka 30 procent,

and the average likelihood of divorce is about 40 percent.

og den gennemsnitlige sandsynlighed for skilsmisse er 40 procent.

But they didn't think that those numbers were related to them.

Men de mente ikke, at de tal havde noget med dem at gøre.

What this means is that warning signs such as these

Det det betyder er, at advarselsskilte som disse

may only have limited impact.

har muligvis kun en begrænset indvirkning.

Yes, smoking kills, but mostly it kills the other guy.

Ja, rygning dræber, men det dræber for det mest den anden fyr.

What I wanted to know was

Det jeg ville vide var,

what was going on inside the human brain

hvad sker der i den menneskelige hjerne,

that prevented us from taking these warning signs personally.

der forhindrer os i at tage disse advarselsskilte personligt.

But at the same time,

Men samtidig,

when we hear that the housing market is hopeful,

når vi hører at boligmarkedet er håbefuldt,

we think, "Oh, my house is definitely going to double in price."

tænker vi, "Ah, mit hus bliver helt sikkert dobbelt så meget værd."

To try and figure that out,

For at prøve og finde ud af det,

I asked the participants in the experiment

bad jeg de deltagende i eksperimentet

to lie in a brain imaging scanner.

om at lyve i en billeddannelses scanner.

It looks like this.

Det ser sådan ud.

And using a method called functional MRI,

Og ved at bruge en metode der hedder funktionel MRI,

we were able to identify regions in the brain

var vi i stand til at identificere de områder i hjernen

that were responding to positive information.

der reagerede på den positive information.

One of these regions is called the left inferior frontal gyrus.

Et af disse områder hedder den venstre inferiøre frontale gyrus.

So if someone said, "My likelihood of suffering from cancer is 50 percent,"

Så hvis nogen sagde, "Min sandsynlighed for at få kræft er cirka 50 procent,"

and we said, "Hey, good news.

og vi sagde, "Hey, godt nyt.

Average likelihood is 30 percent,"

Den gennemsnitlige sandsynlighed er 30 procent,"

the left inferior frontal gyrus would respond fiercely.

ville den venstre inferiøre frontale gyrus svare voldsomt.

And it didn't matter if you're an extreme optimist, a mild optimist

Og det betød ikke noget om man var en ekstrem optimist, mildt optimistisk

or slightly pessimistic,

eller lidt pessimistisk,

everyone's left inferior frontal gyrus

alles venstre inferiøre frontale gyrus

was functioning perfectly well,

funktionerede perfekt,

whether you're Barack Obama or Woody Allen.

uanset om man er Barack Obama eller Woody Allen.

On the other side of the brain,

På den anden side af hjernen,

the right inferior frontal gyrus was responding to bad news.

svarede den højre inferiøre frontale gyrus på dårligt nyt.

And here's the thing: it wasn't doing a very good job.

Og her er hagen; den gjorde ikke et særlig godt stykke arbejde.

The more optimistic you were,

Jo mere optimistisk man var,

the less likely this region was

jo mindre sandsynligt var det at dette område

to respond to unexpected negative information.

interagerede med den uventede, negative information.

And if your brain is failing

Og hvis ens hjerne ikke formår

at integrating bad news about the future,

at integrere dårligt nyt om fremtiden,

you will constantly leave your rose-tinted spectacles on.

vil man konstant have ens lyserøde briller på.

So we wanted to know, could we change this?

Så det vi ville vide var, kan vi ændre dette?

Could we alter people's optimism bias

Kunne vi ændre folks optimistiske tilbøjelighed

by interfering with the brain activity in these regions?

ved at ændre hjerneaktiviteten i disse områder?

And there's a way for us to do that.

Og der er en måde hvorpå vi kan gøre det.

This is my collaborator Ryota Kanai.

Dette er min samarbejdspartner Ryota Kanai.

And what he's doing is he's passing a small magnetic pulse

Og det han gør er, at han leder en lille magnetisk puls

through the skull of the participant in our study

gennem kraniet på deltageren af vores studie

into their inferior frontal gyrus.

ind i deres inferiøre frontale gyrus.

And by doing that,

Og ved at gøre det,

he's interfering with the activity of this brain region

forstyrrer han aktiviteten i dette område af hjernen

for about half an hour.

i cirka en halv time.

After that everything goes back to normal, I assure you.

Derefter vender alt tilbage til normalen, kan jeg forsikre jer om.

(Laughter)

(Latter)

So let's see what happens.

Så lad os se hvad der sker.

First of all, I'm going to show you

For det første, vil jeg vise jer

the average amount of bias that we see.

den gennemsnitlige mængde tilbøjelighed vi ser.

So if I was to test all of you now,

Så hvis jeg ville teste jer alle sammen nu,

this is the amount that you would learn

ville dette være mængden I ville lære

more from good news relative to bad news.

mere fra godt nyt i forhold til dårligt nyt.

Now we interfere with the region

Nu vil vi forstyrre dette område

that we found to integrate negative information in this task,

som vi fandt ud af reagerede på den negative information i denne opgave,

and the optimism bias grew even larger.

og den optimistiske tilbøjelighed voksede sig større.

We made people more biased in the way that they process information.

Vi fik folk til at have en større tilbøjelighed i måden hvorpå de bearbejdede information.

Then we interfered with the brain region

Så forstyrrede vi området i hjernen

that we found to integrate good news in this task,

som vi fandt ud af reagerede på godt nyt i denne opgave,

and the optimism bias disappeared.

og så forsvandt den optimistiske tilbøjelighed.

We were quite amazed by these results

Vi blev ret forbavsede over disse resultater

because we were able to eliminate

fordi vi var i stand til at eliminere

a deep-rooted bias in humans.

en dybt fæstet tilbøjelighed i mennesker.

And at this point we stopped and we asked ourselves,

Og på dette tidspunkt stoppede vi og spurgte os selv,

would we want to shatter the optimism illusion into tiny little bits?

ville vi knuse den lille optimistiske illusion i små stykker?

If we could do that, would we want to take people's optimism bias away?

Hvis vi kunne gøre det, ville vi så have lyst til at fjerne menneskers optimistiske tilbøjelighed?

Well I've already told you about all of the benefits of the optimism bias,

Jamen jeg har allerede fortalt jer om alle fordelene ved den optimistiske tilbøjelighed,

which probably makes you want to hold onto it for dear life.

hvilket sikkert giver jer lyst til at holde fast i den som om det gjaldt livet.

But there are, of course, pitfalls,

Men der er, selvfølgelig, faldgruber,

and it would be really foolish of us to ignore them.

og det ville være virkelig dumt af os at ignorere dem.

Take for example this email I recieved

Tag for eksempel denne email jeg modtog

from a firefighter here in California.

fra en brandmand her i Californien.

He says, "Fatality investigations for firefighters

Han siger, "Dødsulykke undersøgelser for brandmænd

often include 'We didn't think the fire was going to do that,'

inkluderer ofte "Vi troede ikke at ildebranden ville gøre det,"

even when all of the available information

selv når al den tilgængelige information

was there to make safe decisions."

var til stede, til at tage en sikker beslutning."

This captain is going to use our findings on the optimism bias

Denne kaptajn vil bruge vores opdagelser om den optimistiske tilbøjelighed

to try to explain to the firefighters

til at prøve at forklare brandmænd

why they think the way they do,

hvorfor de tænker som de gør,

to make them acutely aware of this very optimistic bias in humans.

for at få dem til at være opmærksomme på denne optimistiske tilbøjelighed i mennesker.

So unrealistic optimism can lead to risky behavior,

Så urealistisk optimisme kan lede til meget risikofyldt adfærd,

to financial collapse, to faulty planning.

til finansiel kollaps, til dårlig planlægning.

The British government, for example,

Den britiske regering, for eksempel,

has acknowledged that the optimism bias

har vedkendt at den optimistiske tilbøjelighed

can make individuals more likely

kan gøre individer mere modtagelige

to underestimate the costs and durations of projects.

til at undervurdere omkostningerne og varigheden af projekter.

So they have adjusted the 2012 Olympic budget

Så de har justeret det Olympiske budget for 2012

for the optimism bias.

på grund af den optimistiske tilbøjelighed.

My friend who's getting married in a few weeks

Min ven der bliver gift om et par uger

has done the same for his wedding budget.

har gjort det samme med hans bryllups budget.

And by the way, when I asked him about his own likelihood of divorce,

Og for øvrigt, da jeg spurgte ham om hans egen sandsynlighed for skilsmisse,

he said he was quite sure it was zero percent.

sagde han, at han var ret sikker på at den var på nul procent.

So what we would really like to do,

Så det vi meget gerne vil gøre,

is we would like to protect ourselves from the dangers of optimism,

er at vi gerne vil beskytte os selv fra farerne ved optimisme,

but at the same time remain hopeful,

men samtidig forblive håbefulde,

benefiting from the many fruits of optimism.

og drage fordel af de mange goder der er ved optimisme.

And I believe there's a way for us to do that.

Og jeg mener at der er en måde vi kan gøre det på.

The key here really is knowledge.

Nøglen her, er faktisk viden.

We're not born with an innate understanding of our biases.

Vi er ikke født med en instinktiv forståelse af vores tilbøjeligheder.

These have to be identified by scientific investigation.

De skal identificeres af en videnskabelig undersøgelse.

But the good news is that becoming aware of the optimism bias

Men den gode nyhed er, at blive klar over den optimistiske tilbøjelighed

does not shatter the illusion.

ikke fjerner illusionen.

It's like visual illusions,

Det er ligesom visuelle illusioner,

in which understanding them does not make them go away.

hvor det at forstå dem ikke for dem til at forsvinde.

And this is good because it means

Og det er godt nyt, fordi det betyder

we should be able to strike a balance,

at vi burde være i stand til at finde en balance,

to come up with plans and rules

til at finde på planer og regler

to protect ourselves from unrealistic optimism,

for at beskytte os selv fra urealistisk optimisme,

but at the same time remain hopeful.

men på samme tid være håbefulde.

I think this cartoon portrays it nicely.

Jeg tror denne vittighedstegning fanger det godt.

Because if you're one of these pessimistic penguins up there

Fordi hvis man er en af disse pessimistiske pingviner deroppe

who just does not believe they can fly,

der bare ikke tror på at de kan flyve,

you certainly never will.

så kommer man aldrig til det.

Because to make any kind of progress,

For for at have noget fremskridt,

we need to be able to imagine a different reality,

er vi nød til at være i stand til at forestille os en anden virkelighed,

and then we need to believe that that reality is possible.

og vi skal være i stand til at tro på at den virkelighed er mulig.

But if you are an extreme optimistic penguin

Men hvis man er en ekstremt optimistisk pingvin

who just jumps down blindly hoping for the best,

der bare springer ned og håber på det bedste,

you might find yourself in a bit of a mess when you hit the ground.

så kan man komme i noget være rod når man rammer jorden.

But if you're an optimistic penguin

Men hvis man er en optimistisk pingvin

who believes they can fly,

der tror på de kan flyve,

but then adjusts a parachute to your back

men justerer det ved at have en faldskærm på ryggen,

just in case things don't work out exactly as you had planned,

bare for det tilfælde at tingene ikke ender som planlagt,

you will soar like an eagle,

vil man svæve som en ørn,

even if you're just a penguin.

selvom man kun er en pingvin.

Thank you.

Tak.

(Applause)

(Bifald)