|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Should we rely on gut instinct?
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
On the post factual society thread I have started wondering if those who don't vote by fact checking are voting by gut instinct. As that particular phrase is a bit of a dog whistle to me currently, this is to develop that idea further
At child protection training recently, a trainer suggested that we should use our gut instinct as our primary detection, that if our gut instinct told us something was wrong, it almost certainly was and we should then make sure we recorded our concerns through the system. He emphasised this several times - that we should use our gut first, mouth second - to pass on the concern, hand third - to make sure the concern was recorded. And he also said that 93% of gut instinct was correct.
Now, that particular training has blown up in everyone's faces as someone interpreted it as being able to follow their gut instinct in reporting a problem. And we all got the joy of an additional training session.
I did try verifying this belief that we should rely on gut instinct and have found very differing research, and no confirmation of 93% statistic. Some research is discussing the enteric nervous system and the link to the gut, other research is discussing the mistakes made by reliance on gut instinct.
How much reliance can we place on gut instinct?
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Helen-Eva
Shipmate
# 15025
|
Posted
This is really difficult territory because gut instinct can flag up the danger your subconscious has noticed that your conscious mind hasn't got to yet. But it's also the place where prejudices and a world of nasties live. I think in terms of brain function it's one of the short cuts that enables us to take decision quickly when we haven't got time to consider the facts. So in a split second life and death decision situation it's probably very useful, and in voting in a referendum probably not a good thing at all. That said, I dare say most people take most of their decisions at least partly on emotion/gut instinct rather than reason. I know I do.
--------------------
I thought the radio 3 announcer said "Weber" but it turned out to be Webern. Story of my life.
Posts: 637 | From: London, hopefully in a theatre or concert hall, more likely at work | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jack the Lass
Ship's airhead
# 3415
|
Posted
Donald Trump consistently states that he has 93% support in Scotland for his golf courses. So my gut reaction, whenever I see 93% of anything, is to think it's bollocks.
--------------------
"My body is a temple - it's big and doesn't move." (Jo Brand)
wiblog blipfoto blog
Posts: 5767 | From: the land of the deep-fried Mars Bar | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I don't think it's either/or. I mean we can think about our feelings.
But I certainly used gut instinct a lot in working with people in therapy; in fact, I could not conceive of any other way. However, I did also think, quite a lot actually.
In relation to politics, I'm not sure. Some of the Leave areas could be said to be cutting their own throats, but at the same time, probably had a visceral reaction to the Westminster bubble, which I think is valid.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
At child protection training recently, a trainer suggested that we should use our gut instinct as our primary detection, that if our gut instinct told us something was wrong, it almost certainly was and we should then make sure we recorded our concerns through the system.
At the point you are using your "gut instinct" here, you have received information in the form of training, so you are not entirely going by the influence of your digestive tract. What he is telling you, IMO, is to not overthink the situation. That, with your training, you will know instinctively what is/is not appropriate to report.
In the vote that triggered the thread that triggered this thread, many people were acting without accurate information.
Also, gut instinct, aka intuition is not the only factor. ISTM, many people knew, in their gut, that Leave was wrong. But it was overridden by what they wanted to be true. I think this accounts for the speed of the buyer's remorse.
An example of this would be my romantic life. If I followed my gut, it would be a different history. Instead I often listen to a different urge, slightly lower down the torso, ignoring what my gut and head tell me.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
At child protection training recently, a trainer suggested that we should use our gut instinct as our primary detection, that if our gut instinct told us something was wrong, it almost certainly was and we should then make sure we recorded our concerns through the system. He emphasised this several times - that we should use our gut first, mouth second - to pass on the concern, hand third - to make sure the concern was recorded. And he also said that 93% of gut instinct was correct.
[...]
How much reliance can we place on gut instinct?
Not all gut instincts are equal. A trained and experienced teacher or social worker thinking that something looks wrong on a child protection issue is worth taking seriously - I'd be an idiot to think that my own suspicions (or lack thereof) were equally significant.
On the other hand, my gut instinct on the outcome of a property dispute under the law of England & Wales is pretty reliable, even before I check the relevant case law, because I know the field and have a good feel for the principles by which such things are decided. A large part of my job consists of telling less experienced people why their, mostly self-interested, gut instincts on the justice of the facts presented is just plain wrong.
Telling someone who the experience and sense to make good calls to trust their instincts is good advice. It is not advice that ought to be extended universally.
--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"
Richard Dawkins
Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Gut instincts probably originated from our ancestors climbing a tree if they smelt danger. Needless to say humanity would not have got where it is today if they had stayed up those trees.
If a body of people, some 32 million in the case of June 23rd, are asked to put a cross in one of two boxes with a minute fraction of knowledge required to know if their decision is for the greater good or not, then most will invariably apply gut instinct to help make that decision. On the whole our rationally smooths out the bumps of our less rational instincts. Both work in tandem there really is no way to escape that.
If Brexit turns out bad for us all then ultimately the blame must lay with the flawed rationality of holding such a referendum not the vagaries of individual voters.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
It's one thing to follow one's gut instinct to avoid associating with someone or to torn down a job (to use examples where I wish I had followed instinct); and another to say "let's get the police involved".
I can remember the witch hunt that developed in my primary school over a missing (therefore 'stolen') item... And if the 80s taught us anything, surely it's the importance of getting corroborating evidence. Even when 'experts' are involved.
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Indeed. The standard of proof in criminal trials in France is the jurors' "intimate conviction", which translates pretty much as "gut feeling". The outcomes of many criminal trials would doubtless be quite different if the standard of proof was "beyond reasonable doubt" or even "balance of probabilities".
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
The problem is that gut instinct is not that good at judging situations other than the fight or flight situations where you need to make a very quick decision.
With the child protection, what you might be going on is prejudice. Gut instinct is well known to override the sensible decision in interviewing. And fix people in an opinion that may be wrong. There are several miscarriages of justice that were based on the gut instinct of the investigators who then didn't consider other alternatives.
(That said, I can usually work out why my gut instinct is telling me something is wrong on child protection situations - it's little tells of expression, tiny things that don't add up. And I would record any doubts any way, because if something else happens then that record is there.)
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
I think it's going to vary between individuals, and also between fields of knowledge. So people will want to track their own record of accuracy before deciding to follow it all the time. For example, my gut instincts regarding emotional/social interactions usually turn out to be correct; my track record with judging mechanical dysfunctions is a lot worse. So ask me about what's probably happening between person X and Y; but ask my husband why the car is making that noise.
IMHO A reliable "gut instinct" or intuition is based on observations that might not ever have made it to a conscious level. So if it's in my own field of expertise, it's more likely to be reliable than if it's in a field I know little of.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joesaphat
Shipmate
# 18493
|
Posted
Whoever said that if you trust your gut you've got shit for brains was right, ask any disfigured or disabled person, or most gay men... I've met with the ick factor a fair few times, people should not trust their gut feeling.
--------------------
Opening my mouth and removing all doubt, online.
Posts: 418 | From: London | Registered: Oct 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
(That said, I can usually work out why my gut instinct is telling me something is wrong on child protection situations - it's little tells of expression, tiny things that don't add up. And I would record any doubts any way, because if something else happens then that record is there.)
I have to say I'm a little worried about your child protection training. Mine has always been: "it's not your job to make a judgement call: if you are even slightly concerned, pass it on". Better to pass on something unnecessarily than to hold back something that turns out to be vital.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Gut instincts get indigestion from ugly little facts.
No one should base any significant decision other than in emergencies - like "I thought that car was going to hit you when I yanked your arm" - otherwise check your feelings against real information.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
Agree with others that "gut instinct" seems to me ill-advised in most situations, even though that seems to be the contemporary mantra-- especially for women (apparently we're supposed to have some sort of innate voodoo that tells us what's what. I must have missed mine). It seems spectacularly poor advice in child protection-- the sort of advice that has led to many looking the other way when the nice, good-looking man who seems a lot like me is spending a lot of time with that little kid-- but being really really suspicious when it's someone who seem very unlike me.
In my life I've realized that my gut instinct is almost always fear-based. If I followed my gut instinct 100% of the time I'd never leave my house, and I'd have a very very small life. I can accept that it may be different for others-- perhaps there is some instinctual sense for some that I'm missing-- or (more likely) perhaps it's just enough knowledge/experience in a particular type of situation to have a good feel for that particular situation. But as a general one-size fits all life mantra? Spectacularly bad I suspect.
I have had a few instances where I've felt a "leading" that I've attributed to the Holy Spirit. Not many, but a few. Two of the distinctive elements of that experience for me has been:
1. It seems contrary to my "gut instinct". I'm very aware that what I'm feeling led to do is not what my gut instinct tells me to do in that instance.
2. I do not experience fear or even anxious indecision.
Again, these are rare experiences for me, but the contrast to decisions I make based on "gut" is significant, at least for me.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
(That said, I can usually work out why my gut instinct is telling me something is wrong on child protection situations - it's little tells of expression, tiny things that don't add up. And I would record any doubts any way, because if something else happens then that record is there.)
I have to say I'm a little worried about your child protection training. Mine has always been: "it's not your job to make a judgement call: if you are even slightly concerned, pass it on". Better to pass on something unnecessarily than to hold back something that turns out to be vital.
This was why we had a second session a couple of weeks later. The guy was trying to tell us to record anything we felt was suspicious, whatever, whenever we were uncomfortable. It was badly misinterpreted.
I record anything anyway. If I reflect on it, I can usually work out what has triggered the discomfort, but the record is still there first and foremost.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jack the Lass:
Donald Trump consistently states that he has 93% support in Scotland for his golf courses. So my gut reaction, whenever I see 93% of anything, is to think it's bollocks.
Eighty-seven per cent of all statistics are made up on the spot.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
(That said, I can usually work out why my gut instinct is telling me something is wrong on child protection situations - it's little tells of expression, tiny things that don't add up. And I would record any doubts any way, because if something else happens then that record is there.)
I have to say I'm a little worried about your child protection training. Mine has always been: "it's not your job to make a judgement call: if you are even slightly concerned, pass it on". Better to pass on something unnecessarily than to hold back something that turns out to be vital.
This was why we had a second session a couple of weeks later. The guy was trying to tell us to record anything we felt was suspicious, whatever, whenever we were uncomfortable. It was badly misinterpreted.
Even then, I wouldn't call that "going with your gut". "Going with your gut" to me sounds, as others have noted, like giving free exercise to all your subconscious prejudices, which could lead to all sorts of bad consequences. "Record anything suspicious" is something quite different-- it's an act not of "gut" but of brain-- your reason tells you this is a red flag. You can't know that for sure-- but you're being asked to report it anyway so it can be checked out. But the fact that you identify it as a red flag should be an act of clear-headed reason rather than just an "I don't like this person-- they seem weird or off-putting".
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
In my area of expertise - raising puppies, gut instinct is invaluable. If I feel things are not right then I'm usually right although it's hard to explain just what is wrong. I felt this with Twiglet, took her to the vet (feeling a bit silly) she was rushed to pet hospital and put on medication and a drip. Without my gut instinct we'd be one Guide Dog less today.
I think this often holds true with children and health too.
But when it comes to voting etc gut instinct is often not a good way to choose what to do or how to react. It's likely to indicate some prejudice we don't even recognise imo. Best to think and think again, working out the implications and our own motivations.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
I agree with Boogie that gut instinct works where we have a close and continual relationship with the object. We have a lot of data for 'normal' so we are aware of deviations. It would take us a while identify and articulate this knowledge, but it is there and can be acted on.
If however you make decisions in areas where you do not have relevant information, then the gut instinct is operating on some other basis which could be anything, and even antipathetic to a good choice.
It is like dreams: you can have ones which provide insights, but what they will never do is tell you something which you do not, at some level, already know.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
I agree with Boogie that gut instinct works where we have a close and continual relationship with the object. We have a lot of data for 'normal' so we are aware of deviations. It would take us a while identify and articulate this knowledge, but it is there and can be acted on.
That hasn't been my experience-- in fact, mine has been the reverse. With my own children my gut instinct is even more wildly fear-based then with someone else's children. With other people's kids I can rationally look at the situation and assess odds as to what's going on-- with my own I am more likely to jump to extreme conclusions.
I don't know if that's an individual difference-- some people being just more naturally "intuitive" than others (as Myers-Briggs would have us believe)-- or if it's a form of confirmation bias (we both notice/remember the instances of our gut instinct being right/wrong that conform to our expectations).
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
I can't find it now, but I recently read an article about how Google took the behaviour of their users as revealed by their analytics and tracking software, and compared it to their expectations of how they thought their users would behave, and came to the conclusion: Never trust your gut.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
I agree with Boogie that gut instinct works where we have a close and continual relationship with the object. We have a lot of data for 'normal' so we are aware of deviations. It would take us a while identify and articulate this knowledge, but it is there and can be acted on.
That hasn't been my experience-- in fact, mine has been the reverse. With my own children my gut instinct is even more wildly fear-based then with someone else's children.
I'm not sure I'm agreeing or disagreeing with Cliffdweller or Firenze here, but I think that sometimes the object one needs close association with is a field of knowledge more than a person.
Depending on your knowledge about risks, this might not be an example of close knowledge of the topic though. Although your children are your focus in this example, depending on what sort of risk you are thinking the thing to assess might be not relate to them. For instance, if you are trying to make a gut check about whether to let a child of yours go to a nearby playground unattended, you would presumably be an expert on whether that child could cross a small street safely. But you might well not be an expert on whether they are likely to be snatched from the playground. That would depend on knowing things like how often children are snatched.
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
...but then I think we've gone from "gut instinct" to "knowledgable prediction."
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
Is there any general agreement about the meaning of "gut instinct"?
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I do remember some strong arguments that we all rely on "gut instinct" or intuition. The division between intuition and logical reasoning is a myth.
The argument goes that we always make decisions by instinct (see later), and then we post-rationalise them using our logical arguments (sometimes - some of us don't do that latter part). So even when we think we have made a rational, logical decision, we probably haven't.
However "intuition" is not quite the same as what we normally call "gut instinct". Intuition is far more about using all of our history, our background, our knowledge and understanding which enables us to come to a quick basic decision.
If we are open to all possibilities, this will usually work. In the case of the referendum, I did have an initial feeling, and as things went on, I realised that I was on the side of rational, logical sense. If I had found that I was not, and the leave campaign had really good arguments, then I would have considered changing my position. Yes genuinely, although my instinct did prove to be right.
In the case of Child Protection, I think we need to take an open approach and then our intuition. We will never have the facts to make a clear decisions, but we will have a feeling about something that is happening. I think the difference between this and "gut instinct" is that our gut can reflect our prejudices, but our intuition, if properly used, shouldn't
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
How would you explain then a gut check about whether it was safe or not to let a child cross a street and play unattended at a playground?
In the context of a parent who knows their child's abilities and knows the neighborhood crime stats, I would also call it "knowledgable prediction." If you are making a decision based on reason and knowledge, that's not gut, that's head. Usually when I hear someone say "go with your gut" they're not advocating that sort of knowledgable decision making, they're advocating one based more on unsubstantiated feelings. Again, it may be that there are some people who have some sort of sixth sense that allows them to intuitively make good decisions that way, but that has not been my personal experience.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I do remember some strong arguments that we all rely on "gut instinct" or intuition. The division between intuition and logical reasoning is a myth.
The argument goes that we always make decisions by instinct (see later), and then we post-rationalise them using our logical arguments (sometimes - some of us don't do that latter part). So even when we think we have made a rational, logical decision, we probably haven't.
However "intuition" is not quite the same as what we normally call "gut instinct". Intuition is far more about using all of our history, our background, our knowledge and understanding which enables us to come to a quick basic decision.
If we are open to all possibilities, this will usually work. In the case of the referendum, I did have an initial feeling, and as things went on, I realised that I was on the side of rational, logical sense. If I had found that I was not, and the leave campaign had really good arguments, then I would have considered changing my position. Yes genuinely, although my instinct did prove to be right.
In the case of Child Protection, I think we need to take an open approach and then our intuition. We will never have the facts to make a clear decisions, but we will have a feeling about something that is happening. I think the difference between this and "gut instinct" is that our gut can reflect our prejudices, but our intuition, if properly used, shouldn't
See here again I agree we are coming down to definitions. I would agree that what you're describing here is not all that different from a reason-based decision. In fact, I would say (as above) that it IS a reason-based decision, even if you are able to do it rather intuitively. If you're drawing on data-- past experience, history, knowledge, etc.-- that's a cognitive decision.
When I hear people say "gut decision" I usually hear them saying something quite different. I would describe what you're talking about also as "knowledgable prediction". Predictions can be wrong, of course-- which might be why a knowledgable prediction sometimes gets framed as a "gut decision"-- to indicate that it's not a sure thing. But if the prediction is based on some sort of knowledge or experience it's still a cognitive decision, even if some of that reasoning is happening on a more subconscious level.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
Cliffdweller - yes, which is why at the end I drew a distinction. But I suspect that what was meant by "Gut Instinct" was "Intuition".
A gut instinct is precisely that - a response of the gut to something, based on innate responses. It is really pre-intuition, and it is in preparation for possible danger or pleasure.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
