Scientific Definition
We defend existing systems even when they harm us.
Plain-English Definition
We defend existing systems even when they harm us.
Feynman Explanation
Every comp plan has its hostages and its Stockholm syndrome.
Core Principle
We defend existing systems even when they harm us.
Mechanisms
We defend existing systems even when they harm us.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Inputs (Triggers)
Pending editorial review.
Outputs (Behaviors)
Pending editorial review.
Behavioral Signature
Every comp plan has its hostages and its Stockholm syndrome.
Examples
- Long-tenured employees defending a process they openly hated five years ago.
- Institutional inertia mistaken for institutional wisdom.
Pending editorial review.
Famous Experiments
Pending editorial review.
Design Principles
- Outside reviews. Fresh-eyes audits. Defended status quo is still status quo.
Measurement Approaches
Pending editorial review.
Evidence
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
The Perverse Incentive Lens™
How this behavior is exploited — and how to redesign around it.
- Outside reviews. Fresh-eyes audits. Defended status quo is still status quo.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Interactive Mini Network
Click any neighbor to re-center the graph and follow the threads of connection.
Knowledge Graph Neighbors
Auto-linked to the rest of the Human Behavior Taxonomy by family, domain, dimension, and shared keywords.
A story repeats until it becomes obviously true.
Contradictory evidence sometimes deepens the original belief.
Beliefs survive the evidence that should have killed them.
We hunt for evidence that we were right all along.
Updating beliefs too slowly when new evidence arrives.
Believing people get what they deserve.
Assuming new technology will be adopted faster and more usefully than it will.
Reflexively rejecting evidence that contradicts established norms.
Studying winners while ignoring identical losers.
Evaluating an argument's logic based on whether you agree with the conclusion.
We see bias in others more easily than in ourselves.
Low ability paired with high confidence.