In our fast-paced world, there is a strong inclination to take action in uncertain or new situations. This tendency, known as the action bias, compels us to do anything, even when inaction might be more beneficial. From penalty shoot-outs in soccer to decision-making in various contexts, action bias can have unexpected consequences. In this article, we will delve into action bias, explore its influence on human behavior, and discuss why resisting the urge to act impulsively can lead to better outcomes.
The Urge to Act in the Face of Penalties: Action Bias in Soccer
In the high-stakes moment of a penalty kick, the clock is ticking, and the pressure is immense for both the player and the goalkeeper. The speed of the ball, often reaching over 70 miles per hour, means that the goalkeeper has mere milliseconds to react. This leaves them little time to gauge the ball’s trajectory after the kick. Statistically, players tend to direct the ball one-third of the time to the center, one-third to the left, and one-third to the right. This knowledge should, in theory, guide the goalkeeper to stand in the middle, prepared to intercept any ball shot in that area.
However, goalkeepers almost always dive to one side despite the statistical probabilities. Why? It may seem irrational, as they risk missing the center shot entirely by diving to the left or right. But the answer lies in the psychological tendency known as action bias. Goalkeepers feel an overwhelming need to take action in the face of uncertainty. Diving in any direction feels more “active” and controlled compared to standing still in the center, which might be perceived as a passive or indecisive stance. The fear of standing motionless and watching the ball pass them by is a far more discomforting scenario than diving in the wrong direction. This desire to look active—especially when under intense scrutiny—overrides the logical understanding that staying in the middle might yield a better chance of success. Regardless of its efficacy, the tendency to act stems from a deep-seated psychological need for agency, especially in high-pressure situations.
Action Bias in High-Stress Situations: The Young, Impulsive Officers
The action bias is not limited to athletes; it extends into many areas of life, especially in high-stress and uncertain situations. A striking example can be seen in law enforcement, where officers, especially those new to the field, may be compelled to act impulsively in volatile situations. Imagine a group of youths leaving a nightclub. The atmosphere becomes tense, voices are raised, and gestures become more aggressive. The situation seems to be on the brink of an altercation. Nearby police officers are watching the scene unfold, and the officers’ reactions depend largely on their experience and temperament.
More experienced officers, having dealt with similar situations, understand the importance of observation and waiting. They know that rushing in without understanding the full dynamics of the situation can escalate the tension, leading to unnecessary violence. They remain calm, assess the situation, and intervene only when the situation reaches a critical point. However, younger, less experienced officers may feel the overwhelming urge to step in and take control immediately. Their desire to appear decisive and active leads them to rush in without a clear strategy, which often exacerbates the situation. Studies have shown that when experienced officers are involved, the situation tends to resolve more calmly, with fewer casualties or injuries. This is because seasoned officers resist the pull of action bias and instead focus on maintaining control through patience and observation. On the other hand, young officers are driven by the urge to do something, even if it’s the wrong decision at the wrong time. This instinct to act in the face of uncertainty leads to unnecessary risks and undesirable outcomes, reinforcing the idea that action is not always the best course.
The Action Bias in Investing: The Urge to Overact
The action bias is also evident in the world of investing, particularly among novice investors who often feel the need to do something in the face of market uncertainty. The stock market is unpredictable and volatile, and when new investors enter the market, they are often overwhelmed by the perceived need to make constant decisions. The fear of missing out on opportunities or the anxiety of sitting idle leads them to trade frequently, buying and selling stocks at rapid rates. This impulsive behavior stems from the same action bias that drives a goalkeeper to dive or an officer to intervene—acting feels better than waiting and doing nothing.
But this approach is often counterproductive. Studies show that frequent trading often leads to poor financial outcomes. By constantly reacting to the market’s ups and downs, investors make decisions based on emotion rather than rational analysis. This is the exact opposite of the approach recommended by seasoned investors like Charlie Munger, who advocates for patience and discipline in investing. Munger, vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, is a staunch believer in avoiding impulsive trading and in practicing restraint. His approach is rooted in the idea that the best decisions come from careful, deliberate thought, not from the compulsion to act out of fear or impatience. Instead of constantly jumping into the market, Munger’s strategy is to wait for opportunities to present themselves and to invest with conviction when the time is right. This patient inaction philosophy starkly contrasts the action bias that drives novice investors to overtrade. Successful investors can avoid the common pitfalls of frequent trading and emotional decision-making by resisting the urge to act impulsively and embracing a long-term, disciplined approach.
The Influence of Action Bias in Medicine: The Need to Intervene
Action bias is not confined to sports or investing—it also manifests in the medical field, where uncertainty often reigns. Doctors frequently face situations where they must decide on patient care without having all the necessary information. For example, when a patient presents with symptoms that do not clearly indicate a specific illness, the doctor must decide whether to act immediately by prescribing treatment or to wait and observe. In many cases, doctors feel a compelling urge to act, prescribing a treatment or ordering tests, even when waiting might be the more prudent option.
The reason for this compulsion to act is rooted in the action bias. Like everyone else, doctors are driven by the desire to avoid inaction in the face of uncertainty. The idea of doing nothing—of waiting to see how the patient’s condition develops—can feel like a failure to take charge. As a result, doctors may intervene prematurely, prescribing medications or tests that may not be necessary. This is especially true for younger, less experienced doctors, who may feel an acute sense of responsibility to help the patient and fear that doing nothing could lead to negative consequences. In these instances, the action bias overrides a more measured approach, leading to unnecessary treatments or diagnostic procedures. However, more experienced doctors tend to understand that inaction can be an appropriate and beneficial response. By gathering more information and observing the patient’s condition, they can make better-informed decisions that ultimately lead to better patient outcomes. The action bias, in this case, results in an overzealous intervention that can complicate diagnosis, increase patient anxiety, and lead to unnecessary medical costs.
Action Bias and Our Evolutionary Past: The Speed of Survival Decisions
The origins of action bias lie deep in our evolutionary history. Our ancestors lived in a world fraught with dangers, where immediate action was often necessary for survival. When faced with the sudden appearance of a potential predator, such as a saber-tooth tiger, there was no time for deliberation or careful analysis. The ability to react quickly, to run or fight, was the key to survival. A hesitation of even a few seconds could mean the difference between life and death.
This instinct for fast action is ingrained in human biology. Over generations, humans who responded quickly to danger were more likely to survive and pass on their genes. The process of reflexive, rapid decision-making became hardwired into our brains. In moments of uncertainty or threat, our fight-or-flight response kicks in, pushing us toward immediate action. This instinct served our ancestors well in a dangerous, unpredictable world. However, this evolutionary bias toward speed can be counterproductive in the modern world, where threats are less immediate and more abstract. Quick decisions driven by instinct can lead to errors or missed opportunities in business, relationships, and personal decision-making. Yet, our brains are still wired to act first and think later, which can lead to impulsive decisions in situations where more time for reflection would lead to better outcomes.
The Societal Preference for Action: The Value of Inaction
In modern society, there is a strong cultural bias toward action. Individuals who appear decisive, quick to make decisions, and willing to take charge are often rewarded, regardless of whether their actions lead to positive outcomes. This preference for action over inaction is particularly evident in the business world, where executives are expected to make decisions rapidly. The pressure to act decisively, even in the face of incomplete information, is a constant theme in corporate culture. The desire to be seen as an effective leader often trumps the more difficult, slower process of thoughtful reflection.
This societal preference for action feeds into the action bias, reinforcing that doing something is always better than doing nothing. People who make quick decisions—whether they are correct or not—are often praised for their “leadership” and decisiveness. In contrast, those who choose to pause, reflect, and gather more information are often criticized for being passive or indecisive. This creates a culture in which impulsive action is favored over thoughtful deliberation, even when the latter might lead to better outcomes. There is a tendency to reward quick decisions and punish inaction in politics, business, and personal life. This societal pressure only strengthens the action bias, making it difficult for individuals to embrace the value of pausing and reflecting before taking action.
The Wisdom of Waiting: The Benefits of Inaction
While action bias often pushes us to make decisions quickly, there is great value in learning to wait. In a world that constantly rewards decisiveness and speed, resisting the urge to act immediately can be difficult. However, taking the time to pause and reflect can lead to better, more informed decisions. Blaise Pascal famously stated, “All of humanity’s problems stem from man’s inability to sit quietly in a room alone.” In many situations, the best course of action is not to act at all but to allow ourselves the space to think and reflect.
When faced with uncertainty, taking a step back and assessing the situation from a broader perspective can provide clarity. Instead of rushing into a decision, waiting allows us to gather more information, consider alternative options, and make a more thoughtful choice. This patience is especially important in complex situations, such as business decisions, personal conflicts, and financial investments, where impulsive actions can lead to mistakes. By resisting the urge to act immediately, we can avoid the negative consequences of the action bias and make decisions that are more likely to lead to positive outcomes.
Conclusion: The Power of Patience in a World That Demands Action
It’s easy to fall into the trap of action bias in a world that constantly rewards decisiveness and swift action. Whether in soccer, the stock market, or even in personal life decisions, the desire to do something often outweighs the wisdom of doing nothing. However, as our evolutionary instincts clash with modern realities, it’s essential to remember that sometimes, the most powerful decision is to pause and reflect. By resisting the urge to act impulsively and embracing patience, we can make more thoughtful, informed choices that lead to better outcomes. In the end, action may not always be the answer—and in some cases, holding back can be the most effective strategy.
This article is part of The Art of Thinking Clearly Series based on Rolf Dobelli’s book.