Daniel Kahneman, Kamal Nath , & The Story of Human Biases

If Human Biases Trip Up Congress’s Chances to Come Back into Power in the 2023 Madhya Pradesh Assembly Elections.

We humans have our talents and our flaws. We are all biased and our brains work the way most humans’ brains work, as evolutionary forces have shaped how our brains function.

Daniel Kahneman, a renowned psychologist and Nobel laureate in Economics for his work in behavioral economics, has extensively studied various cognitive biases and heuristics that affect decision-making. Some of our most common biases, when we consciously choose something are:

Status Quo Bias: The status quo bias is a cognitive bias that describes our preference for the current state of affairs. The current baseline (or status quo) is taken as a reference point, and any change from that baseline is perceived as a loss. Kahneman’s work, especially in prospect theory, highlights how people tend to prefer avoiding losses to acquiring equivalent gains, which can lead to a preference for maintaining the status quo.
Now look into the Congress claim that, if voted to power, they will continue the welfare schemes, particularly related to women albeit in their own avatar. Shivraj’s flagship scheme, although, cuts no corners, is a non-event according to the leaders of the Congress. Anybody, particularly senior leaders of the state, making such claims should read Kahneman or should accompany Kamal Nath on a short sojourn to meet him. He may have met him in the ‘World Economic Forums’, in the past.

Endowment Effect: This is related to the status quo bias and refers to the phenomenon where people ascribe more value to things merely because they own them. This can lead to an aversion to change, as giving up an owned item (or idea) is perceived as a loss.
This makes the claims of the Congress leaders regarding the prevalent welfare schemes, which Shivraj Singh is marketing so well, a laughing stock and in turn makes them more untrustworthy in the eyes of voters. “Show, Don’t Tell” is an age-old phenomenon in the domain of good writing and works very well in other domains as well. These are the kinds of things that make Congress leaders stand apart from the rest of the crowd, even when there is no need to do so.

Confirmation Bias: The tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one’s preexisting beliefs or hypotheses — can contribute to mental inertia. This bias can lead to the persistence of beliefs or behaviors because individuals continuously seek out information that supports what they already believe or do.
In 2018, the entry of Kamal Nath raised the stakes, as he was a new and untested leader, and his image was that of a pro-business leader. People of the state wanted to give him a chance, as they were eager to embrace the newness and good things they had heard about him — with no direct experience of Kamal Nath. So Congress performed better in 2018. No such luck this time around. Kamal Nath himself, with his frequent outbursts, has left nothing to chance. Even more, everything about him has turned stale, and nobody has any clue to that. So the confirmation bias will prevail — bad luck for Congress and Kamal Nath.

Anchoring Bias: This bias refers to the common human tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information offered (the “anchor”) when making decisions. Once an anchor is set, other judgments are made by adjusting away from that anchor, and there is a tendency to interpret other information around the anchor. This can create a form of inertia where initial information or beliefs heavily influence future thoughts and decisions.
BJP finally is at a stage where it rules the minds of the majority of people in the state, with its multiple offerings. Until something much better or different is provided, there is no chance for a shift in thinking or choices. All the offerings will be compared by anchoring to the present. Congress has nothing as such to offer, and this bias alone will prevent people from moving away from BJP. In 2018, Kamal Nath was an asset — a leader who was embraced by the people of the state and was untested. His novelty and newness added glamour, and the offering was divine. Not anymore.

Kahneman’s work, much of it conducted with Amos Tversky, has significantly advanced our understanding of human decision-making and the biases that can affect it. These biases demonstrate how people can exhibit inertia in their thinking and decision-making processes, showing a reluctance to change even when change might be rational or beneficial. All these biases will trip up any chances of Congress coming back into power in the state. A better strategist may have known this beforehand, as Kahneman’s work is widely read, but the double engine of Congress in the state knows best. After all, they have been around since time immemorial, and one of them has no plans to leave anytime soon.