Normality bias: what is it and how does it affect us?

This psychological phenomenon causes us to underestimate the chances of disasters occurring.

Cognitive biases are "traps" of the mind that make us deviate from "objective" reality and lead us to make mistakes when deciding on certain situations or proposing effective solutions to problems.

One of these biases is the bias of normalitywhich causes us to downplay the importance of emergency situations and their possible effects. In this article we will see what exactly this bias consists of, what consequences it entails, why it occurs and how we can combat it.

Normalcy bias: what does it consist of?

The normality bias is a cognitive bias that causes us to irrationally makes us believe, irrationally, that nothing bad will ever happen to us because nothing bad has ever happened to us.. That is, everything will always be "normal" and nothing will break with that normality. This bias is activated in emergency or disaster situations, as we will see below.

Basically, people with the normality bias manifest difficulties (or even inability) to react to situations they have never experienced before (which are usually traumatic, dangerous or emergency situations). This occurs because they underestimate the possibility of such a disaster occurring, and once it does occur, they underestimate its possible effects.

In other words, it would be that tendency to believe that everything will work as it normally does, that is, with everyday normality, without unforeseen events. It is estimated that around 70% of people present the normality bias in emergency or disaster situations.

Opposite bias

As an interesting fact, the opposite bias to the normality bias is the so-called negativity inclination, which would be precisely that tendency to believe and think that bad things will happen to us..

It would also be to focus much more on the bad things than on the good things, tending to be negative or pessimistic at all times. Thus, this bias is not adaptive either, because it turns us into pessimistic people focused on thinking that everything bad will come.

Bias in emergency situations

The normality bias can appear in emergency or disaster situations; let's put ourselves in a situation to understand it better: let's imagine that we have never experienced anything too traumatic, or that we have never been exposed to an emergency situation.

What will happen when we encounter one and manifest the normalcy bias? We will probably find it hard to believe that it is really an emergency, and the situation will not seem "real" to us. Our brain will have activated this bias, through which it will analyze the novel and stressful situation as if it were not really stressful, and as if it were something normal.and as if it were normal.

Thus, this bias can be counterproductive in emergency situations, because if in such a situation, our mind makes us believe that the emergency is not real (or that "there is no big deal"), we will not put in place the necessary resources to cope with this situation, we will not be able to help and we will also be in danger.

In this sense, then, the normality bias is not very adaptive, nor is it effective for survival.

Consequences of the bias

Thus, in emergency situations (e.g. a fire, a call for help from someone, a robbery...), if our mind activates the normality bias, we will underestimate the situation, believing that it is not so serious, that it is not real or that it will not lead to harmful effects.

In addition, the normalcy bias prevents us from preparing (both physically and mentally) for the possibility of a catastrophe. prevents us from preparing ourselves (both physically and mentally) for the possibility of a catastrophe..

Another consequence of the normality bias, as mentioned above, is the inability to face the situation in an adaptive way, which means that we do not put in place the necessary resources to deal with it; we do not mobilize, we do not ask for help, we do not come to the rescue, etc.

Through this bias, our mind, unconsciously, is sending us the following message: "if a disaster has never happened here before, now it doesn't have to happen.".

On the other hand, people with this bias, when faced with a new and/or dangerous situation, interpret the warning signs that indicate such danger in a totally optimistic way, downplaying their importance and also taking advantage of any ambiguity in the context to understand that the situation "is not as serious as it seems".

This is a mistake and can put us in danger; let us remember that biases usually involve inadequate, ineffective or irrational inadequate, ineffective, or irrational processing of informationand that end up originating in us deviant, erroneous or dysfunctional judgments or beliefs. This is also what happens with the normality bias.

When the bias does not appear

What happens when we do not manifest the normality bias in emergency situations? Many things can happen, since each person reacts differently.

There are people who are more easily mobilized in emergency situations; others, on the other hand, are blocked and have difficulties in deciding what to do more or less quickly (which does not mean that they manifest the normality bias). And so on and so forth, since in unforeseen situations, it is not easy to anticipate how each person will act.

An American journalist, Amanda Ripley, studied people's responses to emergency or disaster situations, and found the following: according to her, there are three phases of response when we react to a disaster.She found the following: according to her, there are three phases of response when we react to a disaster: the first phase is denial (denying that it is happening; we could even frame here the normality bias), the second is deliberation (thinking: what do I do now? how do I act?), and the third is the decisive moment (to act or not to act).

Each person progresses differently through these three phases; there are people who remain in the first, others in the second, and finally some in the third (where they move on to action, to mobilization).

Causes

One hypothesis has been proposed to explain the origin of the normalcy bias. This hypothesis mentions the way in which the brain processes new information; according to it, stress would decrease the probability of adequately processing the information.

It is also interesting to know that even when the brain is calm, it takes between 8 and 10 seconds to process new information.

Thus, trying to explain it in a rather synthesized way, in the normality bias, the brain would have difficulty finding an "acceptable" response to what is happening.and therefore it would end up developing just the opposite idea, which is that "nothing relevant" or "nothing worrisome" is happening.

How to combat the normality bias?

Surely the best way to combat this bias is to make us aware that it can happen to us, but also that we can avoid it, if we are aware of that possibility. Thinking rationally and realistically, although not always easy, can help us.

On the other hand, different responses have been proposed, which are structured in four phases or stages, to combat the normality bias (referred to on a large scale). These consist of:

1. Preparation.

In this first stage, the possibility of a disaster is recognized. Plans are designed to deal with it in case it happens..

2. Warning or alert

The fact that a disaster is occurring is reported (unambiguously), so that people are aware of the seriousness of the situation and can begin to mobilize..

3. Impact

Emergency plans are activated; emergency, rescue and relief teams intervene. In other words, action is taken.

4. Consequences

An attempt is made to re-establish the equilibrium that has been broken as a result of the disaster.. Supplies and necessary post-disaster relief are provided.

Bibliographical references:

• Morales, J.F. (2007). Psicología Social. Editorial: S.A. McGraw-Hill / Interamericana de España.
• Myers, D.G. (1995). Psicología Social. McGraw-Hill, Mexico.
• World Health Organization. (2003). Mental health in emergencies. Geneva: Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse/World Health Organization.
• Rodríguez, J., Davoli, Z. and Pérez, R. (2006). Guía práctica de salud mental en situación de desastres. Iris, Institutional Repository for information exchange. Pan American Health Organization.