The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy is a cognitive bias where an individual or group selectively focuses on specific data, events, or patterns after they have occurred and draws unwarranted conclusions or perceives significance where none exists.
Key Elements
1. Cherry-Picking Data: The fallacy involves deliberately selecting data that supports a preconceived belief while ignoring other relevant information. 2. Ignoring Random Chance: It dismisses the role of chance or randomness, assuming observed patterns or outcomes were intentional. 3. Drawing False Patterns or Conclusions: Individuals incorrectly infer cause-and-effect relationships or significant patterns. 4. Neglecting Context: This includes ignoring broader context and other influencing factors. 5. Confirmation Bias: People tend to seek and favor information aligning with their existing beliefs. 6. Oversimplification: It often involves attributing complex phenomena to a single factor. 7. Lack of Statistical Rigor: The fallacy often lacks rigorous statistical analysis or empirical evidence.
Common Application
The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy can manifest in various areas, including politics, religion, sports, science, personal beliefs, and decision-making.
Example
A person believes in the efficacy of a particular homeopathic remedy based on selective testimonials, ignoring cases where it had no effect. This person may erroneously conclude that the remedy is universally effective.
Importance
Recognizing the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy is vital for critical thinking, decision-making, and ensuring that beliefs and arguments are grounded in sound reasoning and evidence.
Case Study
Implication
Analysis
Example
Climate Change Skeptic
Cherry-picking data disregards climate change consensus.
The skeptic selects short-term temperature data, ignoring long-term global trends and the scientific consensus on climate change.
A person claims global warming is a hoax based on a short-term temperature decline.
Lunar Beverage Sales
Falsely attributing causality to lunar phases.
The marketing manager concludes that moon phases influence sales without considering other influencing factors.
A marketing manager believes that beverage sales are higher during full moons.
Superstitious Student
Misplaced confidence in ineffective rituals.
The student relies on superstitious rituals (wearing a hat, sitting in a specific chair) for academic success, ignoring the role of study habits and effort.
A student believes that a lucky routine of wearing a hat and sitting in a specific chair boosts their grades.
Political Polling
Misinterpreting weather as a significant factor.
An analyst attributes a candidate’s popularity solely to sunny weather, ignoring other factors like campaign strategy and political issues.
An analyst claims a candidate’s success is due to sunny weather during rallies.
Stock Market Predictor
Overestimating predictive power of historical patterns.
An investor assumes that past stock market patterns will predict future performance without considering other market variables.
An investor relies on historical patterns to predict stock market performance without considering other factors.
The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy is a type of cognitive bias that involves selectively focusing on data points or patterns that support a preconceived belief or hypothesis while ignoring the broader context. This fallacy is often used to retroactively create the appearance of meaningful associations or patterns in data when, in reality, these associations are purely coincidental. It is a form of cherry-picking evidence to confirm a particular viewpoint while disregarding contradictory information.
Key Characteristics of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy:
Key Characteristics
Selective Data Analysis: The fallacy involves selecting specific data or patterns from a larger dataset while ignoring the rest.
Post Hoc Reasoning: It frequently relies on post hoc (after the fact) reasoning, where conclusions are drawn based on data that have already been observed.
Confirmation Bias: The fallacy is driven by confirmation bias, as individuals seek evidence that supports their existing beliefs or hypotheses.
Ignored Contradictory Evidence: It typically disregards contradictory evidence or data points that do not fit the desired narrative.
Illusory Patterns: The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy creates the illusion of meaningful patterns or associations when none actually exist.
Examples of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
To illustrate the concept of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy, let’s examine some common examples:
1. Health Supplements
Scenario: A company claims that their new dietary supplement has miraculous effects on health. To support their claim, they gather testimonials from customers who report various health improvements after taking the supplement.
Explanation: In this case, the company is selectively presenting positive testimonials while ignoring any negative reports or scientific studies that show no significant health benefits from the supplement. The fallacy lies in highlighting only the “hits” (positive testimonials) while disregarding the “misses” (lack of scientific evidence).
2. Superstitions
Scenario: A baseball player wears a particular pair of socks during a winning streak. They start to believe that the socks are their “lucky charm” and continue wearing them for every game.
Explanation: The player is committing the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy by attributing their winning streak to the socks. In reality, many factors can contribute to wins or losses in sports, and there is no logical connection between wearing specific socks and winning games.
3. Astrology
Scenario: A person reads their horoscope and finds that it accurately predicts their day’s events. They become a firm believer in astrology.
Explanation: This individual is engaging in the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy by focusing on the few instances where the horoscope seemed accurate while ignoring the numerous times it was not. Horoscopes often use vague and general statements that can be interpreted to fit a wide range of experiences, making it easy to find apparent matches.
4. Political Predictions
Scenario: A political pundit claims to have accurately predicted the outcome of several recent elections. They attribute their success to their exceptional insight.
Explanation: The pundit is committing the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy by highlighting their past correct predictions while downplaying or omitting instances where they were wrong. Political predictions are complex, and even the best pundits can make incorrect forecasts.
5. Lottery Winners
Scenario: A group of people who have won the lottery claim that they used a specific “winning strategy” to choose their numbers.
Explanation: These individuals are committing the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy by asserting that their strategy led to their wins. In reality, winning the lottery is primarily a matter of chance, and any strategy is unlikely to influence the outcome significantly.
Implications of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy can have several significant implications and consequences:
1. Misleading Conclusions
The fallacy leads to misleading or false conclusions based on selective data analysis, potentially influencing individuals’ beliefs and decisions.
2. Reinforcement of Bias
It reinforces existing biases and beliefs by cherry-picking evidence that aligns with those biases while ignoring contradictory information.
3. Overestimation of Skill
Individuals may overestimate their own abilities or expertise based on the illusion of success created by selective data analysis.
4. Reduced Critical Thinking
Encountering the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy can hinder critical thinking skills, as it demonstrates the pitfalls of accepting apparent patterns without rigorous evaluation.
5. Promotion of Pseudoscience
The fallacy is often used to promote pseudoscientific or unverified claims by highlighting anecdotal evidence while disregarding the scientific method.
Avoiding the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
To avoid falling into the trap of the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy, consider the following strategies:
1. Analyze the Entire Dataset
Examine the entire dataset or body of evidence rather than selectively focusing on specific data points that support a preconceived belief.
2. Be Mindful of Confirmation Bias
Be aware of confirmation bias and the tendency to seek out information that confirms existing beliefs. Make an effort to consider contradictory evidence.
3. Apply Critical Thinking
Engage in critical thinking by evaluating the validity of claims and the logical coherence of arguments.
4. Seek Independent Verification
Look for independent and scientifically rigorous sources of information and evidence to verify claims or hypotheses.
5. Avoid Hasty Conclusions
Refrain from drawing conclusions based solely on anecdotal evidence or isolated incidents. Consider the broader context and statistical significance.
Real-World Significance
The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy is prevalent in various aspects of life, including advertising, politics, scientific claims, and personal beliefs:
1. Advertising
Advertisers may use selective data or testimonials to promote products, creating the illusion of effectiveness.
2. Personal Beliefs
People often use the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy to reinforce their personal beliefs, such as superstitions or pseudoscientific claims.
3. Health and Wellness
Misleading health claims may rely on cherry-picked testimonials or anecdotes to support their products or practices.
4. Scientific Claims
In some cases, scientists or researchers may selectively report positive results while neglecting studies that did not yield the desired outcomes.
5. Political Arguments
Politicians and pundits may use the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy to bolster their arguments by highlighting past predictions or successes while downplaying failures.
Convergent thinking occurs when the solution to a problem can be found by applying established rules and logical reasoning. Whereas divergent thinking is an unstructured problem-solving method where participants are encouraged to develop many innovative ideas or solutions to a given problem. Where convergent thinking might work for larger, mature organizations where divergent thinking is more suited for startups and innovative companies.
The concept of cognitive biases was introduced and popularized by the work of Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman in 1972. Biases are seen as systematic errors and flaws that make humans deviate from the standards of rationality, thus making us inept at making good decisions under uncertainty.
Second-order thinking is a means of assessing the implications of our decisions by considering future consequences. Second-order thinking is a mental model that considers all future possibilities. It encourages individuals to think outside of the box so that they can prepare for every and eventuality. It also discourages the tendency for individuals to default to the most obvious choice.
Lateral thinking is a business strategy that involves approaching a problem from a different direction. The strategy attempts to remove traditionally formulaic and routine approaches to problem-solving by advocating creative thinking, therefore finding unconventional ways to solve a known problem. This sort of non-linear approach to problem-solving, can at times, create a big impact.
Bounded rationality is a concept attributed to Herbert Simon, an economist and political scientist interested in decision-making and how we make decisions in the real world. In fact, he believed that rather than optimizing (which was the mainstream view in the past decades) humans follow what he called satisficing.
The Dunning-Kruger effect describes a cognitive bias where people with low ability in a task overestimate their ability to perform that task well. Consumers or businesses that do not possess the requisite knowledge make bad decisions. What’s more, knowledge gaps prevent the person or business from seeing their mistakes.
Occam’s Razor states that one should not increase (beyond reason) the number of entities required to explain anything. All things being equal, the simplest solution is often the best one. The principle is attributed to 14th-century English theologian William of Ockham.
The Lindy Effect is a theory about the ageing of non-perishable things, like technology or ideas. Popularized by author Nicholas Nassim Taleb, the Lindy Effect states that non-perishable things like technology age – linearly – in reverse. Therefore, the older an idea or a technology, the same will be its life expectancy.
Antifragility was first coined as a term by author, and options trader Nassim Nicholas Taleb. Antifragility is a characteristic of systems that thrive as a result of stressors, volatility, and randomness. Therefore, Antifragile is the opposite of fragile. Where a fragile thing breaks up to volatility; a robust thing resists volatility. An antifragile thing gets stronger from volatility (provided the level of stressors and randomness doesn’t pass a certain threshold).
Ergodicity is one of the most important concepts in statistics. Ergodicity is a mathematical concept suggesting that a point of a moving system will eventually visit all parts of the space the system moves in. On the opposite side, non-ergodic means that a system doesn’t visit all the possible parts, as there are absorbing barriers
Systems thinking is a holistic means of investigating the factors and interactions that could contribute to a potential outcome. It is about thinking non-linearly, and understanding the second-order consequences of actions and input into the system.
Vertical thinking, on the other hand, is a problem-solving approach that favors a selective, analytical, structured, and sequential mindset. The focus of vertical thinking is to arrive at a reasoned, defined solution.
Metaphorical thinking describes a mental process in which comparisons are made between qualities of objects usually considered to be separate classifications. Metaphorical thinking is a mental process connecting two different universes of meaning and is the result of the mind looking for similarities.
Maslow’s Hammer, otherwise known as the law of the instrument or the Einstellung effect, is a cognitive bias causing an over-reliance on a familiar tool. This can be expressed as the tendency to overuse a known tool (perhaps a hammer) to solve issues that might require a different tool. This problem is persistent in the business world where perhaps known tools or frameworks might be used in the wrong context (like business plans used as planning tools instead of only investors’ pitches).
The Peter Principle was first described by Canadian sociologist Lawrence J. Peter in his 1969 book The Peter Principle. The Peter Principle states that people are continually promoted within an organization until they reach their level of incompetence.
The straw man fallacy describes an argument that misrepresents an opponent’s stance to make rebuttal more convenient. The straw man fallacy is a type of informal logical fallacy, defined as a flaw in the structure of an argument that renders it invalid.
The Google effect is a tendency for individuals to forget information that is readily available through search engines. During the Google effect – sometimes called digital amnesia – individuals have an excessive reliance on digital information as a form of memory recall.
The Streisand Effect is a paradoxical phenomenon where the act of suppressing information to reduce visibility causes it to become more visible. In 2003, Streisand attempted to suppress aerial photographs of her Californian home by suing photographer Kenneth Adelman for an invasion of privacy. Adelman, who Streisand assumed was paparazzi, was instead taking photographs to document and study coastal erosion. In her quest for more privacy, Streisand’s efforts had the opposite effect.
Single-attribute choices – such as choosing the apartment with the lowest rent – are relatively simple. However, most of the decisions consumers make are based on multiple attributes which complicate the decision-making process. The compromise effect states that a consumer is more likely to choose the middle option of a set of products over more extreme options.
In business, the butterfly effect describes the phenomenon where the simplest actions yield the largest rewards. The butterfly effect was coined by meteorologist Edward Lorenz in 1960 and as a result, it is most often associated with weather in pop culture. Lorenz noted that the small action of a butterfly fluttering its wings had the potential to cause progressively larger actions resulting in a typhoon.
The IKEA effect is a cognitive bias that describes consumers’ tendency to value something more if they have made it themselves. That is why brands often use the IKEA effect to have customizations for final products, as they help the consumer relate to it more and therefore appending to it more value.
The overview effect is a cognitive shift reported by some astronauts when they look back at the Earth from space. The shift occurs because of the impressive visual spectacle of the Earth and tends to be characterized by a state of awe and increased self-transcendence.
The house money effect was first described by researchers Richard Thaler and Eric Johnson in a 1990 study entitled Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice. The house money effect is a cognitive bias where investors take higher risks on reinvested capital than they would on an initial investment.
As highlighted by German psychologist Gerd Gigerenzer in the paper “Heuristic Decision Making,” the term heuristic is of Greek origin, meaning “serving to find out or discover.” More precisely, a heuristic is a fast and accurate way to make decisions in the real world, which is driven by uncertainty.
The recognition heuristic is a psychological model of judgment and decision making. It is part of a suite of simple and economical heuristics proposed by psychologists Daniel Goldstein and Gerd Gigerenzer. The recognition heuristic argues that inferences are made about an object based on whether it is recognized or not.
The representativeness heuristic was first described by psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. The representativeness heuristic judges the probability of an event according to the degree to which that event resembles a broader class. When queried, most will choose the first option because the description of John matches the stereotype we may hold for an archaeologist.
The take-the-best heuristic is a decision-making shortcut that helps an individual choose between several alternatives. The take-the-best (TTB) heuristic decides between two or more alternatives based on a single good attribute, otherwise known as a cue. In the process, less desirable attributes are ignored.
The bundling bias is a cognitive bias in e-commerce where a consumer tends not to use all of the products bought as a group, or bundle. Bundling occurs when individual products or services are sold together as a bundle. Common examples are tickets and experiences. The bundling bias dictates that consumers are less likely to use each item in the bundle. This means that the value of the bundle and indeed the value of each item in the bundle is decreased.
The Barnum Effect is a cognitive bias where individuals believe that generic information – which applies to most people – is specifically tailored for themselves.
The anchoring effect describes the human tendency to rely on an initial piece of information (the “anchor”) to make subsequent judgments or decisions. Price anchoring, then, is the process of establishing a price point that customers can reference when making a buying decision.
The decoy effect is a psychological phenomenon where inferior – or decoy – options influence consumer preferences. Businesses use the decoy effect to nudge potential customers toward the desired target product. The decoy effect is staged by placing a competitorproduct and a decoy product, which is primarily used to nudge the customer toward the target product.
Commitment bias describes the tendency of an individual to remain committed to past behaviors – even if they result in undesirable outcomes. The bias is particularly pronounced when such behaviors are performed publicly. Commitment bias is also known as escalation of commitment.
First-principles thinking – sometimes called reasoning from first principles – is used to reverse-engineer complex problems and encourage creativity. It involves breaking down problems into basic elements and reassembling them from the ground up. Elon Musk is among the strongest proponents of this way of thinking.
The ladder of inference is a conscious or subconscious thinking process where an individual moves from a fact to a decision or action. The ladder of inference was created by academic Chris Argyris to illustrate how people form and then use mental models to make decisions.
Goodhart’s Law is named after British monetary policy theorist and economist Charles Goodhart. Speaking at a conference in Sydney in 1975, Goodhart said that “any observed statistical regularity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for control purposes.” Goodhart’s Law states that when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.
The Six Thinking Hats model was created by psychologist Edward de Bono in 1986, who noted that personality type was a key driver of how people approached problem-solving. For example, optimists view situations differently from pessimists. Analytical individuals may generate ideas that a more emotional person would not, and vice versa.
The Mandela effect is a phenomenon where a large group of people remembers an event differently from how it occurred. The Mandela effect was first described in relation to Fiona Broome, who believed that former South African President Nelson Mandela died in prison during the 1980s. While Mandela was released from prison in 1990 and died 23 years later, Broome remembered news coverage of his death in prison and even a speech from his widow. Of course, neither event occurred in reality. But Broome was later to discover that she was not the only one with the same recollection of events.
The bandwagon effect tells us that the more a belief or idea has been adopted by more people within a group, the more the individual adoption of that idea might increase within the same group. This is the psychological effect that leads to herd mentality. What in marketing can be associated with social proof.
Moore’s law states that the number of transistors on a microchip doubles approximately every two years. This observation was made by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore in 1965 and it become a guiding principle for the semiconductor industry and has had far-reaching implications for technology as a whole.
Disruptive innovation as a term was first described by Clayton M. Christensen, an American academic and business consultant whom The Economist called “the most influential management thinker of his time.” Disruptive innovation describes the process by which a product or service takes hold at the bottom of a market and eventually displaces established competitors, products, firms, or alliances.
Value migration was first described by author Adrian Slywotzky in his 1996 book Value Migration – How to Think Several Moves Ahead of the Competition. Value migration is the transferal of value-creating forces from outdated business models to something better able to satisfy consumer demands.
The bye-now effect describes the tendency for consumers to think of the word “buy” when they read the word “bye”. In a study that tracked diners at a name-your-own-price restaurant, each diner was asked to read one of two phrases before ordering their meal. The first phrase, “so long”, resulted in diners paying an average of $32 per meal. But when diners recited the phrase “bye bye” before ordering, the average price per meal rose to $45.
Groupthink occurs when well-intentioned individuals make non-optimal or irrational decisions based on a belief that dissent is impossible or on a motivation to conform. Groupthink occurs when members of a group reach a consensus without critical reasoning or evaluation of the alternatives and their consequences.
A stereotype is a fixed and over-generalized belief about a particular group or class of people. These beliefs are based on the false assumption that certain characteristics are common to every individual residing in that group. Many stereotypes have a long and sometimes controversial history and are a direct consequence of various political, social, or economic events. Stereotyping is the process of making assumptions about a person or group of people based on various attributes, including gender, race, religion, or physical traits.
Murphy’s Law states that if anything can go wrong, it will go wrong. Murphy’s Law was named after aerospace engineer Edward A. Murphy. During his time working at Edwards Air Force Base in 1949, Murphy cursed a technician who had improperly wired an electrical component and said, “If there is any way to do it wrong, he’ll find it.”
The law of unintended consequences was first mentioned by British philosopher John Locke when writing to parliament about the unintended effects of interest rate rises. However, it was popularized in 1936 by American sociologist Robert K. Merton who looked at unexpected, unanticipated, and unintended consequences and their impact on society.
Fundamental attribution error is a bias people display when judging the behavior of others. The tendency is to over-emphasize personal characteristics and under-emphasize environmental and situational factors.
Outcome bias describes a tendency to evaluate a decision based on its outcome and not on the process by which the decision was reached. In other words, the quality of a decision is only determined once the outcome is known. Outcome bias occurs when a decision is based on the outcome of previous events without regard for how those events developed.
Hindsight bias is the tendency for people to perceive past events as more predictable than they actually were. The result of a presidential election, for example, seems more obvious when the winner is announced. The same can also be said for the avid sports fan who predicted the correct outcome of a match regardless of whether their team won or lost. Hindsight bias, therefore, is the tendency for an individual to convince themselves that they accurately predicted an event before it happened.
Gennaro is the creator of FourWeekMBA, which reached about four million business people, comprising C-level executives, investors, analysts, product managers, and aspiring digital entrepreneurs in 2022 alone | He is also Director of Sales for a high-tech scaleup in the AI Industry | In 2012, Gennaro earned an International MBA with emphasis on Corporate Finance and Business Strategy.
