
Personal pride can sometimes get in the way of accepting the truth. There are many reasons for why this is the case, but little is known about the self-presentational consequences of this behaviour. Specifically, how others might perceive someone who refuses to back down, even when factual evidence is presented to them.
This shortcoming translates into many areas of life, so understanding how it functions has wide implications. To investigate this matter further, Leslie K. John, Martha Jeong, Francesca Gino, and Laura Huang used five studies that were geared towards understanding the self-presentational consequences of people’s aversion to changing their mind in spite of evidence that they are wrong. Their results uncovered a fascinating interplay between individuals’ desire to save face and the perceptions and attributions made by outside observers of this behaviour.
Their first study revealed that refusing to back down can create a bad impression, which can negatively impact the refuser in consequential ways. This study, which used a real-world context in the form of a pitch competition, showed that investors were more impressed by entrepreneurs who backed down, that is changed their stance in response to the investors’ counter-arguments. As such, these entrepreneurs were more likely to succeed, and advance in the competition, compared to those who refused to back down.
Studies 2 and 3 aimed to uncover the facets of person perception and how it impacts observers’ judgement about those who refuse to back down. The researchers found that such actors are seen as being intelligent but at the same time, lacking confidence. “Study 2 indicates that the tendency for investors to favor entrepreneurs who back down is mediated by their positive impressions of that entrepreneur’s intelligence (despite the fact that investors also view such entrepreneurs as relatively unconfident)”, the researchers added.
Study 3 also found that the positive impression gained by backing down depended on domain, specifically whether it’s one where confidence or intelligence is more strongly valued. For example, an engineer who refused to back down was less likely to be hired, but the opposite was found to be the case for a motivational speaker, where confidence trumped intelligence.
Studies 4 and 5 set out to find the driving forces behind why people may (or may not) choose to back down in certain situations. The researchers explained, “Study 4 indicated that actors are capable of anticipating the effects of backing down on observers’ perceptions of their intelligence and confidence. Rather, and consistent with our face-saving account, Study 5 indicated that actors’ propensity to back down is insensitive to whether their pay is determined by others’ ratings of their intelligence versus confidence; instead, it was sensitive to a factor that lessened the “ego blow” of backing down: the ability to do so in relative privacy.”
There findings were able to determine that in situations where portraying confidence is of the utmost importance, it is not beneficial for a person to change their mind. However, the opposite is true in situations where the need to demonstrate intelligence is paramount. In addition to becoming aware of the relative importance placed on confidence versus intelligence in a given situation, the researchers would also advise people to recognize when their desire to save face impedes their ability to change their minds. Additional thought and more research should consider the ways in which can people change their minds and thereby make better decisions, without having to incur any intrapersonal dilemma (i.e. blow to the ego) or interpersonal cost (i.e. being perceived as less confident).