3Qs: Psychological basis for fascination with mystery

March 28, 2014 by Angela Herring

When Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 disappeared on March 8, the world responded with an outpouring of attention and curiosity. Only in recent days have Malaysian officials publicly announced the plane likely crashed and satellites finding "credible" evidence of potential debris. Still, so much uncertainty about what happened remains. Northeastern psychology associate professor John Coley's research focuses on how we mentally organize our knowledge of the world, and how we use it to make predictions. We asked him to explain why humans have a deep-seated need for explanations.

Why does the human mind yearn for explanations and in what areas of society does this need arise most often?

I think we seek out explanations because they allow us to generate predictions. The world is a complicated place. There is far more information available to our senses at any moment than we could possibly take in and make sense of. In order to deal with that complexity, our are very good at simplifying, in order to make the world (at least seem like) a predictable place. An explanation for an event makes it seem predictable, and we like things to be predictable. Indeed, the cognitive scientist Alison Gopnik famously compared explanation to orgasm because we are highly motivated to seek out explanations, and feel deeply satisfied when we find them.

I think the need for explanations is ubiquitous—look at the mental calisthenics we engage in to explain random statistical variability in things like the stock market, the performance of our favorite athlete, or the yield of our vegetable garden. We deeply believe there is an explanation, and if we can find it, we might be able to make favorable outcomes more likely and unfavorable outcomes less likely. However, this need is probably most pronounced in areas in which we are more personally invested, such as jobs, personal relationships, or health.

How does your research specifically address this topic—what questions are you examining in particular?

In my lab, among other things, we study how people make inferences. How they use what they know to make guesses about what they don't know. One way we do this is by giving people hypothetical information, and seeing what they do with it. One thing that my colleague Nadya Vasilyeva and I are finding is that the way people explain the hypothetical information plays an important role in this process. For example, one reasoning problem might be, "There's this substance called sarca. Lots of things have sarca inside them. In fact, hawks and chickens have sarca inside them. What else do you think might have sarca?" People seem to generate an explanation for the given information—answering the question (which, by the way, we didn't ask) of "why would hawks and chickens both have this property?"—before coming up with an inference. And their answer matters. So, people who come up with a categorical explanation—hawks and chickens are both birds, maybe sarca is related to being a bird—tend to make categorical inferences, e.g., "Other birds might have sarca." In contrast, people who come up with a causal explanation—hawks eat chickens, so maybe they get it via ingestion—tend to make causal inferences, e.g., "something that eats the hawk might have sarca." In other words, we're finding that the way you explain a new bit of knowledge has important implications for what you do with that knowledge.

How does the story and media coverage of the missing Malaysian Airlines jet play into this phenomenon? Do mysteries like this one short change other important societal happenings?

The media, for its part, clearly knows a good story when it sees one. Whether this is because those working in the news industry explicitly realize, "People will be interested in potential explanations" or because those working in the news industry are human beings with human cognitive systems that are designed to seek out explanations, I don't know. I suspect it's a combination of both. But the result is endless hours of "experts" spinning possible explanations, to which we seem to be glued.

To be honest, I think that stories like this absolutely do short change other important issues. People prefer simple explanations to complex ones. The explanation for the disappearance of Flight 370 is likely to be fairly simple. In contrast, the explanations for the current state of healthcare in the U.S., or arguments for changing the structure of social security taxes and their implications, or explanations for climate change, are very complex, but ultimately will directly affect many more people.

Explore further: Thailand gives radar data 10 days after plane lost (Update)

Related Stories

Thailand gives radar data 10 days after plane lost (Update)

March 18, 2014
Thailand's military said Tuesday that its radar detected a plane that may have been Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 just minutes after the jetliner's communications went down, and that it didn't share the information with Malaysia ...

People merge supernatural and scientific beliefs when reasoning with the unknown, study shows

August 30, 2012
(Medical Xpress)—Reliance on supernatural explanations for major life events, such as death and illness, often increases rather than declines with age, according to a new psychology study from The University of Texas at ...

Consumers differ in desire for explanation, new study says

September 18, 2012
A study published online in the Journal of Consumer Research finds that people can differ widely on the level of detail makes them feel they understand something. In experiments, the very same explanations that some subjects ...

Recommended for you

New study rebuts the claim that antidepressants do not work

August 18, 2017
A theory that has gained considerable attention in international media, including Newsweek and the CBS broadcast 60 minutes, suggests that antidepressant drugs such as the SSRIs do not exert any actual antidepressant effect. ...

Should I stay or should I leave? Untangling what goes on when a relationship is being questioned

August 17, 2017
Knowing whether to stay in or leave a romantic relationship is often an agonizing experience and that ambivalence can have negative consequences for health and well-being.

Kids learn moral lessons more effectively from stories with humans than human-like animals

August 17, 2017
A study by researchers at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) at the University of Toronto found that four to six-year-olds shared more after listening to books with human characters than books with anthropomorphic ...

History of stress increases miscarriage risk, says new review

August 17, 2017
A history of exposure to psychological stress can increase the risk of miscarriage by upto 42 per cent, according to a new review.

Study finds children pay close attention to potentially threatening information, avoid eye contact when anxious

August 17, 2017
We spend a lot of time looking at the eyes of others for social cues – it helps us understand a person's emotions, and make decisions about how to respond to them. We also know that adults avoid eye contact when anxious. ...

Communicating in a foreign language takes emotion out of decision making

August 16, 2017
If you could save the lives of five people by pushing another bystander in front of a train to his death, would you do it? And should it make any difference if that choice is presented in a language you speak, but isn't your ...


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.