The Psychological Fault Lines of Decision Making in War

One can argue that the hardest decision a political leader faces is whether to send men and women to war. In the U.S., this decision is limited to a very small but highly influential group of presidents and lawmakers. If you pondered this for any length of time, you’d likely be awed by the direct and indirect impact the choices made by these leaders can have on untold millions of people.

In a recent interview, journalist Dan Rather tried to make this exact point. Speaking primarily to politicians and media pundits calling for “boots on the ground” in the Middle East, Rather stated: “I will hear you out if you tell me you are prepared to send your son, your daughter, your grandson, your granddaughter to that war of which you are beating the drums. If you aren’t, I have no patience with you, and don’t even talk to me.”

So, how much confidence should you have in the decision-making abilities of elected public officials? Probably about the same level of confidence you would have in anyone else. Unfortunately, the average person’s decision-making process is filled with a variety of errors and faulty logic.

In Rather’s comment, you get a glimpse of how difficult decisions become easier when one has little or no emotional, physical or financial “skin in the game.” In contrast, if decision-makers’ choices directly affect their emotional, physical or financial integrity, they’d be more likely to exercise caution.

Another common decision error many people make is referred to as “groupthink” — the desire to reach cohesiveness, unanimity and connection with like-minded people. We see this all too often in politics when intelligent and presumably well-intentioned individuals cannot seem to break free from a larger group’s overly narrow line of thinking.

Then there’s the error referred to as “curse of knowledge,” the inability to consider the viewpoints and opinions of less-informed people. Although our system of government is constructed so that average citizens can shape the opinions and actions of our elected officials, in practice, it doesn’t always work that way.

As with most things in life, there is a psychology behind going to war. The way politicians view the world and make decisions — based as much on faulty logic and distorted thinking as on a masterful grasp of facts and a keen understanding of probability and outcomes — determines the fate of countless service members and the ones they love. Let’s hope that our elected officials upon whom we rely to make choices in our best interest are smart enough to pause, understand the reasoning behind their choices, and seek consultation from the “less-informed.”

This column originally appeared in Dr. Moore's column "Kevlar for the Mind" in Military Times.