PDF Summary:Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me), by Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson

Why and how do people justify their questionable actions and big mistakes? In Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me), social psychologists Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson argue that we self-justify to relieve cognitive dissonance: discomfort triggered when we do things that don’t align with our other beliefs, actions, and values. They examine several unconscious processes we use to reduce the discomfort of cognitive dissonance, including self-justification, confirmation bias, and memory distortion. By learning about these psychological processes, you can unlock awareness of them in your own life and begin taking accountability for your actions.

In this guide, you’ll learn how contradictory thoughts and behaviors create painful dissonance. We’ll also discuss how self-justification, confirmation bias, and memory distortion help us relieve dissonance. Finally, we’ll discuss how the authors suggest we can break the cycle of self-justification and hold ourselves accountable for our uncomfortable actions. In our commentary, we’ll discuss healthier strategies you can use to deal with dissonance and explore some of the neurological processes that drive self-justifying behavior.

(continued)...

Belief #2: I Am a Competent Person

Another commonly held self-perception we’re compelled to defend is our sense of competence. Tavris and Aronson state that most of us believe we’re of above-average competence and intelligence, and this belief contributes to our positive sense of self.

(Shortform note: The exaggerated belief in your own competence is called overconfidence bias, and it’s fairly common in the workplace. People who experience this cognitive bias overestimate their skills and knowledge, leaving them unable to objectively assess their abilities. This might look like underestimating the time it takes to complete a task, always assuming they have the right answer, or overrating themselves in comparison to others.)

Therefore, when we make mistakes or learn that we’ve made decisions based on incorrect beliefs, we feel foolish and embarrassed. We believe that a competent person wouldn’t make such an error, so we seek to preserve our positive self-image by resolving the dissonance between our mistaken actions and the resulting consequences.

(Shortform note: While we tend to get embarrassed when we make a mistake because we assume others are judging us for it, there’s most likely no need for this. Our ego makes us intensely aware of our own thoughts, feelings, and flaws, and we assume that others are paying attention just as closely (a psychological phenomenon known as the spotlight effect). However, other people are most likely too busy ruminating over their own foibles to pay attention to yours.)

We often resolve our dissonance by passing the blame for the mistake to someone else or by wholly denying we made a mistake. The more serious the mistake was, the greater the dissonance will be, and the more motivation we have to absolve ourselves of wrongdoing.

Consider our earlier example, where you make a mistake at work. If your mistake only costs your company a small amount of money, you’ll likely fix the issue by admitting your blunder. You can acknowledge it and attribute it to human error without it affecting your sense of competence too much. However, if your mistake costs the company a large sum of money and leads to bigger personal consequences, you’re more likely to downplay your mistake, make excuses, or blame someone else to resolve the dissonance, since it poses a substantial threat to your sense of competence.

How to Raise Children Who Aren’t Afraid of Mistakes

Our fear of making mistakes and shattering the illusion of our competence often starts in early childhood—we’re afraid to disappoint our parents, and we don’t want to get in trouble. It doesn’t have to be this way, though—parents and caregivers can model behavior that helps kids see mistakes as learning opportunities, not something to conceal. By implementing these tips, you might help your kids break free from mistake-related self-justification:

• Start by talking honestly about your own mistakes—tell stories about times when you made the wrong choice, discuss how you handled it, and explain what you learned from it. This helps to destigmatize mistakes and reinforces the idea that they’re an inevitable part of life.

• Discuss mistakes as opportunities for learning and growth. Use language that encourages children to take responsibility for their choices and not give up just because something is hard at first.

• Identify solutions for mistakes in everyday life. Focusing on solutions fosters a productive attitude toward mistakes (rather than a defeatist one).

Belief #3: I Am a Good Person

The final and often most powerful quality that contributes to our positive self-image—and that we thus aim to keep free from dissonance—is our belief that we’re good and righteous individuals. According to Tavris and Aronson, we all want to believe we’re good people, so we’re highly motivated to justify any actions we take that threaten our sense of righteousness. This is especially true in circumstances where we hurt other people—we have to reconcile the harm we’ve caused with our belief in our own goodness.

How Do We Define Goodness?

As the authors state, most of us want to think of ourselves as good people, and we desperately self-justify if we feel we’ve failed in this regard. But how do we define goodness in the first place?

Some people define goodness as the ancient Greeks did, focusing on having a strong moral character and a fixed set of virtues. In this framework, if a person possesses those established virtues—like the Stoic virtues of courage, temperance, justice, and wisdom—then they’re objectively good.

Others argue that the key to understanding someone’s goodness lies in understanding the motivation behind their actions. For example, if you lie to protect another person’s feelings (an action that would be considered bad under a moral code that prizes honesty in all circumstances), you’re still demonstrating goodness because you’re coming from a place of empathy.

Still others argue that being good involves actively working to make the world a better place. To measure your goodness, you have to consider what you do to help others—for instance, volunteering for charitable organizations or advocating for people in need.

How We Justify Causing Harm

The authors state that when we’ve caused harm, we use self-justification to preserve our self-image as good, righteous people. When we do something that hurts someone else, we often reduce the resulting dissonance by justifying in one of three ways:

1. Denying wrongdoing entirely
2. Making excuses that minimize our culpability: for example, “I couldn’t help it,” or “I was provoked”
3. Accepting responsibility for our actions, but viewing them as isolated past incidents and ignoring their consequences in the present

How Making Amends Can Heal Both Sides

Though many of us ignore, downplay, or deny our actions to resolve the dissonance that happens when we’ve hurt someone, that’s not the best or only way to feel better. Rather, making amends and acknowledging your wrongdoing can be healing for both you and the person you’ve hurt.

Making amends may feel painful at first, but it also allows you to let go of internalized shame around making mistakes so you can learn, grow, and heal. When you hurt others, you hurt yourself too, and rationalizing with excuses or denying your culpability only reinforces the idea that you’re not allowed to make mistakes. In reality, we’re all fallible—accepting that by making amends can be an act of self-compassion, allowing you to forgive yourself.

For the person you’ve harmed, your acknowledgment of the role you had in their suffering can help them heal by making them feel understood and validated. It shows that you care about their feelings and that you’ve made the effort to understand their perspective. That being said, for amends to be healing, they must be genuine—if your apology is disingenuous, it can make the situation worse.

Part of that means avoiding the habit Tavris and Aronson mention of minimizing your actions because they happened in the past—your actions may still strongly affect the person you hurt, even if you’ve moved past them. If you’re apologizing after a long time, explain why it took you so long, and empathize with any remaining feelings they may have.

Reactions to Hurting or Being Hurt

When we’ve hurt someone else, the authors note, we usually seek to move past our harmful actions quickly to resolve the painful dissonance of our actions. Over time, memory distortion and self-justification help to reduce the sting of guilt and remorse.

(Shortform note: Often, we try to move past actions that we’re ashamed of by suppressing the painful emotions that come with them, such as guilt. This isn’t effective in the long-term, though—emotions that we suppress can actually get worse over time, hurt our self-esteem, and cause physical health issues. Instead of suppressing your feelings, write down what happened that made you feel guilty. Acknowledge any other emotions that come along with your guilt—anger, regret, and so on. Examine them with nonjudgmental curiosity—often, the situation that caused your guilt is more complex than you think. Working through it can help you productively resolve your dissonance and understand all of your feelings about it.)

By contrast, when we’ve been wronged, we generally hold onto the pain of the event for a long time. We’re much more likely to report lasting negative consequences from the actions of the person who hurt us.

(Shortform note: It can be hard to forgive someone when they’ve hurt you, especially when they justify their actions instead of apologizing. However, experts say that forgiveness can also be great for our health and happiness. So, how do you know when it’s time to forgive? Typically, we’re able to forgive when three conditions are met: First, you’ve received a sincere apology. Second, you were able to recover from the hurt—if an emotional or physical injury is permanent, it’s much harder to forgive. Third, the offending behavior stops. If someone hurts you in the same way over and over, they aren’t prioritizing your well-being, and they aren’t truly sorry. The next time you have trouble forgiving, ask yourself if all these conditions have been met.)

Additionally, sometimes we use victimhood to justify harm without tarnishing our self-image as a good person. Being wronged creates a sense of self-righteousness, which we can then use to justify cruelty toward the person who hurt us in the name of getting back at them.

Practicing Radical Acceptance

In Radical Acceptance, Tara Brach argues that we lash out when someone hurts or betrays us because their actions make us feel unworthy, especially when they’re someone we love. We begin to think there’s something wrong with us, and we resent both the other person for their actions and ourselves for being unworthy of love.

Instead of self-justifying poor behavior that’s driven by these feelings of anger and resentment, Brach suggests practicing radical acceptance: accepting that bad actions don’t mean someone’s a bad person and that everyone has goodness inside them. First, accept the goodness in yourself, forgive yourself for your own harmful actions, and let go of the blame and resentment you use to protect yourself from pain. Then, you can begin to forgive others.

Cycles of Harm

According to Tavris and Aronson, research shows that being hurt doesn’t reduce the chance that we’ll harm someone else. In reality, self-justification allows us to be harmed and commit acts of harm at the same time, perpetuating the cycle.

(Shortform note: If you frequently find yourself justifying harmful behavior with the belief that everyone is out to harm you, you may have a victim mentality. People with a victim mentality frequently blame others for the bad things that happen to them while also engaging in self-destructive behaviors. Even if there are steps they can take to make their situation better, they feel like nothing is within their control. Likewise, they often feel resentful and take things personally, even when something isn’t directed at them. Often, people who have fallen into a victim mentality experienced some kind of trauma, but they had no way to cope with it, so they no longer feel in control.)

We know that good people don’t deliberately inflict pain on others, so when we do harm others on purpose, we resolve the dissonance and maintain our sense of righteousness by convincing ourselves that the people we harm deserve it. Each side goes back and forth in an endless cycle of escalating retaliation until they can no longer empathize with each other.

(Shortform note: Though we may feel tempted to retaliate against the people who hurt us and justify doing so with our own hurt, this isn’t a healthy response—it creates deep rifts between people and prevents both sides from healing. Here are two alternative actions you can take to heal when someone hurts you: First, allow yourself to feel your emotions without judgment. This will help you release some of these emotions’ weight. (Crying can be a great release.) Second, instead of lashing out at the person who hurt you (or anyone else), find an activity that helps you channel your anger. It could be exercise, listening to music, talking to a friend, or spending time in nature.)

Stereotypes and Prejudice

One specific means of harming others that our brains skillfully justify is having prejudice—predetermined opinions about a group of people that aren’t based on reason or experience. The authors argue that everyone is capable of prejudice because of the way our brains work—we naturally organize information into categories that become stereotypes when applied to other people.

(Shortform note: In Biased, Jennifer Eberhardt expands on Tavris and Aronson’s assertion that categorization is a normal aspect of human brain function, stating that it’s necessary to help us process the enormous amount of information we encounter every day. At the same time, it becomes problematic when we apply it to other people. According to Eberhardt, studies show that we’re predisposed to focus on faces we’ve sorted into a “like me” category, and we block out or ignore other faces. This means that our brains see the faces of people in our own race as individuals with distinct features, while we perceive people of other races as part of a general group.)

Stereotypes can be advantageous—they allow us to make choices using past experiences, recognize important differences between groups of people, and judge how others will likely act in a given situation.

(Shortform note: While stereotypes may save you some cognitive energy, you should never rely on them as a guide for how to treat others as they’re inherently reductive. To deconstruct the stereotypes that you hold, use a technique called negative empiricism, as outlined by Nassim Nicholas Taleb in The Black Swan. Negative empiricism involves seeking out information that disproves your original belief. For example, say you think women aren’t as good at math and science as men. To disprove this stereotype, you could look for examples of women’s achievements in the STEM field or research the barriers women have to overcome to be successful in STEM.)

However, stereotypes also harmfully emphasize the differences between groups of people and diminish the differences within groups of people. They allow us to make generalizations about another group that justify our poor treatment of them while maintaining our sense of righteousness, and these generalizations can turn into prejudices.

(Shortform note: Many stereotypes serve as justifications for wide societal inequalities, not just the bad treatment of individuals. These are called pathological stereotypes. Instead of finding fault with the system, we explain social and economic disparities by placing fault with the people in the lower social position. For example, there are many unfounded, harmful stereotypes that help justify poverty—that poor people are lazy, that they don’t want to work, that they’re not interested in education, that they abuse drugs and alcohol, and so on.)

Self-Justification and Prejudice

The design of the brain also makes it difficult to identify prejudice in ourselves. The authors argue that this is because the brain is built to convince us we aren’t biased—it persuades us that our perception of reality is clear and accurate (a phenomenon called naive realism). We believe that if an opinion wasn’t reasonable, we wouldn’t have it, so other fair, good, reasonable people will see things the same way we do.

(Shortform note: As Tavris and Aronson state, we’re biased to think that what we perceive is objective reality, but this belief is entirely false. Our brains are constantly fed raw data from our sensory organs—eyes, ears, mouth, nose, tongue, and skin—which the brain then ascribes subjective meaning to. From a neuroscience perspective, without the brain’s ability to interpret, information is meaningless. Therefore, everyone’s reality is based solely on perception, which is inherently subjective. For example, in 2015, a picture of a dress went viral because half the internet saw the dress as white and gold while the other half saw a blue and black dress, proving that two people can look at the same picture and see something completely different.)

We justify our prejudices with the belief that our hostility toward other groups of people is reasonable and warranted (or else, we wouldn’t feel it), and it’s the other group that needs to change.

(Shortform note: Research suggests that it’s much easier to maintain prejudice against a group of people than it is to hate an individual. When you hate a whole group, you’re less likely to be confronted with a specific person from that group and thus with any information that contradicts your prejudices. In contrast, when you hate an individual, you’re much more likely to gain empathy for that person or experience something that shows a positive side of them that you didn’t see before. Studies conducted in conflict regions showed that 80 percent of people telling stories about people they hated mentioned groups instead of individuals.)

That being said, most of us still aren’t truly comfortable with our prejudices, the authors argue. Our negative feelings about another group of people conflict with our understanding that it’s morally or socially unacceptable to feel that way. This threatens our view of ourselves as good people and creates uncomfortable dissonance with our perceived righteousness, which we dispel through further self-justification. We self-justify by reinforcing our belief in harmful stereotypes (for example, the belief that the other group is violent, unintelligent, or untrustworthy). This cycle allows us to continue causing harm to the group while maintaining our sense of righteousness.

(Shortform note: No matter how empathetic or open-minded we try to be, we’re all susceptible to the prejudices and biases described here. What matters most is how we address them. Instead of self-justifying to alleviate the discomfort of your biases and consequently harmfully acting on those biases, try actively working against them. One way to do this is by identifying your implicit biases—attitudes towards people or stereotypes we associate with them without conscious awareness. You can do this using an implicit bias test, like Harvard’s Implicit Association Test (IAT). When you become conscious of your implicit biases, you can more easily identify and counteract patterns of thinking that support them.)

How Patterns of Self-Justification Lead to Polarization

We've explored some of the major patterns of self-justification. Now, let's discuss another impact of this process: polarization, or extreme divergence in once similar people's beliefs and perceptions of the world. According to the authors, two people who start off sharing the same beliefs, abilities, values, and psychological health can become vastly different over time and lose empathy for each other through a pattern of self-justification.

Why We Seek Out People Similar to Us (And Avoid Those Who Aren’t)

Drifting apart from people who were once close to us because of polarization, as the authors describe here, can be distressing and even lead to us abandoning previously close relationships. Because we usually care about the opinions of people close to us, we experience cognitive dissonance when they have beliefs that conflict with our own. Therefore, we generally prefer to be around people who are similar to us, and we might discontinue relationships when our beliefs diverge.

Our tendency to gravitate toward people with similar beliefs, values, interests, and experiences (and avoid those we deem different than us) is called affinity bias. Thousands of years ago, this was an evolutionary trait that helped us form protective social networks and diverse belief systems. Now, it’s a problematic bias that undermines collaboration and limits the ideas we’re exposed to. Studies have mapped affinity bias in the brain—when we think about people within our group, it activates the same neural pathways that light up when we think about ourselves, making us predisposed to show these people more empathy. In contrast, we use other neural pathways to think about people outside of our in-group.

How Making Different Choices Drives People Apart

The authors illustrate the pattern of polarizing self-justification starting with a single choice. You and another person are presented with the same dilemma, and one of you chooses the first path, while the other chooses the second. Before making your choice, either of you could have chosen the other path. After making your choice, however, each of you uses self-justification to resolve any dissonance that results from your decision, which changes your view on the issues involved in the dilemma. You each believe there was no other option than picking your (starkly different) routes.

The authors further explain that your justifications for the original choice inform future actions that again take you further from the other person’s beliefs, and you develop justifications for those subsequent choices. Over time, as you continue a cycle of justification and action, your beliefs on the matter become more extreme and polarized from the beliefs of the person you once agreed with. You’re no longer able to imagine taking the alternative path, and you can no longer remember feeling any differently. These patterns can leave once-similar people unable to empathize with or understand each other.

Leaving Regret Behind

As the authors explore here, believing that your decision was the only good option may harmfully push you away from people who made a different choice. However, it can also help you make peace with the choices you made and prevent unnecessary regrets, which can be healing.

Our choices, especially those that involve a moral struggle or a big life decision, often create dissonance because they leave us questioning if we did the right thing. We wonder what would have happened if we made a different choice, and we imagine a reality where we’re happier because we did.

Some people argue that this kind of thinking is based on false ideas—your current reality is the only one that could exist because it’s the only one that does. Every choice you made was the right one (even if it led to an undesirable outcome) because it’s the choice you made with the knowledge, history, relationships, and limitations you had at the time. Likewise, every choice you make changes you, so judging a choice a past version of yourself made only creates unnecessary suffering. Instead of regretting what could have been, try to find the lessons in every experience and be grateful that you’re a little bit wiser.

How to Develop Your Sense of Empathy

As the authors demonstrate, it can be difficult to empathize with people who make different choices than us due to everyone’s tendency to self-justify their behavior. If we can empathize with their decisions, it makes us question our own choice, provoking dissonance. That being said, you can actively foster empathy for all people, even those who are different from you. This will help you understand other people’s perspectives beyond how they relate to your own. When you become comfortable with the idea that people may think differently than you, you’ll experience less dissonance when you encounter opposing ideas and rely less on self-justification to support your own beliefs.

Start by assessing people with curiosity rather than judgment—ask people questions, get to know them, and try to understand what drives them before you make judgments about their choices and character. Studies show that you can also develop higher empathy by reading fiction. When you read about a character’s choices and struggles, you’re forced to relate to them—you’re presented with their motives and reasoning. Additionally, reading a story requires you to engage with another person’s perspective, which is an act of deep listening—another quality of highly empathetic people.

Shortform Example: Giving Someone Money on the Street

Let’s take a look at a small-scale example. Say that you and a stranger both pass a person on the street asking for money. That stranger has a similar background and value system to you. Initially, you’re both conflicted about whether to give the person money—you don’t know what the person will use the money for, and you don’t want to aid someone else’s bad decision. At the same time, the person on the street clearly needs help, and you don’t want them to go hungry just because of your suspicion.

You decide to give the person on the street a few dollars, hoping that they’ll get something to eat. The person thanks you profusely. Afterward, you dismiss any sense of worry you had before with the justification that you just made someone’s day a little bit better. You tell yourself that you can’t control what people will do with the money you give them, but that should never stop you from offering help when someone needs it. The next time someone asks you for money on the street, you give them a few dollars without hesitation. After several positive interactions with people in need, you can no longer imagine ignoring someone asking for money—now, you feel a moral obligation to offer help when you can.

The stranger chooses the alternative path—they decide to walk past without acknowledging the person asking for money. They suppress any dissonance from their decision with the justification that they can’t trust that the money won’t be used for something harmful, so it’s better not to get involved. They also heard a story on the news about someone being attacked while trying to give a person money, so they feel justified in protecting their safety. The person on the street can get help from someone else if they really need it.

The next time they see someone asking for money, the stranger walks to the other side of the street, their prior justifications running through their head. Now, they actively avoid people asking for money, believing that it’s always better to be safe and that it’s not their problem to solve. Though you and the stranger started off with the same hesitations and the same desire to help, you end up with very different values because of a single decision.

How to Break the Cycle of Self-Justification

You’ve just learned about the great lengths we’ll go to preserve our self-perception as rational, competent, and righteous individuals. These patterns of self-justification can drive us apart, leaving once similar people unable to understand each other.

Though self-justification is an inherent part of our psychological makeup, Tavris and Aronson assert that we don’t have to let it control us. In this final section, we’ll discuss how you can start taking more accountability for your actions and break the cycle of self-justification.

Tip #1: Accept Discomfort and Acknowledge Your Mistakes

Throughout this guide, we’ve examined how we use self-justification primarily to avoid the discomfort of cognitive dissonance. To begin taking accountability, the authors state that you have to accept the pain that comes with your mistakes and faults. By accepting uncomfortable dissonance instead of avoiding it, you can determine where you erred and how to fix it.

(Shortform note: Many of us do all we can to avoid discomfort (including the psychological discomfort of cognitive dissonance), but being occasionally uncomfortable is an important part of personal growth. To increase your discomfort tolerance, incorporate new experiences that initially feel uncomfortable into your life (like trying a new type of food or traveling to a new city). Additionally, put yourself in more social situations and accept that the risk of discomfort and rejection is inevitable. Practice conversing with different types of people, go to different settings, and try to make some friends. Taking small social risks will help you grow and evolve.)

Hiding from a mistake, or justifying your way out of it, won’t make it go away; in reality, errors are often harder to fix the longer you avoid them. Take responsibility instead of spending intellectual effort justifying your mistakes. This will lessen their burden. (Shortform note: One way to become more comfortable confronting mistakes instead of hiding from them is to separate them from your self-worth. Address the error you made as a problem to be solved, not as a reflection of your character or value as a person.)

Additionally, admitting your mistakes builds trust with others—we respect people who are willing to own up and use their missteps as opportunities for learning and growth.

(Shortform note: Admitting mistakes to foster trust with others is especially important if you’re in a leadership position. In No Rules Rules, Reed Hastings argues that leaders of a company should own up to mistakes because it encourages employees to take risks despite the possibility of failure. There’s a caveat, however—this will only work if your employees already trust and respect you. If they hold a low opinion of your competence, discussing your mistakes will only worsen their opinion of you.)

Tip #2: Understand Your Personal Biases

Often, automatic self-justification leaves you unaware that you did anything wrong, making it difficult to take responsibility. According to the authors, breaking this cycle involves actively cultivating your awareness of these psychological patterns in your behavior.

Research shows that people who understand and identify their biases have more control over them. If you can identify moments when you start self-justifying bad behavior, you can stop the pattern of thinking before it leads to further poor actions. To do this, assess your behavior and decisions critically. Instead of acting based on biases or emotions, take time to reflect and consider your motivations before you act.

Using Mindfulness to Reduce Bias

You can start to increase your understanding of your biases and reflect on your behavior patterns through regular mindfulness practice. Mindfulness helps you cultivate conscious awareness of yourself and the world around you, encouraging non-judgmental observation and a commitment to regular introspection. This introspection may make identifying your personal biases and behavioral patterns easier as you get to know yourself better.

Here are three mindfulness practices you can use to help recognize your biases and change your biased behavior.

1) Practice being aware of your emotions. Negative emotions that we often shy away from—like judgment, apathy, and fear—can be important indicators of biased thoughts and impulses.

2) Separate your sense of self from negative thought patterns. Mindfulness involves de-centering from thoughts and emotions and recognizing that they don’t always represent the truth. When you recognize that your biased thoughts are temporary and not necessarily a reflection of who you are, you can more objectively examine them.

3) Use a loving-kindness meditation. The Buddhist practice of loving-kindness involves wishing yourself, your loved ones, your enemies, and finally the whole world well. This meditation increases feelings of connectedness, and research shows that it substantially decreases unconscious bias toward marginalized groups.