"Keep Things Simple" (Photo by Brett Jordan on Unsplash)
WATERLOO, Ontario — Imagine you’re facing a complex problem. Would you prefer a convoluted, multi-step solution or a straightforward approach that gets the job done? Researchers from the University of Waterloo found that most people instinctively choose simplicity — and there’s a fascinating psychological reason why.
The team discovered that humans have a deep-seated preference for simple explanations and efficient actions, a mental shortcut that might be hardwired into our cognitive processes. Led by PhD candidate Claudia Sehl, the study explored how people think about solving problems and understanding the world around them.
The team conducted seven experiments with 2,820 participants, presenting them with various scenarios that had both simple and complex explanations or solutions. Time and again, participants gravitated toward the most straightforward options. However, this isn’t just about laziness — it’s about our brain’s remarkable efficiency.
“These findings show that our preference for simpler explanations mirrors how we evaluate actions,” Sehl explains in a media release. “Simplicity isn’t just valued in explanations—it’s part of how we think about achieving results efficiently.”
The research uncovered a key psychological principle: people are drawn to explanations involving common and reliable causes. If a potential explanation seemed rare or unpredictable, participants were less likely to find it convincing. In essence, we’re mental economists, always looking for the most reliable return on our cognitive investment.
“Essentially, the more common and reliable a cause, the more appealing it became as both an explanation and a method for achieving outcomes,” Sehl notes.
The study suggests we’re hardwired to seek efficiency, preferring methods that do more with less.
“Our research suggests that people care a lot about efficiency—the idea of doing more with less—and that this focus on efficiency affects how people think about both explanations and accomplishments,” says co-author Ori Friedman.
Published in the journal Cognitive Psychology, this study offers a compelling glimpse into the human mind’s remarkable ability to streamline complex information. It’s a reminder that sometimes, the simplest explanation isn’t just the most elegant — it’s often the most powerful.
So, the next time you find yourself gravitating toward a straightforward solution, remember: it’s not just preference. It’s psychology in action.
Paper Summary
Methodology
The study investigated why people prefer simple explanations by comparing preferences for explanations and processes through seven experiments involving 2,820 participants. Participants were presented with scenarios involving both simple and complex methods to explain or produce outcomes. Some experiments included statistical information about the probability of these methods, while others did not. For instance, one vignette described how “Gozo flies” could turn purple by eating one or two substances.
Participants then judged which method was more appealing as an explanation or process. The experiments were conducted online, with participants sourced from reputable crowdsourcing platforms like Prolific and CloudResearch. Data collection and analysis were pre-registered, ensuring transparency and replicability.
Key Results
The study found that people generally prefer simpler explanations and methods when statistical data is absent. When statistical data indicating higher probabilities for complex methods was provided, preferences shifted. For example, participants often favored a simpler explanation unless the probability of the complex explanation was overwhelmingly higher.
Importantly, the preference for simplicity was consistent across explanations and processes, suggesting shared cognitive mechanisms at play. This means people might favor simplicity not because it’s an inherent virtue of explanations but because it aligns with broader cognitive preferences for efficiency.
Study Limitations
First, the scenarios used, like flies turning purple, may not fully capture real-world complexity. The findings might not generalize to domains where explanations require intricate reasoning or where the stakes are high. Additionally, the study focused on participants from specific demographics, primarily recruited online, which might not reflect global diversity. Lastly, the statistical manipulations might not account for other factors, such as emotional or cultural biases, that influence explanation preferences.
Discussion & Takeaways
This research sheds light on why simplicity often wins in human reasoning. Preferences for simple explanations and methods may arise from a general desire for efficiency in achieving goals. However, when presented with data indicating greater reliability of complex explanations, people are willing to adapt. This highlights the flexibility of human cognition and underscores the importance of context in decision-making. For educators, scientists, and communicators, understanding this preference can guide how information is presented to align with intuitive reasoning patterns.
Funding & Disclosures
The research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. The authors declared no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could influence the study. All materials, data, and analytic code are accessible through the Open Science Framework for full transparency.
Our Editorial Process
StudyFinds publishes digestible, agenda-free, transparent research summaries that are intended to inform the reader as well as stir civil, educated debate.We do not agree nor disagree with any of the studies we post, rather, we encourage our readers to debate the veracity of the findings themselves.All articles published on StudyFinds are vetted by our editors prior to publication and include links back to the source or corresponding journal article, if possible.
Read More →
Our Editorial Team
Steve Fink
Editor-in-Chief
Chris Melore
Editor
Sophia Naughton
Associate Editor
