Malcolm Gladwell in his book, Blink, explains to us the inner workings of our rapid cognitions and snap judgements that often happen in the 'blink' of an eye. He maintains that we 'blink' when we think without thinking. We do this by 'thin slicing' or using limited or selective information to draw our conclusions. In our world today with it's bounty of information, Gladwell claims that experts make better and more accurate decisions using thin slicing than with using volumes of information and careful analysis.  In his book, Gladwell addresses questions about thin slicing and gives examples about 'blinking' from all different kinds of people and situations from gambling to divorce, to speed dating, tennis, art museums, hospitals, war games, popular music, car salesmen, and much more. Amongst these telling stories and examples are accounts of scientific studies that attempt to explain the largely unconscious phenomenon that we all experience in our daily lives whenever we are faced with a decision no matter how big or how small. Too much information can interfere with the accuracy of our judgements. The challenge is to be able to rapidly draw to the surface the most important and significant information only. Simplicity and Frugality of information can produce significantly improved judgements.

 Ultimately the book shows that how we blink is a result of our knowledge, training, education, and experiences. Gladwell uses the example of racial prejudice to show how our blinks can be effected negatively. Because prejudice is such a huge part of our society, it's hard for people to accurately judge certain situations where race is a factor, especially if it's high stakes or and emergency situation. This explains why leaders and people in high up positions are usually tall. Subconsciously and incorrectly, people must somehow associate tallness with success in leadership roles. Yet another example the book uses is the killing of Amadou Diallo, an innocent african american man, unarmed, who was shot 41 times by police because they mistakenly thought he was drawing a weapon. So while Gladwell gives a compelling argument for thin slicing and using our rapid cognition, he also shows why it can sometimes fail and may not always be as effective as it could potentially be. In the following paragraphs I will try to elaborate with some personal examples as well as some examples from Blink. 

One of Galdwell's case studies is discusses what he calls, "The Warren Harding Error." (Gladwell p. 72) In this study Gladwell examines how Warren Harding, former US president, worked his way up to becoming the commander in chief simply by looking like he would make a good president. Despite his appearance and the expectations of those who saw him and thought he would make a great leader, in the years since his presidency, many have remembered him as one of the worst presidents in the history of our nation. This would be an example of a time where its possible for our rapid cognitions to lead us astray. Gladwell says this about what he calls the dark side of rapid cognition, "Part of what it means to take thin slicing and first impressions seriously is accepting the fact that sometimes we can know more about something or someone in the blink of an eye than we can after months of study. But we also have to acknowledge and understand those circumstances when rapid cognition can lead us astray." Recently, I saw for myself what 'The Warren Harding Error' looked like in action. I was in a Culvers parking lot in West Allis pulling into the drive through. While stopped in the drive through, a car backed into my left bumper. I looked to see the car and the people that had hit me, and it was seemingly a very nice elderly couple. They stared back and waited a few seconds, but when I got out to talk to them they were pulling away out of the parking lot as if they'd never run into my bumper at all. This was something I maybe would have expected from someone my own age, to pull away and try to not take responsibility for their actions. My rapid cognition thought. "Oh, it's some nice elderly people who probably have had experience in this kind of thing. I'll just get their information and everything will be fine," but this was not the case. My rapid cognitions were wrong. And as Gladwell is not afraid to admit, sometimes they will be wrong.   

More often then not however they will be more correct than if you over think a situation. One aspect of this that Gladwell talks about in his book has to do with just your facial expressions. He studies the work of two scientists, Silvan Tomkins and Paul Ekman. What these scientists did was document, record, and examine in depth all the different muscle movements of our faces and the expressions they can combine to make and what the connotations are for each of them. Gladwell quotes Ekman on seeing Bill Clinton for the first time, "I was watching his facial expressions and I said to my wife, 'This is Peck's Bad Boy. This is a guy who wants to be caught with his hand in the cookie jar and have us love him for it anyway." Ekman already knew just from watching facial expressions, what kind of person Bill Clinton was, and ultimately what kind of president he would be as well. I experience success daily with this kind of rapid cognition everyday. I may not be able to reach the level of accuracy of Paul Ekman, but I know that when I talk to my boyfriend, parents, and friends on a regular basis, I am able to pick up on subtle clues in their faces that let me know what it is they are feeling or even thinking, and how they might act. This goes right along with Gladwell's ideas on how rapid cognitions can work, and how more or excess information can lead you farther away from the truth. Since reading blink I have picked up on the fact that your facial expressions can be much more telling than more information. Say me and my boyfriend have a discrepancy. He, being the nice person he is, never just comes out and tells me what's wrong right away, especially if it's something I do that bothers him, but I can see it in his face. So I gently ask again, until he comes forward with what's actually bothering him. If I wasn't able to pick up on these hints in his expression, he would just stay upset and nothing would ever get solved. 

Blink has forever re-educated me about how and why people make snap judgements and use their subconscious minds to make decisions. After reading this book, I don't think I'll ever be able to think about thinking in the same way again. It will have changed the way I make decisions, because where I once thought that the most information always resulted in the best out comes to any situation, I am now left questioning, having been giving examples where the excess of information was exactly the reason for peoples' failures. On the other hand, snap judgements have their dark side, and they can and will be incorrect at times, but to me the results we see time and time again in in the situations Gladwell gives us in Blink, prove that their really is a significant probability that our snap judgements benefit us more than they hurt us. Gladwell closes Blink by saying, "Once we know how the mind works- and about the strengths and weaknesses of human judgement- it is our responsibility to act." And I believe it will be our responsibility to act on drawing out the simplest and most important information first to ensure the success of any judgements we need to make in the 'blink' of an eye.