False consensus effect
Overestimating how many other people share your beliefs, preferences and habits. What you would do seems like what most people would do.
What drives it
Validates your choices as normal and reasonable, and saves the effort of modelling minds that differ from yours.
How it shows
Work
'Everyone's fine with weekend email.' The founder sure the team shares the urgency. The manager who assumes blunt feedback is welcome because they would welcome it, then is surprised by the engagement survey. Product built for users who think like the founder.
Relationships
Assuming a partner wants the same kind of birthday, sex life or contact with family. 'Anyone would be upset by that.' Gifts that reflect the giver's taste.
Self
'Obviously' and 'everyone' attached to preferences. The tell in how you judge others is repeated surprise at how people react, which means you were using yourself as the model.
What tells it apart
Projection: Projection attributes a disowned, usually unwanted trait or impulse to someone; false consensus spreads views and habits you hold openly and are comfortable owning.
Naive realism: False consensus assumes most people agree with you and shows before disagreement surfaces; naive realism shows once it does, as the conviction that those who disagree are biased or uninformed.
Mind reading: Mind reading assumes you know what a specific person is thinking, usually something negative about you; false consensus is an overestimate of agreement across people in general.
A test
Ask people directly, anonymously if needed, before assuming; if the real spread of views is wider than you expected, you were projecting consensus.
Questions to carry
- Before assuming most people agree, who was actually asked, and how wide was the real spread of answers?
- Which of my habits do I treat as what any reasonable person would do?
How strong the research is
strong
Where it comes from
Lee Ross, David Greene and Pamela House, 1977