False consensus effect
The tendency to believe our opinions and choices are more common than they are, and to see those who choose differently as odd.
What problem it addresses
Explains why a team assumes everyone will use its product the way it does, and underpins the idea “you are not the user.”
An example
An illustrative example: a team decides how to order an app’s menu.
The team wasn’t careless: it was projecting its own way of thinking onto others.
Why it happens
We start from what we would do.
We use it to estimate what others will do.
And we find it odd when someone chooses differently.
Applications in design
Use it like this
When someone says “everyone gets it,” test it with real people before deciding.
Avoid
Using the team, your friends or yourself as a sample of your users.
Don’t fall for it
Knowing the bias exists doesn’t remove it: you need outside data.
62% vs. 33%
What the research says
Students were asked to walk around campus wearing an advertising sign. Those who agreed thought 62% would agree; those who refused thought only 33% would (Ross, Greene and House, 1977).
Solid evidence. A meta-analysis of 115 tests confirmed the effect, with a moderate size that changes depending on how the question is asked (Mullen et al., 1985).
Connections
Authors and works
- 1977
Lee Ross, David Greene and Pamela House
Demonstrated it with stories and with a real request; in every case, each person believed their own choice was the most common.
- 1985
Brian Mullen et al.
Pooled 115 tests from 23 studies and confirmed the effect is consistent.
Sources
Original sources
- Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13(3), 279–301. View source: Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977)
Academic reviews
- Mullen, B., Atkins, J. L., Champion, D. S., Edwards, C., Hardy, D., Story, J. E., & Vanderklok, M. (1985). The false consensus effect: A meta-analysis of 115 hypothesis tests. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21(3), 262–283. View source: Mullen, B., Atkins, J. L., Champion, D. S., Edwards, C., Hardy, D., Story, J. E., & Vanderklok, M. (1985)
Last reviewed: