Now
that summer’s here and we are knee deep in strawberries and tennis at
Wimbledon, our senses for individual’s primacy are being honed as the London
Olympics are rushing towards us with the excitement for our expectations building
like the anticipation of an English thunderstorm.
Long
past is the ideal that what matters is how we competed, not who won. Now first
is critical for health, wealth, and happiness. This is even more the case for
the Tour de France which starts this weekend. First is where it’s at, last is
nowhere.
So
where do we stand if we are devotees of Mathew (specifically 20:16 in the King
James version) or Bob Dylan with the “last being first and the first being
last”? Well in these ‘me first’ times, we don’t buy it. Carni and Banji have
worried about this and got down to doing some experiments that are reported out
this week (1).
The question was is the first thing that comes
along the winner in our choice. Most of us will say but buying a car is not
choosing the first one we’re shown, we want to see several and then we will
give the matter the benefit of our grey matter working overtime. Well, maybe
not.
The
first experiment was carried out by asking 123 participants to make choices of
which team they would like to join, which male salesperson they would buy their
car from and which female salesperson the would buy their car from. In each
case the choices were offered sequentially with strictly equal timing.
Participants went for the first ones offered.
The
next experiment was carried out in a rail stain in Boston where 207 lone
travellers were importuned to make a choice between two pieces of bubble gum
that looked similar except for the name. This wasn’t a considered decision
which you could give some thought to as in the first experiment. Well, at 2:1, the first
was popped into the mouth.
The
elephant in the room here is that in both experiments either first or second
choice would have been fine, so maybe the first in line was the no-brainer
decision. Things now went into a deeper mode. Thirty one participants were shown
picture of two criminals convicted of violent crimes in Florida and asked who
they would keep incarcerated and who they would parole. Of course, photos were
switched around, but again the first in line was chosen for parole, even if he
looked to be the most threatening.
So
it seems that the first in line is our choice whether they get there by
competitive advantage or random chance. Apply this to political hopefuls who we
have a healthy skepticism for their promises, the first to speak in a debate,
the first name at the top of the ballot, the first to kiss our baby – need I go
on, they are likely to be our first choice. I seem to recall that recently a
theory was put forward that a coin toss would give us all more effective
governments – could they be right?
