Mental modesl are the images, assumptions, and stories we carry in our minds about ourselves, others, institutions, and all aspects of our relationships with our evironment. Like a crystal that subly distors our vision, mental models determine what we see.
For Carlos Herreros de las Cuevas
We are going to try to present an introduction to mentalñ models and their relationshion with paradigms.
A person visit hs psychologist and says: » I just got fires for the seventh time in the last five years.
I have problems with my wife/husband and I have already been divorced three times. I desperately need your help to undestand. Why are there so many unhiged people in the world?
Let’s imagine that thism person, instead of going to his therapist, comes to you and you want to help. What wpuld you say? perhaps at firs he would reply: «It is true that there are many incosiderate bosses and perhaps there anre many hateful women / men.
But if you really want to help this person, then you will try to make him see his problems did not originate «outside him / her, in the world.»
At least in part, the reassons are this person’s assumptions adn beliefs about others.
If you cannot find a way to make him understand it, your attemos to helos him will be short-lived and will fail.
Mental models are the images, asumptions and stories we carry in our minds about ourselves, others institutions, and all aaspects pf our relationships with our environment.
Likea crystal a that subtly distorts our vision, mental models determine what we see.
The ladder of inferences
We live in a world of self-generated and unquestioned beliefs.
We adopt these beliefs because they are based on conclusions, wihotch are inferred from what we observe, in addition to our past experience,
Our ability to archive desired results is undermined by our belief that:
- Our beliefs are the truth.
- The truth us evident.
- Our beliefs are based on real data.
- The dara we select is the actual data.
For example, I make a presentation ti my company’s marketing team.
Every is paying attemtion except Mario, one of my superiors, who is sitting at the end of the table looking bored and distracted.
He doesn’t look at my face and yawns even though he covers his mouth with is hand.
It doesn’t ask any questions until my report is finished and then following dialog is established:
- Okay, Jaime, I understand I think we should ask you for more complete report.
- But Mario seems to me that what I have presented is quite complete and he marketing department needs quick solutions.
- It is true. Anyway, I do not think that a few more days of analysis will mean too much waiting and it is better to be more sure that our sales force understands and assumes the measures we adopt.
- Of course, everything can be improved, Mario, but it would also be worth he experimenting, trying with different clients and thus we will have some conclusions, even if they are provisional.
- You’re right, develop them further and we will analyze them the day after tomorrow. For now we finish this meeting.
He has told me all this, Jaime, who has much more experience than him and, furthermore, I am in contact with our salespeople and he only deals with important customers.
In our culture, Mario’s proposal tends to be understood as a reprimand or as a criticism for not having delved deeper into the report. Everyone keeps their papers and notes. Obviously, Mario considers me incompetent, which is a shame because our behavios needs these ideas.
Now that I think about it, he never liked my ideas. Mario is ambitious. When I sit down, I have already made a decision.
I will not include in the report anything that could be of use to Mario. He wouldn’t read it or worse, he woud use it against me.
In a few second, I have climbed all the rungs of the “ladder of inferences”, a mental path of increasing abstraction that leads to misconceptions.
- I started with observable data: Mario’s comment, as obvious as it would appear in a video recording.
- I selected some details about Mario’s behavior: he did noo look me in the face and tried to suppress a yawn ( I did not notice that, a moment before, he was listening carefully).
- I added some meaning of my own based on the culture of the company: Mario wanted me to fisish as soon as possible.
- I quickly moved on to assumption about Mario’s mood ( he doesn’t care what I say).
- I concluded that Mario considers me incompetent. Futhermore, Mario and all his associates have become enemies.
- Thus, when I rach the top rung of the ladder, I begin to conspire against him.
Everything seems so reasonable and happens so fast that don’t even realize what I did. Futhermore, all the rungs of the ladder are in my head.
The only parts visible to others are the observable data on the first rung; if I decide to do it, my decision to act on the top rung.
The rest of the journey, the stairway where I spend most of the time, remains hidden, undisputed and abstract.
Perhaps you have climbed that ladder of inferences many times. The more I think Mario is bad person, the more I reinforce my tendency to notice his malicious behavior.
This phenomenon is known as “the reflective cycle”: our beliefs influence the data that we will select the next time. And there is another opposite reflective cycle in Mario’s mind: by reacting against my behavior that misses him because of its antagonism, he may be climbing his own ladder.
Without anyone knowing why, we will quickly indentify each other as bitter enemies. Maybe Mario was bored by presentation or maybe he wanted to commission the report from someone else. Maybe I’m shy, or afraid of embarrassing myself in public. Have I come up with other equally reasonable explanations?
How to use the ladder of inferences?
We cannot live without addng meaning or drawing conclusions as it would be an arid and tedious way of life. But we can improve our communcations rhrough reflection and using the ladder of inferences in three ways:
- Acquiring greater awareness of our thoughts and reasoning (reflection).
- By making our thoughts more visible to others (plea).
- Inquiring the thinking and reasoning of others (inquiry).
Once Mario and I understand the concepts behind the “ladder of inferences”, we have a way to stop the conversation and ask several questions:
- What are the obserbable data that support this claim?
- Does everyone agree on the validity of the data?
- Cab you share your reasoning with me?
- How do we get from the data t these abstract assumtions?
- When did you say (“you inference”) you mean (my interpretation of it)?
4001universeodissey 