Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior by Ori Brafman

Mar 19, 2009 Trevor rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: behavioural-economics

First you need to find yourself an interesting verb – Sway in this case, obviously, but Snoop is also good, as is Stick. It doesn’t have to start with ‘s’ – there’s Blink as well, of course. Then you need some really good stories about people at the end of their tether. Plane accidents are particularly good for this. Both Outliers and Sway both have plane crashes and both have you at the edge of your seat waiting for the inevitable.

Then you need ‘get-out-of-here’ psychology tests – honestly, who...more First you need to find yourself an interesting verb – Sway in this case, obviously, but Snoop is also good, as is Stick. It doesn’t have to start with ‘s’ – there’s Blink as well, of course. Then you need some really good stories about people at the end of their tether. Plane accidents are particularly good for this. Both Outliers and Sway both have plane crashes and both have you at the edge of your seat waiting for the inevitable.

Then you need ‘get-out-of-here’ psychology tests – honestly, who comes up with the ideas for these things and why, WHY, are they still allowed to out on the streets? Clearly these people are a danger to themselves, their families and the rest of the community. I mean, who would think to test how much more attractive you find a woman after crossing a rickety bridge? What sort of sociopath would you need to be for that to present itself as something that you might like to test?

If you do want to write one of these books it also seems to help if you are from Israel. I’m not going to pretend I understand this final connection – but that has been true of both this one and Predictably Irrational. Oh, and you might want to write the book with your brother. Not sure how this works either, but it does seem to. Made to Stick was also written by a pair of brothers.

I have read so many of these books lately and I’m currently also struggling my way through another called Nudge (again written by two people, but this time not brothers, or even related – although both male). Even if I feel I’m overdosing on this stuff, this one was a particularly fine example of the genre.

This was good not so much because all of the examples were new, but because they put an interesting twist on the interpretation of what these odd behaviours might ‘mean’.

I’m not going to go into the explanation of why the chief pilot in charge of safety for an airline might end up causing the worst plane crash of all time – although, this would be as good a reason to read this book as any other I can think of, nor any of the other seemingly endless examples of human irrational behaviour. But I do mean to talk about who wants to be a millionaire, because this has really made me think.

I really love the French. I know people don’t like them for some reason or other, generally involving some talk of arrogance, but I love their sense of humour and I love their sense of style. That whole stuff-the-rest-of-you-we’re-French thing or the, if we want to blast the b’Jesus out of some atoll in the South Pacific, well, it is our atoll. And if you want to stop drinking our wine to protest – what can we say, but you will only be punishing yourselves. I would love to have that level of self-confidence.

I was talking to someone the other week about the whole ‘Freedom Fries’ thing – but I had forgotten some of the details of this story. This is retold here in full and is probably worth the price of the book for that alone. I had missed the French reply to the proposal to change the name of French Fries to Freedom Fries simply because the French had the audacity to say that it might be dumb to invade Iraq. I hadn’t realised they had responded by saying something to the effect of, “This is much more important than potatoes”. Given that most rational people in the world would now agree with France probably means we should change the name again to Fickle Fries.

But I distract myself. The best bit of this book is the description of the French version of who wants to be a millionaire when the contestant turned to ask the audience the answer to what ought to have been a simple question of astronomy – what revolves around the earth and the audience effectively said ‘stuff you’. The Wisdom of Crowds points out that if you ever end up on this show and find yourself in difficulty you should rely on the answer given by the audience, as in the US the audience gets the right answer over 90% of the time. But in France or Russia this is not quite so simple a choice. In France if the audience thinks you are too thick to deserve to win they are just as likely on mass to give you the wrong answer. In Russia if they think you are stepping too far out of line they are also as likely to give you the wrong answer. Imagine that! Imagine that there are cultures that will decide whether to help you or not based on whether they think you deserve to win or not. This discussion really fascinated me.

I really liked that this one started each chapter with a whole series of what were virtually headlines and it was only as you got into the chapter that you began to understand that “We don’t even know where the tunnel is” might refer to LBJ.

But the bit of this book that will stay with me for months is the random attribution of ‘gradings’ to soldiers and how this got the soldiers to live up to how they were graded. If you ever needed some proof about why you should encourage your kids – this is it.

This is a wonderfully well written book and one that really could not fail to amuse. Yet another of the long line of books on the troublesome boarder between economics and psychology that have been providing me with so much joy lately.
(less)

19 likes · like · see review

Jul 01, 2008 Lena rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction, how-the-brain-works

I was not at all in the mood for another non-fiction book about human behavior when my husband asked if I wanted to read this one before he returned it to the library. I half-heartedly decided to scan a few pages before saying no, but I was quickly sucked in to a fictionalized re-creation of the last few hours in the cockpit of the KLM flight responsible for the 1977 Tenerife crash that claimed the lives of 583 people.

Though this book looks at research from social psychology, behavioral economic...more

12 likes · like · see review

Jun 01, 2008 Lisa Vegan rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: everyone - except those who never read nonfiction, but maybe they’d appreciate this one

Shelves: advance-copy, reviewed, gr-author, non-fiction, psychology, from-author-publisher, altta

This book is very readable and entertaining, and so engaging that I just kept reading and didn’t read the notes until after I’d finished the book, which is unusual for me. It’s fascinating knowlege for anyone who has an interest in universal human nature and/or group dynamics.

The authors take a bunch of existing studies and do a tremendous job of presenting a cogent thesis about why human beings can exhibit such irrational behaviors. I was familiar with many of the studies cited in the book; I w...more This book is very readable and entertaining, and so engaging that I just kept reading and didn’t read the notes until after I’d finished the book, which is unusual for me. It’s fascinating knowlege for anyone who has an interest in universal human nature and/or group dynamics.

The authors take a bunch of existing studies and do a tremendous job of presenting a cogent thesis about why human beings can exhibit such irrational behaviors. I was familiar with many of the studies cited in the book; I was even a participant in a friend's version of the “different lengths of lines” study described.

I recommend this book to everyone, because it shows that even if we believe we’re logical and independent thinkers and reasonable in our decision making, and assume that we possess impeccable common sense, that there are factors at work that often make our assumptions not so. You may be surprised by the findings presented here re loss aversion, pull of commitment, value attribution, diagnostic bias, etc. Even if these concepts are not new to you, the way the information is presented here will make you think. Now that I’ve read this book, I’m confident that remembering the material presented will help me think before I act. I do think of myself as someone who thinks and makes decisions in a logical manner, although even though before I read this, I was very aware of my own aversion to loss, and also my tendency to be influenced by value attribution; the latter is something I’ve actually tried to work on with some success.

I’d like to see this book assigned as an adjunct text for many psychology, sociology, economics, business, and education classes. I also hope that it’s read by every person who is in a position of power, especially our elected officials and those such as airplane pilots and others in similarly responsible jobs. Also finding it helpful would be those who work with others, including HR people (although preferably not those who will interview me for jobs since historically I do “very well” in job interviews, even though I’ve always thought they’ve had limitations.)

My favorite portions of the book were the part that described the brain centers of altruism vs. pleasure, because that research was brand new information for me, and also the part where Stephen Breyer describes his process doing his work as a Supreme Court Justice, just because I found his explanation so fascinating. I also was extremely entertained by the $20 bill story, and I assume that all readers will find this story enjoyable, unless they were ever one of the final two participants in this or a similar activity.

I appreciate that, while this is not a self-help book, reading the book isn’t an exercise in futility; having this information actually gives the readers tools to empower themselves.

The formatting of the chapter headings is very clever too, as it ties into the sway/pull theme of the book.
(less)

3 likes · like · see review

Aug 29, 2008 Otis Chandler rated it 4 of 5 stars

Recommended to Otis by: kareem

Shelves: business, nonfiction, selfhelp, psychology

Great book. Quick read, and you learn about about psychology that you can apply to life or business.

A few notes:
- All about first impressions. First impressions can sway our opinion of something for years to come regardless of subsequent performance.
- Labels matter. If you label someone as a higher performer, top of class, leader, having command potential, etc - it will translate into them actually having it. My high school motto was Principes Non Homines (leaders not men) - now I know why they...more

5 likes · like · see review

Nov 23, 2008 Brian rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction

Quick read - 181 pages. I banged it out over two days. Sway is a social economic book from the same vein as Freakonomics and The Tipping Point. The authors descibe psychological forces that can "sway" people into irrational decision making. Several well stated examples are given to support the authors theories throughout.

Overall, Sway is entertaining. It falls short on meaningful substance, and some areas are fluff laden. However, there are several interesting points illustrated through engaging...more

3 likes · like · see review

Jul 08, 2009 David rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: read-in-2009

This book covers roughly the same behavioral economics territory considered in such recent books as Dan Ariely's "Predictably Irrational" (http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/....) and "Nudge" by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein (http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/....) It had been stalking me on my Amazon recommendations queue for at least a year, but I had resisted it successfully until this weekend, when I came across it in the bookstore and finally succumbed.

I'm glad I did. I wasn't expe...more This book covers roughly the same behavioral economics territory considered in such recent books as Dan Ariely's "Predictably Irrational" (http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/....) and "Nudge" by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein (http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/....) It had been stalking me on my Amazon recommendations queue for at least a year, but I had resisted it successfully until this weekend, when I came across it in the bookstore and finally succumbed.

I'm glad I did. I wasn't expecting to learn anything new, necessarily, but neither was I expecting a book as funny and engaging as this turned out to be. The Brafman brothers are whip smart, enthusiastic guides on this brilliant overview of recent research in behavioral science. As far as I can tell, throughout the book they are engaged in summarizing results of other people’s investigations (unlike Ariely or Sunstein & Cass, who are often reporting on their own, or colleagues’, work). They do it very well – clearly, succinctly, and with great examples. The book doesn’t discuss ways to trigger more honest behavior, as Ariely did in “Predictably Irrational”, neither does it contain the kind of discussion of implications for sensible public policy that was such a strength of “Nudge”. It does, however, provide a very lucid discussion of pitfalls to avoid in group decision-making.

My favorite story in the book has to be that of the French “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” audience who were apparently so disgusted by the contestant’s inability to answer the question “What revolves around the earth?” that they figured he deserved to be booted, so that 56% gave the answer “the sun”. It worked. Hapless Henri took the bait and was kicked off. (Russian audiences are apparently the worst on WWTBAM; regularly providing the wrong answer when polled. There is speculation that this stems from a broadly held Russian view that anyone trying to get ahead by amassing great personal wealth is, by definition, behaving anti-socially, and thus deserves to be cut down to size (the tall poppy syndrome at work)).

An interesting and well-executed book.
(less)

2 likes · like · see review

Aug 11, 2008 Jonathan rated it 4 of 5 stars

Very entertaining. It feels like the authors have just kind of thrown a lot of material together, but the material is fascinating. Roughly speaking, the book is about how people's behavior and decisions are driven by psychological factors they aren't aware of.

Just to give an example, there was a study dealing with the impact of first impressions in which a class of college students were told they would have a substitute instructor for that day's lecture. Bios of the lecturer were handed out, an...more

1 like · like · see review

Aug 04, 2008 Jackie "the Librarian" rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: If you enjoy books such as Freakonomics

Recommended to Jackie "the Librarian" by: Lisa Vegan

Shelves: non-fiction

That street musician might just be a musical genius - you never know! Beware of making assumptions about the value of something based on superficial appearances, or you may miss out on a masterpiece, like the stolen painting in a cheap frame, left out with the trash, and found on the streets of New York by a woman with a discerning eye.
Give yourself permission to go against the crowd, and question authority when you have legitimate questions. In other words, don't let yourself fall prey to bein...more

1 like · like · see review

Apr 10, 2011 Bonnie rated it 3 of 5 stars

liked the concept, didn't like the writing style. Not as good as "the drunkards walk"

1 like · like · see review

Oct 18, 2012 Ashley Borda added it

In the Brafman brother's book "Sway The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior" they discuss the fact that as humans, we act rationally most of the time. Especially in situations where we are expected to, like work or school. Yet for some reason sometimes we don't, no matter how professional we think we are. The Brafman's told a story about KLM Flight 4805. The pilot of this flight was one of the most trustworthy, experienced, highly trained pilots at the time. He was the best pilot that the a...more In the Brafman brother's book "Sway The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior" they discuss the fact that as humans, we act rationally most of the time. Especially in situations where we are expected to, like work or school. Yet for some reason sometimes we don't, no matter how professional we think we are. The Brafman's told a story about KLM Flight 4805. The pilot of this flight was one of the most trustworthy, experienced, highly trained pilots at the time. He was the best pilot that the airline had and they were certainly not apprehensive at all to show him off. When a terrorist attack caused an unplanned early landing, the pilot behaved as rationally as he normally would, but as time passed he began to think about ways to make up for lost time. At this moment in time the pilot began to think irrationally. The Brafman's explanation for this kind of behavior is that humans tend to overreact to potential losses. Meaning, that as humans, we are more focused on the short-term consequences rather then the long-term effects that actually matter. This is what the pilot of the flight did on this day. He saw the potential of an overnight flight delay as a loss and tried to think of every solution possible to this problem. The "solution" that the pilot came up with was deciding to go ahead and rev up the engines and continue with take-off without takeoff clearance and in low visibility. As a result he collided with a parked plane and caused 584 lives to be lost, including his own.
I agree with Rom and Ori Brafman's theory of humans overreacting to potential losses because I can relate to this in my everyday life. I try to make up for lost time almost everyday when I am going to school or work. If I think that I am going to be late, I tend to drive a lot faster then I normally would. Which is me diverting to irrational behavior. I am not thinking about the consequences of my actions when I start to drive faster, I just do it. I don't think about what would happen if I got a speeding ticket or somehow got into an accident. I just begin to behave irrationally instead of using my brain and remaining calm. This idea will lead me to change my actions in the future because when I start to think irrationally about a certain situation, I will try to keep calm, and keep my rational thinking. I think that everyone should read this section of this book because this is an idea that is not just used in business' or by CEO's, this is an idea that can be used in day to day life. I think that if people are more aware of human tendencies like this then they would be less likely to surrender to them. (less)

like · see review

Oct 17, 2012 Nick rated it 3 of 5 stars

Ori and Rom Brafman provide a quick read on the psychology of irrational human behavior. Sway will prove useful to anyone interested in understanding both why people and groups behave the way they do and also how to influence that behavior.

The Brafman's focus on why individuals and groups sometimes behave irrationally. They point to three psychological processes, (1) loss aversion, (2) commitment, and (3) value attribution.

People and groups succumb to loss aversion when they ignore maximizing ga...more Ori and Rom Brafman provide a quick read on the psychology of irrational human behavior. Sway will prove useful to anyone interested in understanding both why people and groups behave the way they do and also how to influence that behavior.

The Brafman's focus on why individuals and groups sometimes behave irrationally. They point to three psychological processes, (1) loss aversion, (2) commitment, and (3) value attribution.

People and groups succumb to loss aversion when they ignore maximizing gains in favor of avoiding losses. Withdrawing when some loss has occurred insulates you from future loss but guarantees at least some degree of loss. In this situation, perseverance becomes attractive even with an extremely small likelihood of future gains and with a very high price for delaying failure.

Commitment resembles inertia, the tendency for an object in motion to remain in motion. The Brafman's describe commitment in human behavior as the difficulty of abandoning the behavior done yesterday. Commitment makes giving up a losing strategy very difficult. Joined together, l commitment and loss aversion make abandoning a losing behavior nearly impossible, even if it is highly likely that doing so will avoid even greater future losses.

Value attribution applies to how people make snap judgments about the world. When we imbue someone or something with qualities based on our perception of their value rather than on objective data, we are succumbing to value attribution. When Joshua Bell, one of the world's best violinists, gave a free concert, only one person attended. The concert was part of a Washington Post study and revealed the power of value attribution. Bell played some of the most challenging pieces ever written for the violin, but he did so wearing casual clothes in a subway station. The only person who appeared to realize what she was witnessing did so because she recognized Bell's face. Value attribution caused thousands of people streaming by Bell to categorize him as just another street musician, not a virtuoso, largely on the context of his performance. I wonder, if a street performer were booked at Carnegie Hall, would those same subway riders pay hundreds of dollars to see her?

When we encounter someone or something new and create a value attribution, we then fall prey to a diagnosis bias, a propensity to continually evaluate something based on our initial impressions of it. The diagnosis bias lays three traps. The first catches us when we ignore facts that contradict our initial diagnosis . The second snares us when we use objectively arbitrary information to support our subjective diagnosis. The third requires a bit more explanation. When we diagnose someone with a label and they know about that label, they tend to take on the characteristics of that label. Our diagnosis generates a confirmation bias in the labeled person that then reinforces our initial diagnosis. This may sound strange, but experiments support this effect.

The Brafman's also offer lessons on group behavior. When Solomon Asch put test subjects in a room and asked them to judge the lengths of three lines, then match which of the three was the same length as a fourth line, he discovered how being in a group can lead to irrational behavior. In the experiment, all but one subject were paid actors instructed to agree with each other on a wrong answer. The answer of which line matched the length of the fourth line was obvious; even so, given the group dynamic of agreement on a wrong answer 75% of subjects went along with the wrong answer in at least one round of the experiment. When Asch changed the setup and instructed one of the actors to disagree with the others, the subjects were "freed up" to disagree, even when the dissenting actor chose the wrong answer. Just having one person break ranks made room for dissent.

The work of David Kantor adds to this. He found four basic types of behavior in family units. Initiators constantly offer new ideas and drive activity. Blockers criticize new ideas. Supporters choose sides between initiators and blockers. Observers remain neutral, sometimes commenting on the discussion. Looking at Asch's and Kantor's work reveals a bit about group dynamics. When groups lack blocker types, members prone to supporter or observer behavior may have dissenting opinions but will remain silent. The presence of blockers--even if they are objectively wrong in their arguments--may free up supporters and observers to contribute their critical views. Thus Kantor says blockers are critical to maintaining the balance of groups and slowing them from "going off the rails."

The Brafman's propose that people and organizations naturally seek initiators and repel blockers, but doing so may expose them to the risks of loss aversion, commitment, and value attribution without blockers to free up dissenting views.

This may all sound useless to all but the academically inclined, but Dr. Barbara Kanki's work with NASA studying cockpit crew performance in air disasters shows it might just save your life. When studied in simulators, cockpit crew performance in disaster scenarios depended more on management skills than technical flight skills, meaning that how the group made decisions meant more than how well they could fly the plane. After a particularly deadly runway collision between two 747s killed over 500 people, airlines instituted new procedures based on findings that what I'll call "tyrant captains"--captains solely responsible for making decisions about plane operation without input from the rest of the flight crew--would benefit from being "blocked" by members of the flight crew with different opinions. The dangers of loss aversion, commitment, and value attribution that seem so arcane become matters of life and death for airline passengers relying on good decision making by the flight crew. The new procedures put in place by airlines freed up flight crew members to present criticism of a captain's decisions by training flight crews in how to become blockers, leading to flight crews making more informed, better decisions for their passengers.

Irrational behavior can have serious, negative consequences in the real world. Strategies to reduce irrational behavior may decrease the likelihood of such consequences by helping individuals and groups make better decisions.
(less)

like · see review

Mar 16, 2012 Lynne Favreau rated it 5 of 5 stars

I’ve been considering people’s motivations, trying to figure out why we make the choices we do, in an attempt to understand what may have precipitated the actions of characters I’m writing about. Sway caught my eye on the list of books I wanted to read and turned out to be a pretty interesting. Unexpectedly, this book gave me a lot to think about as far as trying to come up with rationales (however irrational) for why my characters might make the choices they do.

The Brafman brothers illustrate t...more I’ve been considering people’s motivations, trying to figure out why we make the choices we do, in an attempt to understand what may have precipitated the actions of characters I’m writing about. Sway caught my eye on the list of books I wanted to read and turned out to be a pretty interesting. Unexpectedly, this book gave me a lot to think about as far as trying to come up with rationales (however irrational) for why my characters might make the choices they do.

The Brafman brothers illustrate their point of view by using some high profile instances of irrational decision making, such as the crash of KLM Flight 4805 in which 584 people died, the space shuttle crash, people and business references that the general public would be familiar with.

I think it was a good strategy to use these, the material is actually quite profound. It is easy to follow the logic of irrational behavior when you can place yourself in the situation. Which was a funny place to be, considering it forces you to realize how many time you personally have made irrational decisions.

Ori, who has an MBA, relates his first day of business school. During the first class Professor Roberto Fernandez stated to the students, “People aren’t rational.” Then he went on to illustrate just how irrational they are by way of a film showing doctors performing open heart surgery and pouring asbestos onto the heart. And in another example they examined an engineer report about “...the likelihood of a mechanical failure as temperatures drop.” evidence that NASA had concerning the O-rings predicted failure before the launch of the space shuttle Challenger. “Fernandez’s point was that although we all like to think of ourselves as rational, we’re much more prone to irrational behavior than we realize.”

Each of the books chapters center around one particular habit or trait of irrational behavior. One such is “Diagnosis Bias” such as when a health care professional mistakenly assigns you a label like, “overly protective mother” and dismisses vital signs of a serious health problem as described in the preface. Another chapter centered on “Loss Aversion” I think one of the more prevalent irrational behaviors, and one I can see most people identifying with. It is when you perceive a loss to be greater than the real loss. There were several examples using phone or cable service. We’ll pay more for an “unlimited time use” because we are afraid of what we’d lose if we had to stay within a limit and pay more if we exceed it, even though we have the evidence that we don’t exceed it, it’s the implied “what if I do” that gets us to act irrationally.

I won’t go into all the stories, there are so many in what is a small book it’s hard to pick out just a few. I am already rereading it, taking notes for ideas on character behavior. This was interesting to think about from a writing standpoint. To think about my characters not behaving because of a clearly defined childhood event or circumstance but acting irrationally as anyone of us is prone to do.

The one irrational behavior the book talked about is one that gives me more reason to hate the current school system and what I’d already considered to be irrational behavior. Money as incentive for academic excellence, it just doesn’t work. Teachers can not put the students needs ahead of their own if outcomes are tied to monetary rewards.

MRI’s show “...the pleasure center and the altruistic center cannot both function at the same time: either one or the other is in control.” Meaning, that teachers teach for the high of inspiring students -the altruistic or they do it for the bonus -the pleasure.

“Neuropsychologist have shown that activities associated with addictive substances and those associated with monetary rewards are both processed by the pleasure center. Because monetary incentives present such a strong allure to us they distort our thinking.” What happens is teachers instead of acting in the interests of the students, that is inspiring them to learn, they instead, become focused on test scores “chasing the reward.”(less)

like · see review

Jul 10, 2011 Jill Furedy rated it 3 of 5 stars

Sway was a quick read filled with lots if sociological studies, which I always find interesting, and yet when I closed the book I felt like I hadn't gotten a thing out of it. The main studies I remember is the 'dissenters voice in a group" and the "subway musician/art in the dumpster" scenarios. But there wasn't a lot of practical application...for instance, I was interested in the job interview section. But it told me what questions not to ask, gave me a vague idea of what questions might be be...more

like · see review

May 28, 2011 Jeana rated it 3 of 5 stars

Quick, entertaining read that brought me back to my college Psych 1 class. Unlike college though, reading summaries of psych studies seems to make things "click" a bit more now, as you see these findings being played out in your daily life, especially in work situations. I think the authors could have done a better job of defining "irrational behavior" or the reasons behind why we might act in seemingly irrational ways.

I especially found the snippets on how the concept of loss alters our behavi...more

like · see review

Feb 14, 2011 Sandra Strange rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: history-and-nonfiction

Another great nonfiction read, this book examines the ways in which we derail our decisions, ignoring rational considerations for the irrational pull of obstinacy or out of perceptions of unfairness. The engaging writing helps a lot, but what's most fun to read is the experiences and experiments that support and dramatize the "pull of irrational behavior" the authors are discussing. Some of the most fun: if someone you cannot identify must divide a sum of money, offering you as much (or as littl...more

like · see review

Jan 20, 2011 Shannon Smith rated it 4 of 5 stars

For me, this book falls into the same genre as Malcolm Gladwell’s books and Freakonomics, all of which I rather enjoy. It contains a lot of anecdotes that build to push a single point. The point driven home in this book is that there are underlying forces that are always at work “swaying” us towards doing things that from the outside seem irrational.

It was a very quick read, but a good one. While reading it, I found myself analyzing situations in my life where the forces they discuss might be at...more

like · see review

Nov 28, 2010 Rhonda rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: read-in-2010

Really liked this...a study on why we sometimes do things that are so uncharacteristic for us, and what sways us to do them.

It discussed that there are four distinct roles people play in group decisions. Of course, the initiator who comes up with the idea, bad or good, followed by the blocker, the one who helps maintain balance in the group and presents the other side. Soon the supporter steps in and takes the side of one or the other. The observer stays fairly neutral and tends to just comment...more Really liked this...a study on why we sometimes do things that are so uncharacteristic for us, and what sways us to do them.

It discussed that there are four distinct roles people play in group decisions. Of course, the initiator who comes up with the idea, bad or good, followed by the blocker, the one who helps maintain balance in the group and presents the other side. Soon the supporter steps in and takes the side of one or the other. The observer stays fairly neutral and tends to just comment on what's going on. Think about it, this is so true.

Favorite Quotes:

"The more we become aware of the factors affecting the perceived value of a person or object, the less likely we are to be swayed by value attribution. But not all sways are so easily vanquished. It's virtually impossible fo rus not to make judgments about people and situations. We judge, or diagnose, the world around us (and , in turn, get diagnosed) all the time. In the case of job interviews, we can reduce our tendency toward the diagnosis bias by instituting regimented structures that force us to focus on objective data. " p 177

"What personal construct theory teaches us is to remain flexible and examine things from different perspectives. Epting explained that this approach is called "propositional thinking." It's all about keeping evaluations tentative instead of certain, learning to be comfortable with complex, sometimes contradictory information, and taking your time and considering things from different angles before coming to a conclusion. It can be as straightforward as coming up with a kind of self-imposed 'waiting period' before making a diagnostic judgment.
When it comes to the fairness sway, our emotional reaction can be just as intractable and difficult to set aside. One way to counter the fairness sway is to try to weigh things objectively and not succumb to emotional maneuvers or moral judgments." p 178

"If you've ever been fortunate enough to work for a boss who values and believes in you, you'll know that you tend to rise to meet the hugh expectations set for you. On the other hand, there's nothing that will make you feel more incompetent and demoralized than a supervisor who is convinced you don't have what it takes." p 99

"Just as communicating our process is important, so is giving voice to the dissenter. In group situations, the presence of a blocker can actually make the decision-making process more rational and less likely to go off the tracks. It gives us a new apreciation for someone who tends to play 'devil's advocate.' The term originated in the Vatican to refer to a priest designated to argue against a papal nominee. The priest assigned to represent the devil's position, so to speak, brought balance to the debate. Although no one is likely to win a popularity contest by playing the devil's advocate, businesses would do well to repect a dissenting opinion---if not straight-out encourage someone to take on such a role. The dissenter, of course, is as likely to be wrong as anybody else, but the discussion of the points made by the dissenter can add perspective to the debate." p 180

"The fact is, all of us are swayed at times by factors that have nothing to do with logic or reason. ... It is only by recognizing and understanding the hidden world of sways that we can hope to weaken their influence and curb their power over our thinking and our lives." p 180-181

(less)

like · see review

Sep 24, 2010 Barnaby Thieme rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: psychology

I wish I could recommend this book, as the topic is an interesting and important one, but I can't. It's simply not well written or organized.

Brafman treats the hot topic of cognitive biases and nonconscious factors that contribute to decision making, an area which has received enormous attention in recent years in cognitive and social psychology (Wegner, Wilson), and economics (Tversky).

I gather what he's trying to do is to present some of the basic findings to a lay audience. Either Brafman's...more

2 likes · like · see review

Jul 17, 2010 Kelly rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: people who are curious about human decision-making behavior

I've been reading a lot of books like this lately--books that talk about how irrational humans are. Basically, all of them have me convinced that we are doomed, and this one is no different. I mean, it's fine that we made idiotic decisions or simply don't understand probability or cause and effect when we were hunting and gathering, but now that we have things like nuclear bombs, it's more frightening.

One of the stories in the book is about the worst plane crash in history (Tenerife, KLM/Pan Am...more I've been reading a lot of books like this lately--books that talk about how irrational humans are. Basically, all of them have me convinced that we are doomed, and this one is no different. I mean, it's fine that we made idiotic decisions or simply don't understand probability or cause and effect when we were hunting and gathering, but now that we have things like nuclear bombs, it's more frightening.

One of the stories in the book is about the worst plane crash in history (Tenerife, KLM/Pan Am, 584 deaths). The cause of the accident was the decision made by the KLM captain, who was a celebrated pilot who also happened to head the airline's saftey program and appeared as a smiling face representing KLM in glossy magazines, to take off without clearance. The authors did a good job of explaining all the pressure he was under and the various mini-decisions he had made along the way leading up to his last one, but ultimately he made an arrogant decision that killed a ton of people. This decision did sort of reinvigorate the industry's approach to safety and pilot training, however. Silver lining, tra-la-la.

There are several such stories, most not so famous. One thing the authors are good at is connecting apparently unrelated irrational behaviors, which results in a better understanding of all of them. For instance, Chapter 4 starts off talking about the NBA draft and how (higher) amount of court play time correlated better with the player's (earlier) order placement in draft, rather than their actual performance when they did get on the court. In other words, people assumed earlier draft picks were better players and largely disregarded their actual performance. This tendency to prejudge and/or make our minds up on first impressions alone is present in many other areas. In one study, a guest professor was introduced to some students as a "very warm person" and to others as a "rather cold person", before giving a lecture to all of them together. Their feedback to the lecture was split into two camps, one positive and one negative. Unsurprisingly, the positive ones had received the bio describing him as warm and the negative ones the bio describing him as warm.

This type of thing is clearly related to a very important interaction that most of us have repeatedly in our lives: the job interview. Basically, most interviewers are completely incompetent. The authors say most use the "first-date", unstructured interview format, which reveals virtually no information about the candidate's ability to do the job or even really fit in with the company. They report on studies of college freshman in new relationships. Almost all of them had positive views about their relationship's future, even when their friends and family did not (these outsider predictions were far more accurate, as well). Both the actual students and their friends/family were aware of the actual flaws in the relationship, but the student tended to disregard the importance of them. They didn't want to believe they mattered, so they downplayed their importance, even when these were the things that ultimately brought the relationship to an end. Hiring managers do the same type of things. Of all the most common standard questions for interviews (like, "Why should I hire you?", "How would you describe yourself?", "What do you see yourself doing five years from now?", etc.), only "What do you know about our company?" will reveal useful information about the candidate. (And the question isn't even ABOUT the interviewee!) They point out that interviews are a poor predictor in general, because some people are just better at selling themselves than others. And unless the interviewer is a sales position, this would seem irrelevant. I think this says something about speed dating, too.

The authors also report on a bizarre "experiment" carried out by the marketing department of a South African bank. They sent out offer letters for a new loan with varying features: different interest rates (3.25-7.75%/month), info on competitors' rates, giveaways, and/or a photo of a smiling man or woman. They found that men who received a letter with a picture of a woman were much more likely to sign up than men who received letters with a photo of a man. They said the effect was the same as dropping the interest 4.5%. I mean, not to be rude, but COME ON. It's the brain that's for thinking, guys.

So now that I've given you a synopsis of Chapter 4, you can skip that one when you read this book. But whether you do actually read it or not, we're all doomed. Doomed, doomed, doomed.(less)

like · see review

Feb 17, 2010 Julie rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: business-and-society

Sway deals with one of my favourite topics: why we're not as rational as we think. In fact, Sway highly reminiscent of Predictably Irrational (one of my favourite non-fiction books), using many of the same example cases and to make its points. To take just a few examples: how can a seasoned pilot, the head of safety for a major airline, ram his plane into another parked on the runway? Why do players picked in later rounds of an NBA draft get less game time, even if they're just as good as earlie...more

like · see review

Dec 03, 2009 Jonny99 rated it 4 of 5 stars

I didn’t check the NYT Bestseller list but I would assume that Sway must be doing well. It is brief enough to read over a weekend and there is just enough psychology that you can repeat and sound like you know what you are talking. It is sort of a little tree that grew in the ground broken by Freakonomics.
The book starts with a story of the mature, highly experienced, and well-trained head of safety at KLM airlines impulsively taking off without clearance, plowing into another plane and killing...more I didn’t check the NYT Bestseller list but I would assume that Sway must be doing well. It is brief enough to read over a weekend and there is just enough psychology that you can repeat and sound like you know what you are talking. It is sort of a little tree that grew in the ground broken by Freakonomics.
The book starts with a story of the mature, highly experienced, and well-trained head of safety at KLM airlines impulsively taking off without clearance, plowing into another plane and killing some 587 people. Why? The Brafmans chalk it up to the same reasons people will race to be on time for a meeting through heavy snow – loss aversion. They posit that people are hard-wired to make widely irrational choices to avoid perceived loss. They relate the story of a man who sold his biotech firm then stubbornly rode the stock from $47 to less than one dollar because he didn’t want to take the perceived loss at any point in the decline. Loss aversion is also proposed as the reason for a human tendency toward unreasonable commitment and here the Brafmans review the well-trodden retelling of the escalation of the Vietnam War. They relate a very interesting study on National Basketball players which does tend to support an unconscious commitment effect. The study found that regardless of performance, players chosen higher in the draft play more minutes, get traded less often and have a longer career. In other words, the commitment made in the draft directly affected the commitment made by coaches for as much as five years out despite the actual player performance. On a more hopeful note they relate a story on the success of Gordon Moore who was able to overcome the commitment bias by abandoning Intel’s dying but still profitable memory chip business to become the leader in microprocessors.
The second sway is the misleading effects of context. The Brafmans relate a story about a virtuoso violinist who was ignored in the DC subway as supposedly demonstrating how context irrationally affects perceived value; frankly, I think it is just an indicator of classical music’s popularity. There is a also a story about the acceptance in the archeology community of a fraudulent missing link skeleton called Piltdown man contrasted with the denial of real find of a missing link skeleton in Java. Again, the story doesn’t convincingly suggest that there is an irrational impulse at work but rather regular, old, politics. In this chapter there is also a discussion of job interviews and how they lack any predictive power which probably won’t come as much of surprise and again not sure this fact really indicates an irrational motivation at play.
Later the Brafmans take on psychiatry (maybe their Scientologists?) as an example of the sway of false authority. They relate an incredible rise of the diagnosis of bipolar disorder from its initial formalization based on little more than one doctor’s theorizing through direct popularization by drug companies. Children as young as two and dogs now can be diagnosed as bipolar. This same arc probably could be applied to Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and more recently autism. The book also reports on meta-analyses of psychiatric care outcomes and finds that the type of treatment or diagnosis has little to do with treatment success. Instead the idiosyncratic skill of the psychiatrist seems to be the only active ingredient.
The sway of cultural norms is discussed using the example of the show Who Wants to be a Millionaire. In the U.S., using the audience lifeline will get you the correct answer better than 90% of the time, in France, the audience is about 50/50 on helping you out and in Russia, fully 90% of the audience will deliberately try to deceive you. There is also cross-cultural research on sharing norms showing that in the U.S., people will walk away from anything less than a 50/50 split of money in an experiment where one person gets to decide the distribution and the other has to live with the decision. When the study was tried with a tribe with no contact to the West, the distributor would keep better than 85% on average and the receiver would accept whatever they were given which is actually the rationale thing to do.
The final chapters look at the sway of group thinking. The book relates a famous experiment which demonstrates that people will go along with obvious wrong answers in a line length comparison test rather than contradicting other members of the group (who were actually researcher confederates). This effect is applied to the Supreme Court where we learn that it takes a substantial amount of disagreement for a dissenting judge to write a dissenting opinion.
The Brafman’s book is lean, tells some interesting stories and keeps the words and ideas snappy. They introduce their chapters with a neat trick, they give little snippets of text from the chapter such as ”51 women waiting by the phone” or “only the Gators walk away”. It is a very good ”sway” as they use the term.(less)

1 like · like · see review

Apr 12, 2009 Mazola1 rated it 4 of 5 stars

Sway is a light but thought provoking little book which attempts to shed some light on why people believe and stubbornly continue to act upon irrational beliefs. Why did Lyndon Johnson and George Bush get stuck in paths of action which viewed rationally could be seen to be mistakes? For the same reasons investors don't dump stocks even after it's obvious they're headed for the celler -- because it's very hard to take a loss. Why would people pass up an opportunity to receive a significant amount...more

like · see review

Apr 20, 2013 Christal rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: non-fiction, 2013-nbrc, 2013-rlftci-book-count

Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior by Ori and Ram Brofman is a very broad overview of several sociological attributes that may affect behavior, causing people to react and behave in unexpected ways. The Brofmans provide a multitude of anecdotal evidence to explain these topics and to demonstrate how they might be observed in everyday life. While this book isn’t very effective at explaining how to combat irrational behavior, it does succeed in introducing the common attributes in...more Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior by Ori and Ram Brofman is a very broad overview of several sociological attributes that may affect behavior, causing people to react and behave in unexpected ways. The Brofmans provide a multitude of anecdotal evidence to explain these topics and to demonstrate how they might be observed in everyday life. While this book isn’t very effective at explaining how to combat irrational behavior, it does succeed in introducing the common attributes in an engaging way that might lead the reader to further research or study of these issues.

Initially, Sway focuses on three main processes that can trigger irrational behavior: loss aversion, commitment, and value attribution. Loss aversion relates to our tendency to persevere in situations to avoid additional loss, even if it might have made more sense to remove ourselves much sooner and suffer a minimal loss. For example, a dwindling stock should be sold right away for a small amount of loss, but people tend to hold on to the stock longer in case it possibly increases in value again. Commitment refers to our tendency to stick with a behavior or idea, even if something else might make more sense, just because we have committed to that path of action. You might see people in the workplace that have committed themselves to doing a task a particular way and refuse to change their process, even if it might take less time and effort. Value attribution relates to how valuable we perceive an item or service. For example, people tend to see designer bags and clothes as more valuable because they cost more than everyday clothing. Why wouldn’t you charge more if it is a better product? Value aversion can be used to blindside the public to an item’s true quality because we are conditioned to assumed high priced items equal higher quality and therefore, a higher value.

Sway soon transitions into more sociologically-focused attributes such as the diagnosis bias, altruism vs. self-interest, and fairness. Each of these attributes focuses on ideas and qualities that have become recognized in our society and how they are used to influence our behavior. For instance, labeling is very prevalent in our society. We label people by their defining characteristics and can’t seem to see them in any other way. The Brofmans used the NBA draft picks to illustrate this example; players picked as early draft picks almost always received more playing time than players picked later in the draft, even if their other player statistics were equal or worse. The coaches label the early draft picks as better players and continue to treat them as such even if their quantifiable statistics do not support it. In situations where we have a choice between altruism and self-interest, most people will act in a way that supports their self-interest. This is the basic idea behind why we do not work for free. One very good takeaway from this principal is that you should reward after a positive action or behavior has been completed, not before. Once you create the expectation of reward, people stop working for good work’s sake and instead begin working for the reward only. If you then take the reward away, the positive behavior will cease. Fairness is a fairly simple idea; people want to feel they are being treated properly and that their opinions and ideas are being valued. People want to be listened to and heard, even if nothing changes.

Group behavior is also touched on in the second half of Sway and is especially successful in covering the importance of group dissention. Our natural tendency to go with the group can be destructive overall. If someone has a valid point, or even an invalid point that might lead to questioning other more constructive issues, their reluctance to speak against the popular opinion hurts the group as a whole. The authors present research that shows even one other dissenter can cause bolster others in the group into offering their true feelings. These people no longer feel like they are standing alone and, even if their opinion differs from the dissenter, are more likely to provide their actual input to the group. Dissenters are important in group discussions because they open other avenues to communication and allow everyone to express their views.

The book closes with a short epilogue that is intended to provide advice for counteracting the discussed irrational behaviors; this is where the book tends to fall short. The strategies presented are too simplistic to be truly effective and the short page count did not allow the authors to go into any specific depth. Along these same lines, the stories that the authors chose to demonstrate their topics, while entertaining, were sometimes suspect. They have been presented in such an abbreviated form that it becomes difficult to see how the authors drew causation conclusions instead of correlation. Presenting more statistically-proven studies and fewer colloquial examples would strengthen the authors’ research and lend more creditability to their conclusions.

Sway succeeds as an introduction to irrational behavior and hopefully the reader will be better able to recognize these behaviors in their everyday lives. Unfortunately, it does the reader a disservice by not discussing potential problem solving strategies in more depth. That said, it is a quick read with a light narrative style that readers with little to no background in sociology/psychology should find engaging. This book would be perfect for the reader looking to begin learning about behavior patterns and societal impacts, with an eye toward more intensive study in the future. (less)

1 like · like · see review

Apr 14, 2013 Blanca Rodriguez rated it 5 of 5 stars

"Although no one is likely to win a popularity contest by playing the devil's advocate, businesses would do well to respect a dissenting opinion-if The dissenter, of course, is as likely to be wrong as anybody else, but the discussion of the points made by the dissenter can add perspective to the debate."

The above quote is one of the reasons I enjoyed Sway as much as I did.

I have a sociology degree and have been exposed to many of the ideas presented in Sway, however, I'd never come across a b...more

like · see review

Feb 25, 2012 Deb rated it 5 of 5 stars

*Swayed from word one*

Appropriately enough, I was swayed into this book from the very first word! Fascinating, funny, and superbly written, _Sway_ reveals how irrational forces (including loss aversion, value attribution, and diagnoses bias) unconsciously influence our behaviors and thinking. Each chapter begins with a title page of irresistible teasers (such as: "The $204 twenty-dollar bill," Can a discount drink decrease IQ?" "What lovesick college freshmen have in common with HR managers," "P...more

like · see review

May 03, 2010 Chris rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: adult, life, nonfiction, not-graphic

Much like Predictably Irrational, which I recently read, Sway is concerned with the ways we consistently act irrationally. The Brafmans use a mix of real life illustrations and sociological research to illustrate their points, coming from the fields of business and psychology. They offer enlightening and frightening insights into human behavior, why we do the stupid things we do, and ideas for being a little less stupid.

Because I read this right on the heels of Predictably Irrational, I can't re...more Much like Predictably Irrational, which I recently read, Sway is concerned with the ways we consistently act irrationally. The Brafmans use a mix of real life illustrations and sociological research to illustrate their points, coming from the fields of business and psychology. They offer enlightening and frightening insights into human behavior, why we do the stupid things we do, and ideas for being a little less stupid.

Because I read this right on the heels of Predictably Irrational, I can't really review this book without mentioning that one. There is enough overlap (the Brafmans even cite some of Ariely's research work) that I couldn't help but think of the other book to make comparisons, and the knowledge I'd gleaned from the other book made this one at times seem too common sense. This one is also slighter. But having read the other one didn't make this one less valuable because it takes a slightly different approach to things.

An example. I've shared feedback at work that I don't care for the practice of rewarding those who take the time to complete trainings and surveys with the chance to win gift cards in a drawing. It makes me feel like I'm being bribed our bought, that I'm motivated to do such things because it's the right thing to do and adding prizes somehow soils the purity of my participation. Both books explore this dynamic. Both include the example of asking a friend to help you move. Most of the time, friends are happy help do so as friends. But if you offered to pay them $10, they'd feel insulted and much less likely to help. They might accept $100 or what they consider a fair wage for their labor, but they'd rather do it for free than an insulting amount.

Ariely describes this dynamic in terms of social vs. market norms: So we live in two worlds: one characterized by social exchanges and the other characterized by market exchanges. And we apply different norms to these two kinds of relationships. Moreover, introducing market norms into social exchanges, as we have seen, violates the social norms and hurts the relationships. . . . when a social norm collides with a market norm, the social norm goes away for a long time.

The Brafmans approach the dynamic through brain science, looking at the physical response to the different exchanges: It's as if we have two "engines" running in our brains that can't operate simultaneously. We can approach a task either altruistically or from a self-interested perspective. The two different engines run on different fuels . . . It turns out that when the pleasure center and altruism centers go head to head, the pleasure center seems to have the ability to hijack the altruism center.

Almost identical statements to describe the same thing, but coming at it with very different approaches. And now I have multiple ways of understanding why I don't like being motivated to do things I'm personally invested in by drawings and gift cards at work.

Perhaps because I recently completed a leadership program and have been thinking about the topic, I also feel Sway has more to say about the idea of leadership and highly recommend it for leaders and managers. I’ve long been a proponent of the power of expectations, but each time I come across new illustrations and data I’m still blown away. Consider one (of many) from this book, describing the results of a commander training program in the Israeli military. The trainers were told the trainees had been pretested and had either “high,” “regular,” or “unknown” potential. This was a fabrication and the labels were randomly assigned. Still, when the trainees were tested at the end of the program, the average score for the “high” group was 79.89, the “unknown” 72.43, and the “regular” 65.18. The only variable was the expectations of the trainers, yet those expectations determined reality.

Another realm discussed is the idea of fairness. The researchers concluded that auto manufacturers and business managers alike “place too great an importance on margins and outcomes” when what was clearly more important to the customer was the perceived fairness of the process. They recommended that all managers—regardless of industry—put greater “effort, energy, investment, and patience” into nurturing the relationship. As the car dealer study suggests, how we are treated—the fairness of the procedure—has as much to do with our satisfaction as the ultimate outcome. And: But it turns out that regardless of the crime they committed or the punishment they received, respondents placed nearly as much weight on the process as they did on the outcome. . . . In other words, although the outcome might be exactly the same, when we don’t get to voice our concerns, we perceive the overall fairness of the experience quite differently. I know there have been many decisions I didn’t like that I’ve been able to accept once I felt like my disagreement had been heard and acknowledged.

One more. As someone with a tendency to play devil’s advocate and really consider ideas before getting excited about them, this one resonated with me. The idea that in group dynamics there are four roles: initiator, blocker, supporter, and observer, and that blocker is a necessary and important role to balance the initiator and blind group think. Whatever the situation, be it the cockpit or the conference room, a dissenting voice can seem, well, annoying. And yet, as frustrating as it can be to encounter blockers, their opinions are absolutely essential to keeping groups balanced. It’s natural to want to dismiss a blocker’s naysaying, but as we’ve seen, a dissenting voice—even an incompetent one—can often act as the dam that holds back a flood of irrational behavior.(less)

like · see review

Jul 19, 2010 Ross rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: economics, social-psychology

Think of the the Brafman brothers as a poor man's Malcolm Galdwell. A very, very poor man. "Sway" covers interesting and important ground, but dumbs it down way too much.

This might be the right call when presenting this material to a half-day corporate retreat. But it makes for a maddening read. Instead of building up their case based on evidence and support, the authors simply assert their conclusions (or the conclusions of the researchers on which they rely? It's never made clear). Instead of...more

2 likes · like · see review

Apr 18, 2010 Christopher rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2010-challenge

The authors main premise is that we as humans are fundamentally flawed in our abilities to make rational decisions due to various factors in our upbringing and values systems.

Take for example the story about Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? In America individuals generally admire the wealthy, and as a result when a contestant on the show uses the Ask the Audience life-line the audience gives the correct answer more than 90% of the time. Russians are suspicious of the wealthy as they believe that...more

like · see review

Dec 19, 2009 Yeribel rated it 3 of 5 stars

Quotes/Notes:

Aversion to loss: It doesn’t matter how wrong the decision is, as long as you believe that things will turn out well in the end you will do everything possible to keep in the path. Fighting is better than accepting defeat.

Daniel Kahneman: “To withdraw now is to accept a sure loss,” he writes about digging oneself deeper into a political hole, “and that option is deeply unattractive.” When you combine this with the force of commitment, “the option of hanging on will therefore be rela...more

like · see review

Mar 25, 2010 Aimee rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: brainy-reads, non-fiction, fun-reads, economics

3.5 stars.

The authors enumerate several different patterns of irrational behavior (sways) that are endemic in human decision making. Some are culturally based, but most are actually hardwired into our brains in various ways. I especially enjoyed the first several chapters of the book which clearly explain why I am a terrible investor.

The light tone of the book makes it incredibly readable, but the sacrifice is that the authors never go very in depth on any given sway. Their remarks are rather a...more

like · see review

title link	preview: Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior
avg rating	preview: Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior Goodreads rating: 3.69 (5619 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2118114.Sway?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1320419177l/2118114.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2118114.Sway?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior by Ori Brafman[/url]

Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (17)

Genres

Readers also enjoyed similar books

Books by Ori Brafman

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Sway: The Irresis...

Quotes from Sway: The Irresistible...