The horns and halo effect
I actually found some free time in my schedule and my psycho bones are rattlin' so I thought perhaps I might entertain you with s'more psycho stuff. Who knows, this might improve your already advanced analytical football wizardry by compelling you to introspect yourself as you make your analyses, and the end result might be a far keener intuition upon which your sophistication breaks a glass ceiling that you never knew was there. My goal is to add to that fundamental knowledge of analytic acumen that I have noted has taken some effect whereby even bloggers from other sites have remarked that s&bp knows football, and I am proud to be a member of this site, so put on your critical thinking caps (or Raider helmets, should I say?).
Have you ever thought about how other people's writings just might influence your perceptions of analyses and what you might come to believe about how players play and their abilities? I am sure you will readily argue that you are your own man (or woman) and that no one can influence you. You might even feel that you will justifiably hear other arguments and weigh in on political correctness but at a certain point people can reach your noble zenith that is so sacrosanct and how dare anyone question your football psychodynamics? I mean, how can others be greater football wizards than you? So, psychodynamically speaking, what possible influences are underlying your unconscious that just might be influencing you without you being aware? I want to focus on one such theory called the horns and halo effect. For example, in the field of industrial/organization psychology (sharpen your fangs Mallard, this is your area), psychologists make analyses about workers or working environments and preconceived perceptions of certain workers might influence evaluations based upon previous notions or understandings of certain workers' performance which is currently worse or better than what it actually is. You might like someone and therefore you might give a person good credit when such credit is not deserved and vice versa, and it was preconceived notions of this person that led to such possible erroneous evaluations. To clarify what I mean, let's place this theory in a football perspective.
Consider Jacoby Ford. In his breakout game last year vs KC he caught a few important catches that won the game. He was so cheap as a 4th round pick that no one could focus on a couple of bombs he dropped that game. In fact in the remainder of the year, he dropped several other important catches such as a kick off return against San Diego. Jacoby dropped a total of 5 balls in just half the season because that is all he played. However, because Ford was so cheap, and without a doubt, other factors come into play, such as the way he fights for the ball midair, that left people so impressed that his failures tend to be overlooked. Now, don't take me wrong because I love Ford's play, but he makes mistakes that other players make and people tend to overlook these errors, which is the halo taking effect. When people speak so highly of Ford in combination with geniunely talented play, a sort of bandwagon effect might happen with that tendency to overlook his deficiencies. I recall in the first Denver game how Ford dropped a pass at the start of the game that was a fumble recovery by Denver, yet no one questioned or criticized Ford - truly a halo effect.
Now, I am not trying to defend DHB, but he is a classic example of a horns effect. Because of his draft status and the fact that NO ONE approved of that choice, he came to us with bullhorns that would make a Texas longhorn jealous. We have all witnessed his production this year yet let him drop one pass and so many people overlook that he was still our most productive receiver and getting better. It is difficult to overcome the horns effect especially when our hunger for playoffs can be so overwhelming. Had it been DHB that dropped those balls that Ford had dropped I am sure he would have been nailed to a cross. Note that DHB dropped less balls than Ford did in the second half of last year (and if I recall correctly, he dropped less balls than Ford for the entire year, and someone here presented those statistics). Again, I'm not defending DHB, and I would encourage you to think about other players that might have started with a horns effect such as Jason Campbell, a player whom I have been outrightly critical of during his development, who began to show real promise before he broke his collarbone. The important point I am trying to emphasize is that once you have unconsciously labeled a person, it is hard to overcome the pull of the horns and halo effect whereby you can be unjustifiably overly critical and not even know it, or it just might tamper with your analytic acumen. Stay sharp, stay focused, and don't let the horns and halo effect skew your perceptions. I will leave you with these questions: Upon self introspection, have you been guilty of the horns and halo effect? What Raider players might you have prejudged as a result of this horns and halo effect?
Signed, Psycho From Hell
32 comments
|
Add comment
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I should add that this is the theory of "first impressions."
The very first impression you make on someone or that someone makes on you can be indelible, meaning that it can be permanent or last for a long time. It is hard to change first impressions, much to Jacoby’s advantage and DHB’s disadvantage.
This seems to be less about first impressions
and more about expectations.
It’s not that we think that DHB is a bad guy and Jacoby is a good guy personally. It’s just that DHB came in with a lot higher expectations than Jacoby or Moore and therefore more is expected out of him whether or not he is able to give it.
"Now I know what your thinking, did he fire six shots or only five. Ive forgotten myself in all this excitement, but being that this is the 44 magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and could blow your head clean off, you have to ask your question. Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk!"
Dirty Harry Callahan
Well written and informative in an introspective way
While I usually try to judge every player on his merits, this horns and halo effect certainly does come into play, especially for DHB because of his draft status and his paycheck. The same goes for Rolando.
The fact is that these higher draft picks come in with higher expectations (and costs) by everyone, the team included. So when we see a Denarius Moore or a Jacoby Ford (who cost us little) making big time plays we do tend to overlook their short comings.
Since there is a salary cap and you do want to field the best team possible under said cap, being harder on the guys who are costing us more and are producing the same results as those who are making considerably less seems a natural reaction.
This is DHB’s fate and his cross to bear until he becomes the player his draft status and paycheck predicted him to be.
It may not be fair, but it is reality!
He was not drafted to be an average possession receiver. He was drafted to be a number one and until he is he will be judged this way fair or no.
"Now I know what your thinking, did he fire six shots or only five. Ive forgotten myself in all this excitement, but being that this is the 44 magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and could blow your head clean off, you have to ask your question. Do I feel lucky? Well do ya punk!"
Dirty Harry Callahan
That is so true what you say. I like your analysis Rambo.
You are highlighting different factors that may come into play regarding the horns and halo effect. Naturally, it is not only speculation, but that are also core factual elements that come into play that can make us so vulnerable to our unconscious drives.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 28, 2012 9:11 PM PST up reply actions
id say the reason why somebody has a halo or horns effect doesnt actually matter
Its simply I like this person for a reason and so I am less critical of a mistake and I dislike this person for a reason so I am more critical of their mistake. It can he justifiable but it doesn’t change that the effect has taken place.
Its like if u have a lifelong friend who stole from you because they are broke, sure you are mad but you might listen to their reasoning and not call the cops where as if its a person you have never liked who is broke steals from you and u don’t think twice about calling the cops. The halo effect is justified because u feel u owe it to the friend to listen and the horns are justified because. U never liked the person but either way the effect still took place. Reasoning for it is simply a by-product and actually has no baring on whether the effect took place.
"We want to win. The Raider fans deserve it. The Raider players deserve it, even my organization deserves it. You have to win and you have to win with a vision for the Super Bowl. That's our passion here."--Al Davis
"Winning isn't everything, but wanting to win is."--Vince Lombardi
by Marcus Allen Krause on Jan 28, 2012 10:06 PM PST up reply actions
Remember, it is a theory and it is useful as regards how I/O psychologists and other professionals use it on the job.
As a working tool, it has had its successful applications, and in fact, assessment instruments that measure these behaviors and control for faulty evaluations on the job are in current use. I was applying it to football and thought it would make a nice conversation piece. I am sure we are all guilty of application of this theory as we interact with friends, acquaintances, coworkers, etc. You have your own way of looking at the the theory and there is really no right or wrong way to define it. Couldn’t it be said that:
“I like this person for a reason and so I am less critical of a mistake” = halo?
“I dislike this person for a reason so I am more critical of their mistake” = horns?
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 12:12 PM PST up reply actions
Indeed
Particularly polarized on Palmer. He’s either a Lamonica in the making or a complete jackass, depending on who you ask.
Still if there’s any forum that needs a shrink, it’s a Raider forum. You know, in other forums they actually have conversations with some bickering. Here, we mostly argue, seldom agreee on anything (except Bresnahan, but even that with some dissenters).
In addition to your perceptions regarding Palmer, it is true that he has his followers as well as his critics...
We have seen this pattern with so many players such as Campbell, Boss, Murphy, Bush, etc… and even the great ones such as DMC. Those that criticize may be exhibiting a horns effect, while the followers may exhibit a halo effect. My point here is that if the analyzer is more wary of this effect and control its pull, the analyzer might potentially become a more potent, more accurate, more powerful, and more informative analyzer. Make sense?
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 2:38 PM PST up reply actions
Oh yes
It does make sense, but probably not going to happen here. Raider fans are hot-blooded. If you notice, people are more likely to respond to somebody’s post if they disagree then if actually do agree with what it says. The Raider Nation is like Beirut, circa 1982. A bunch of different factions in a twilight war, and all it takes is one shot to be fired to get the crew all riled up.
I think that is part and parcel because everyone likes to think of themselves as a sort of competent analyzer, as I had suggested above.
I think it is something we are all guilty of at one time or another, but looking at it positively, these differences in opinion can actually lead to some fruitful conclusions that otherwise would not have happened. It’s like two lawyers ligitating their views, and the audience benefits from a more complete picture, so it can’t be all bad.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
In terms of "needing a shrink" I wish I had more time, but thanks for the complement.
Nevertheless, when I am around please feel free to ask me as I do enjoy the conversation, and if need to rely on psychological skills, I only enjoy it more.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 2:43 PM PST up reply actions
This is it right here
paycheck
The key word. These guys can’t help being drafted where they were, but they never turn down the money. And if they’re going to take the money, they damn well ought to perform. Obviously the worst case probably ever, JaMarcus. Holds out for a bigger contract, gets it, and then sucks it up anyway.
Meanwhile Jacoby’s and Denarius’ base salaries combined still don’t make 7 figures.
Hooey!
The cowards never started, the weak died along the way....
by BlackHeartSilverEyes on Jan 29, 2012 5:30 AM PST reply actions
So who takes you seriously? Hahahahaha....
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 11:52 AM PST up reply actions
You do.
The cowards never started, the weak died along the way....
by BlackHeartSilverEyes on Jan 29, 2012 12:38 PM PST up reply actions
Or you would just fucking ignore me.
Not being held in awe or esteem bothers you. Hahahahha.
The cowards never started, the weak died along the way....
by BlackHeartSilverEyes on Jan 29, 2012 12:39 PM PST up reply actions
You are entitled to make your presumptions, just remember they are your presumptions not mine.
I have no idea where you get the idea that I need peer gratification, I just enjoy blogging with them and that is the gratification I get. Sometimes it is hard to ignore a fly constantly buzzing in my ear and the attention I pay to such distractions is get a can of Black Flag. Why don’t you go buzz somewhere else troll because I never wanted to engage in this conversation with you in the first place.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 2:13 PM PST up reply actions
Troll?
Because when you post, you have to take the good with the bad psycho. Whete do I get the idea you need gratifiction?
Gee….how far back should I go…when you first arrived and explained yourself and kissed this ass and that ass. Sorry, but you would need more than black flag, mr tough guy.
Pontificate at you peril.
The cowards never started, the weak died along the way....
by BlackHeartSilverEyes on Jan 29, 2012 3:57 PM PST up reply actions
When I first got on this post I had never really read the sort of blogging that went on and just introduced myself.
I was being gentlemanly, something that someone at your mental age cannot possibly understand. Being kind and sharing with others is your definition of kiss ass, and I agree with Jack’s axe that you are quite the jack ass.
You reflect your idiocy by pursuing arguments with me when I have perpetually tried avoiding you like the plague. Why do you persist? If you don’t believe in psychology or my brand of it why the hell do you continue to post on me? Do me a favor and avoid me as I will be doing my best to avoid you. Now f@ck off, azzhole.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 4:09 PM PST up reply actions
By the way, I shoud add that as a clinical psycholgist, there are people reading me who have a certain faith in the profession.
I cannot get out here and speak like an idiot. Behaving like a gentleman is appropriate. Imagine the faith these people would have in clinical psychology if I exhibited your personality and idiocy? There is a high probability that some people here have been treated and might feel betrayed, but already I presume these things are beyond your understanding so just leave it alone.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 4:18 PM PST up reply actions
In terms of taking the good along with the bad, I will take the good and the bad from the people of my choosing.
Just because I am on this blog does not automatically commit me to respond to whomever wishes it so, and you are most certainly no one to make such dictations.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 4:31 PM PST up reply actions
Buchanon, Porter...
Watching Phillip Buchanon and Jerry Porter play….I really thought these two guys had it! Phillip became too much of a “mouth” and got burned quite often. Porter, well he just didnt produce enough. For some reason though, I still have a soft spot in my heart for Jerry Porter. I thought for sure he was going to be a HOF caliber WR.
Sounds like Sapp and Buchanon had something in common. Both had big mouths and created their own horns effect.
Sounds like you put a halo on Porter.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 3:56 PM PST up reply actions
Real World/Foottball World
In the large corporate world I saw the halo effect in evaluations ll the time and tried to guard against this when I was a supervising manager. What this caused was workers who had issues passed along from manger to manager and job to job with nothing being done.
The same thing happened with the Raiders. Al’s high draft picks play no matter what and get passed from coach to coach to coach. I think this will change now.
Ya know, I was anticipating such a comment from you because you are a professional within the I/O field.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 11:56 AM PST up reply actions
That Predictable?
My example is James Jett. He was always a starting receiver even though he should not have been. Art Shell made him his number one receiver and went 2 – 14. I believe after that season Jett never played in the NFL again.
by Mallard Davis on Jan 29, 2012 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
Perhaps the Jett-Shell combination led eventually had much to do with Shell's demise as the coach wouldn't you say?
Sorry for my sloppy posting. I ask about Jett and Shell because I was busy at that span of my career and did not watch so closely.
Tell me more about that Jett-Shell combination.
by RaiderPsycho on Jan 29, 2012 2:57 PM PST up reply actions
Shell
He played Al’s guys and brought in an OC with a playbook right out of 1984 and it did not work.
by Mallard Davis on Jan 29, 2012 4:13 PM PST up reply actions

by 





























