Why do we think we understand the world more than we actually do?

The Illusion of Explanatory Depth

, explained.
Bias

What is the Illusion of Explanatory Depth?

The illusion of explanatory depth (IOED) describes our belief that we understand more about the world than we actually do. It’s often not until we are asked to explain a concept that we come face to face with our limited understanding of it.

doodles of a person and an alien standing next to a toilet. the person says 'it's simple, it works by...'

Where this bias occurs

Imagine an alien comes to Earth and demands that you explain how a toilet works. That’s easy for you, right? You’ve presumably been using a toilet your entire life, as has everyone you know. In fact, you may even have encountered an array of different types of toilets, from the old-style one with a pull flush in your grandparents’ house to more modern ones with heated seats in places like Japan. Explaining toilets to aliens should be a piece of cake. You assure your new friend that very soon, he’ll be an expert on toilets.

And yet, as the alien takes a seat to listen, you realize you can tell him about the button or the lever you press to flush the toilet, but you can’t explain much about what’s going on inside the toilet. How does the dirty water leave and the clean stuff arrive? What mechanisms or forces are working behind the scenes? And what about the little thing that rises and falls inside the… what’s it called… the bit at the back…

Perhaps you can partially answer one or two of these specific questions (or even more if you happen to be a plumber), but surely the alien will have even more questions you can’t answer. To think that a toilet is such a simple, everyday item, and yet you actually know much less than you’d predicted. This puzzles you greatly.

Your trouble explaining a toilet to the alien is because of the illusion of explanatory depth: sometimes, having to explain your knowledge brings you to realize how limited it is in reality. You could replace the example of the toilet with many other everyday items, such as locks, car engines, or light bulbs.

The illusion has two parts. First, the “explanatory” part refers to our belief that we can provide a clear, detailed explanation of how something works. The “depth” part reflects our assumption that the explanation will be thorough and complex enough to convey what we’re trying to explain. In reality, however, when we try to dig into the details, we often find that our explanatory knowledge is much shallower than we initially thought. What we actually end up with is the reality of explanatory shallowness.

Both parts are important to the illusion. That is, it’s only when we explain something that the gaps in our knowledge become apparent to us. Before that, we might still believe in our minds that we possess a depth of knowledge. The illusion of the explanatory gap is something that we’re subject to from an early age, with studies showing that children as young as kindergarten overestimate their explanatory knowledge.7

The illusion is far stronger for explanatory knowledge than other domains of knowledge, such as facts, procedures, or narratives.11 And it doesn’t apply if you know nothing about a topic and are happy to admit it. It only works when we inaccurately overestimate our understanding or knowledge of a certain concept or topic.

Sources

  1. Fernbach, P. (2013, November 15). The Illusion of Understanding: Phil Fernbach at TEDxGoldenGatePark. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SlbsnaSNNM&ab_channel=TEDxTalks
  2. (2017, November 29). You Don’t Know How Toilets Work – The Illusion Of Explanatory Depth [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CodKUa4F2o&ab_channel=Technicality
  3. Waytz, A. (2017). The Illusion of Explanatory Depth. Edge.org. https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27117
  4. Gimini. (n.d.) Velocipedia. https://www.gianlucagimini.it/portfolio-item/velocipedia/
  5. Meyers, E. A., Gretton, J. D., Budge, J. R. C., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2023). Broad effects of shallow understanding: Explaining an unrelated phenomenon exposes the illusion of explanatory depth. Judgment and Decision Making, 18, e24. doi:10.1017/jdm.2023.24
  6. Cotterel, A., & Zhu, E. (2023, December 11). Oversimplification and the Illusion of Explanatory Depth. The Epic. https://lhsepic.com/48253/in-depth/oversimplification-and-the-illusion-of-explanatory-depth/
  7. Mills, C. M., & Keil, F. C. (2004). Knowing the limits of one's understanding: the development of an awareness of an illusion of explanatory depth. Journal of experimental child psychology, 87(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2003.09.003
  8. Humiston, G. (2023). Revealing the Illusion of Explanatory Depth Can Hinder Persuasion. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Master’s thesis. https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/150283/Humiston-graelyn-SMMR-Management-2023-thesis.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  9. Chromik, M., Eiband, M., Buchner, F., Krüger, A., & Butz, A. (2021). I Think I Get Your Point, AI! The Illusion of Explanatory Depth in Explainable AI. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1145/3397481.3450644
  10. Elsayed, Y., & Verheyen, S. (2024). ChatGPT and the Illusion of Explanatory Depth. In L. K. Samuelson, S. L. Frank, M. Toneva, A. Mackey, & E. Hazeltine (Eds.), Proceedings of the 46th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. 
  11. Rozenblit, L., & Keil, F. (2002). The misunderstood limits of folk science: an illusion of explanatory depth. Cognitive science, 26(5), 521–562. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2605_1
  12. Fernbach, P.M., Light, N., Scott, S.E. et al. (2019). Extreme opponents of genetically modified foods know the least but think they know the most. Nat Hum Behav 3, 251–256. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0520-3
  13. Sloman, S., & Fernbach, P. M. (2017). The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone. Riverhead Books. 
  14. Fernbach, P. M., Rogers, T., Fox, C. R., & Sloman, S. A. (2013). Political extremism is supported by an illusion of understanding. Psychological science, 24(6), 939–946. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612464058

About the Authors

A man in a blue, striped shirt smiles while standing indoors, surrounded by green plants and modern office decor.

Dan Pilat

Dan is a Co-Founder and Managing Director at The Decision Lab. He is a bestselling author of Intention - a book he wrote with Wiley on the mindful application of behavioral science in organizations. Dan has a background in organizational decision making, with a BComm in Decision & Information Systems from McGill University. He has worked on enterprise-level behavioral architecture at TD Securities and BMO Capital Markets, where he advised management on the implementation of systems processing billions of dollars per week. Driven by an appetite for the latest in technology, Dan created a course on business intelligence and lectured at McGill University, and has applied behavioral science to topics such as augmented and virtual reality.

A smiling man stands in an office, wearing a dark blazer and black shirt, with plants and glass-walled rooms in the background.

Dr. Sekoul Krastev

Dr. Sekoul Krastev is a decision scientist and Co-Founder of The Decision Lab, one of the world's leading behavioral science consultancies. His team works with large organizations—Fortune 500 companies, governments, foundations and supernationals—to apply behavioral science and decision theory for social good. He holds a PhD in neuroscience from McGill University and is currently a visiting scholar at NYU. His work has been featured in academic journals as well as in The New York Times, Forbes, and Bloomberg. He is also the author of Intention (Wiley, 2024), a bestselling book on the science of human agency. Before founding The Decision Lab, he worked at the Boston Consulting Group and Google.

About us

We are the leading applied research & innovation consultancy

Our insights are leveraged by the most ambitious organizations

Image

I was blown away with their application and translation of behavioral science into practice. They took a very complex ecosystem and created a series of interventions using an innovative mix of the latest research and creative client co-creation. I was so impressed at the final product they created, which was hugely comprehensive despite the large scope of the client being of the world's most far-reaching and best known consumer brands. I'm excited to see what we can create together in the future.

Heather McKee

BEHAVIORAL SCIENTIST

GLOBAL COFFEEHOUSE CHAIN PROJECT

OUR CLIENT SUCCESS

$0M

Annual Revenue Increase

By launching a behavioral science practice at the core of the organization, we helped one of the largest insurers in North America realize $30M increase in annual revenue.

0%

Increase in Monthly Users

By redesigning North America's first national digital platform for mental health, we achieved a 52% lift in monthly users and an 83% improvement on clinical assessment.

0%

Reduction In Design Time

By designing a new process and getting buy-in from the C-Suite team, we helped one of the largest smartphone manufacturers in the world reduce software design time by 75%.

0%

Reduction in Client Drop-Off

By implementing targeted nudges based on proactive interventions, we reduced drop-off rates for 450,000 clients belonging to USA's oldest debt consolidation organizations by 46%

Notes illustration

Eager to learn about how behavioral science can help your organization?