We're Facing a Credibility Crisis: Here's How to Manage Information Overload
We're drowning in information — and somehow more confused than ever.
In the latest episode of Live+Work More Human, Lex and Sal dig into what they're calling the "modern credibility crisis": the growing struggle to separate fact from fiction in a world of infinite scroll and algorithm-driven feeds. It's not just about spotting obvious misinformation. It's about understanding why even smart, well-educated people fall for bad advice, dodgy health claims, and confidently-stated nonsense — every single day.
The culprit isn't stupidity. It's overload.
When our brains are bombarded with more information than they can meaningfully process, we default to shortcuts. We start trusting surface credibility — polish, confidence, social proof, an impressive title — instead of actually checking whether someone's expertise matches what they're claiming. Add in algorithms that are optimised for engagement rather than truth, and it's no wonder we're sliding into echo chambers that quietly reshape our worldview without us noticing.
The good news: none of this is unfixable. If you’d like an in-depth article on the Credibility Crisis, find it on Alexis’ Substack right here.
Key takeaways
How to navigate today’s credibility crisis with clearer thinking.
Why cognitive overload pushes us toward mental shortcuts and passivity.
What to know about deceptive “surface credibility” cues online.
How to question whether someone’s expertise fits the topic.
Why algorithms optimise for engagement, not truth or accuracy.
How to match decision scrutiny to the stakes involved.
What to know about echo chambers shaping your worldview.
Why consuming less, higher-quality information is powerful.
Alexis book Real: Reconnecting to Yourself in a World of Likes and Lies explores this exact challenge with even more depth, pre-order your copy here.
Transcript
Alexis Zahner (00:01.996)
Welcome to Live and Work More Human. Sal, how are you today?
Sal (00:08.077)
I'm doing really well today, thanks, Lex. How are you?
Alexis Zahner (00:12.408)
I'm doing well. I'm pretty fired up about our topic today.
Sal (00:13.336)
I'm very, yeah. I am super psyched for this topic. I think this is one that is, it's been sort of on my mind for a long time. And I know that you have done some deep, deep research on it. Can you give us a little bit of a spiel, a bit of an intro? What are we going to talk about today?
Alexis Zahner (00:32.108)
Yeah, so today we're looking at the credibility crisis and more specifically how information overload, which just seems to be everywhere for us in modern work and modern life, is starting to impact our decisions. So I I know for me personally, this is something that I struggle with. I feel like in some ways I'm becoming more gullible as more information is sort of accessible to us. And I've really wanted to understand for myself why that's the case. So this is sort of the
the beginning of the topic for me and then it's kind of unfolded itself into a full chapters in my book and and now at the article that I've written that we're gonna be discussing today.
Sal (01:11.404)
Yeah, I think it is something that is so important for us to be thinking about almost this sort of metacognitive awareness of as we're exposed to all this information, as we're trying to consume so much of it, how we're doing that, bringing some intentionality to it. think it's going to be an absolute ripper. I'm really excited to delve in, but before we do, let's hear a word from our podcast partners.
Sal (01:37.486)
For some reason I can't hear you. What happened?
Alexis Zahner (01:40.247)
sorry. I said, should we run that again? I felt like it was a little bit of an awkward intro. How did you feel? All good? Okay. Sorry, there was also a bit of lag at the beginning where you stopped speaking and I went to speak again and then you spoke as well. And I was like, I think my computer like froze for a second.
Sal (01:44.846)
Sure, yeah, no, let's do it again, sure.
Sal (01:57.203)
good. So should I stop or do you want to just use the same recording and go ahead and edit it from here?
Alexis Zahner (02:03.006)
Yeah, we could just do it from here, I suppose. Cool. Alright.
Sal (02:09.326)
Okay.
Alexis Zahner (02:13.41)
Welcome to Live and Work More Human. Sally, how are you doing today?
Sal (02:18.904)
really well today, Lex. I'm really excited to delve into our topic. How are you doing?
Alexis Zahner (02:24.564)
I'm doing well and equally as excited to delve into this topic today as I think it's something that many of us struggle with in modern life, personally and professionally, and so I hope that it will be an illuminating one.
Sal (02:38.968)
I'm sure it will. This is kind of a little bit your topic as it were. This is something you've poured a lot of thought and research into not only for your upcoming book, but also for an article that you're writing. Can you give us a little bit of an intro to what we're going to delve into today?
Alexis Zahner (02:54.03)
For sure. So today we're looking at the modern credibility crisis and how information overload is really impacting our decision making. Now, for me personally, this is something that I've experienced a lot of, again, both in my personal and my professional life. And it's just an interesting one because I think now more than ever before, we're not short on information. We have access to information from anywhere in the world, and yet
we seem to be finding it harder and harder to sort fact from fiction. So that's what we're going to be looking at today. Information sources, the credibility of information sources, how we start to vet information sources, and how we make in how we make informed decisions based on that.
Sal (03:38.094)
And I think also just the kind of almost meta question of like, why should we, what's, what, what do we stand to lose if we don't? So I think there's a lot, a lot we can unpack here today. Before we dive deep into this conversation, let's hear a word from our podcast partners.
Alexis Zahner (03:43.598)
By the way.
Alexis Zahner (03:57.806)
Mm-hmm.
Sal (03:58.388)
Alright, so today we're going to explore information overload and as you've alluded to, we have access to infinitely more information than ever before and it's really exploded even in just the last decade. Why are we getting worse at finding the truth?
Alexis Zahner (04:18.637)
I think it's the perfect confluence of a lot of factors, to be honest, Sally. I think the volume and velocity at which we receive information in this modern world is simply overwhelming for our brains. I think now with the introduction not just of social media but mobile devices, so we have a a little personalized media vessel in our pocket at any given time that's full to the brim of apps with everything from news services to social platforms to emails where we're getting email newsletters.
We are simply being bombarded with information almost from the time we wake up to the time we go to bed. So I think just put pure volume of velocity and volume of information is one of the main factors why we're feeling really overwhelmed. The second and really wonderful thing that social media in particular has done has sort of democratized the capacity for anyone to have a voice, put an opinion forward, and put insight forward. So whilst that is an incredible step forward.
It's also making it harder to understand who we should listen to and why. So again, this was something that I've experienced personally. and I've been gullible from buying anything from you know detox teas to investment advice online. And it's something that we know as social media sort of continues to proliferate different messages, we're actually seeing media literacy levels drop. So it's a really interesting topic, lots of confluencing factors here.
And I'm really excited to dive in to sort of help people understand this a bit more and actually put some processes in place where you can start checking information for yourself to to vet it and to make better informed decisions.
Sal (06:00.298)
Such an important one for us, because I think so much of it is almost automated at this point. We're so busy that all we sort of do or feel like we have the option to do is to kind of stay on our screens and consume. But taking a step back and being a bit more perhaps intentional about these decisions sounds like it might be a valuable starting point. But I think to kind of just frame this whole question, can you tell us a little bit about what is the credibility crisis and how did we end up here?
Alexis Zahner (06:13.678)
Boom.
Alexis Zahner (06:31.448)
Good question. So what we face right now, due to an information overload, is a really challenging period where understanding who to believe and why has become harder than ever. It's almost paradoxical because we've got answers that are easier to access more than ever before. You know, even 15, 20 years ago, we couldn't just Google an answer. but the right answers are becoming harder to find. And again, there's
There's so much in this that will will unpack its volume, its velocity of information. But we're also starting to turn to what I call surface credibility cues as well. And social media really enables this. What these are and how these impact us, I'll dive into more as well. But we're kind of in the the perfect storm right now of credibility crisis. And even for the most intelligent people, it's really challenging. And we'll we'll unpack why that is as well.
Sal (07:29.75)
It really resonates to me. Like I was thinking earlier today, how when I was a kid, I was very lucky. We had a set of encyclopedia at home, which just immediately dates me to like a trillion years ago. But I remember if we, if my brother and I had a question, we'd be sent to the bookshelf where the encyclopedia was, we would pull whatever, you know, volume was relevant off the shelf and we would look it up. And if it wasn't in the encyclopedia, we didn't have an answer. And these days you can have the most random of thoughts or questions ask
Alexis Zahner (07:37.013)
Yeah.
Sal (07:59.384)
Google and algorithms will proffer up, you know, all of these answers. I think it's something I think it's so cute because I'm, you know, meet kids today for whom that is just how it is. Like that is just how it's always been since, you know, their experience of, of technology. So a lot has changed very rapidly. And I wonder if it's also, you know, and sort of human brains, were we even designed to sort of deal with this much information?
Alexis Zahner (08:23.726)
Absolutely not. Like if you think about even just again, 10, 15 years ago, before we had all of these apps on mobile devices in our pocket, our ability to get information was a little more sort of boundaried. You know, it might be a 30-minute news snippet at the end of the day. Certainly that's what it was for me. We had to be inside at 6 p.m. The news bulletin came on, and that was the 30 minutes a day where we could get world news. sometimes I'm sure my parents might have checked like
An MSN news bulletin on a desktop computer at some point through the day. But I didn't have access to that. So I would see the news and I'd go on with my day. But today we have access to this all of the time. And it's really overloading our brains. It's actually causing a phenomena called cognitive overload. And when that happens, our brain kind of goes into two different modes. It either tries to manage this stress by just doing nothing about it.
because it's too complex. So we just try and put it to the side and we just try and forget about it, or it becomes quite passive, where it might just go with the popular popular viewpoint or the easiest answer again, because we're experiencing that overload. So we're basically expending a lot of mental and even emotional resources on just trying to digest the volume of information that's just being thrown at us all day, every day at the moment.
Sal (09:43.31)
And I'm really curious to hear your thoughts on how we can start to determine who we should be trusting. Because I think for a lot of us, when we see the volume of information that we're exposed to, and we start to think, well, if I'm going to try and determine how trustworthy every single piece of this information is, I'm going to have to quit my job and like just do this full time and also hire like 10 other people. You know what I mean? It's like, this is a time and energy question. But I'd love to hear your thoughts on this because when it comes to sources of information,
Alexis Zahner (10:02.83)
Definitely.
Sal (10:10.626)
How do we know who we should be trusting and what are the warning signs that someone perhaps doesn't deserve that trust?
Alexis Zahner (10:17.046)
It's a really good question, Sally, and it's interesting. And I just want to rewind to your encyclopedia point earlier, right? Because an Encyclopedia Britannica, which, if you were lucky as a kid, you had a set of these in your home. And that was sort of Google pre-Google, right? But the information contained in an Encyclopedia Britannica was fact checked. It came from experts. It was pre-vetted before it was allowed to be put into an edition that was then circulated as gospel, dare I say it.
Sal (10:44.723)
Truly.
Alexis Zahner (10:45.568)
Yeah, literally. But when it comes to news sites now as well as social media, and I think we need to be really forward in saying that like the news also presents a certain angle of information that isn't always well fact checked and often has some form of ulterior motive as well. So we're presented with so much information that's being posited to us as fact.
When a lot of the time it might be opinion, it might be insight, it might be anecdote. So it's really, really challenging. And that's, I just want to kind of frame that firstly. Like it is a wonderful thing that the internet has given us, but it's made life infinitely harder. And when you add the layer of algorithms on top of that that are constantly monitoring your behavior. So your engagement, what you like, what you don't like, what you spend the most time on, it's job.
Is to serve you up a better user experience. So its job is to not give you the right answer. Its job is to give you what it thinks it is you want to see, even though you haven't even explicitly thought about that. So again, you might be getting served more of the same versus getting served more of the answers that you're specifically looking to find. So I think that also adds this layer of complexity where we feel like we can be just waiting through so much crap to just find an answer to something, right?
Sal (12:02.67)
Absolutely. That's definitely feels, I think, you that was a simplicity of, again, the encyclopedia. You go and there's an answer and it's probably biased because the patriarchy and it was from America. it was a single answer. And so it gave us a sense of resolve or perhaps then you'd use that as kind of, well, what do I think about this? Or what might the other perspectives be here? But when we're getting bombarded with literally thousands, if not millions of perspectives and
Alexis Zahner (12:14.232)
Probably, right, right, yep.
Sal (12:29.75)
as you alluded to, there's algorithms behind it. So it's not just this kind of innocent piece of objective truth. There's often a capitalist or consumerist component behind why you're being fed that. So it gets all a bit insidious and yuck pretty fast.
Alexis Zahner (12:44.206)
It does. And yeah, you're so right. I think Encyclopedia Britannica, for the most part, you know, frogs were green and certain flowers came from certain countries and we could trust that information. But now, because there's also human beings behind a lot of the information we're absorbing, we're developing a different kind of relationship with information as well. And so this kind of goes into the next point for me, which is something I I went such a down a rabbit hole with when I was writing my book, because I wanted to understand how am I.
As on paper, what would be seen as an intelligent person who should be able to vet information? I've studied at an academic level. How is it that I can fall prey to a skinny tea detox, even though I've got a nutritionist, a medical doctor, and people on my payroll whom I'm not turning to for that information? So I wanted to understand kind of what's driving this and where are these decisions kind of being made from? What part of me is making these decisions, if not.
My rational thinking. And as it turns out, social media in particular and online news in particular is a breeding ground for what I call surface credibility. So I'll just unpack that. So surface credibility is trust that we feel towards another person that's built on things like aesthetic polish. So how someone looks and feels on camera, for example.
confidence and conviction in their delivery. So if they're actually saying something with a bit of oomph behind it, that feels far more compelling than if someone's kind of wishy-washy in their answers. social proof, and again, social media is a big breeding ground for this. If this person has a hundred million followers, or if people are really engaging and on the bandwagon with their content, we can actually start to perceive that as an authority on a topic. So these are some of like
the cues that we're seeing more and more these days, especially even as news media moves itself onto social media platforms as well, we're starting to mistake these surface credibility cues for being more than they actually are.
Sal (14:49.622)
It's a really fascinating point, like I think particularly for me, the conflation of sort of black and white delivery of a message with truth is really troubling because I think I, you know, I think, you know, a lot of cases there is so much complexity, the things that are happening in the world. Really is there a black and white answer? There's so much gray, but we're just naturally drawn to these kinds of really clear messages and
Alexis Zahner (14:59.01)
Right. Yep.
Sal (15:17.89)
They sort of stand out, know, head above the shoulders of these, of the gray, and it really stands out to us and it becomes very appealing. And I think you've elucidated some very compelling reasons why that is. So what should we be looking out for as we're starting to, as we're consuming this information, what are the warning signs that someone perhaps isn't as credible as we might think?
Alexis Zahner (15:26.712)
Yeah, yeah.
Alexis Zahner (15:39.542)
Yeah, a good chat. And I just want to rewind on that thing you just mentioned there as well. Because I think what's so interesting about that is as we are just bombarded with information now, the reduction and the simplification of information is so appealing. Because, you know, like let's be real, the world we live in right now feels really complex, really messy, sometimes quite scary and hopeless. So I understand the innate human need to reduce that uncertainty to reductive and
unfortunately oversimplified answers. But these are exactly two of the things that we'll that we'll explore more now when we're looking at credibility and why that's problematic. Because I mean one of the things I always come back to with myself now when I'm vetting information is if there's kind of two sureties in life, right? That we're gonna pay tax and we're gonna die at some point. Anything outside that, we probably need to interrogate with a little bit more rigor because nothing in life is ever as black and white.
So I think, yeah, it's just an important reminder, I think, for people to feel like it's okay. I get why we do this, but it is problematic. And social media, when we reduce things to 30, 60, 90 minute reels, really only gives us a short amount of time to put a message across as well. So simplification and taking complex ideas and really reducing them and distilling them into something that's bite-sized, it's kind of the name of the game, but it's super problematic when it comes to complex things.
and using these platforms or these sources for making those big decisions as well.
Sal (17:12.726)
Yeah, really important reminder, I think for all of us. And there's so many ways that I'm thinking of right now where this can become really troubling for us in some ways as a society in terms of, you know, allowing things to just be reduced to very sort of simple terms when nothing is indeed that way. But like you said, when things are very, it feels like we're living in a very complex and uncertain time, it's very natural for us to want to sort of latch on to these very simplified messages. You mentioned earlier,
Alexis Zahner (17:21.42)
Yeah.
Alexis Zahner (17:29.752)
Definitely.
Sal (17:40.78)
detox tea and I just want to, cause my brain's immediately going to sort of like, you know, politics and big social issues. But can we use the detox tea as a little bit of an example? Like what, what, what, how does, how does someone become credible in selling those kinds of things? What should we be looking for if some, know, these kind of nutrition, know, faux nutritionists online? Tell me about that.
Alexis Zahner (17:47.128)
Sure.
Alexis Zahner (18:01.74)
It's an interesting one. And so that's a very personal experience for me. So we'll start with that one because I think for me it was the perfect, again, confluence of events where I was feeling insecure about myself. I it was through a period of time where I had a lot of stress at work. So I was eating poorly, sleeping poorly, gaining weight, my skin was poor, and I wasn't able to exercise as much as I normally would because I was spending too much time at work, effectively. So for me,
It was a time of insecurity, it's a time of vulnerability. And as a result, what I was doing was using my phone more as a way to unwind at the end of the day. And then the algorithm met me with these just brilliantly beautiful and thin and fit women who were selling detox tea as like a quick and easy way to kind of manage your weight with having to sort of not worry about all these other things. So I think again, it was this combination of factors, like what they had.
Was, you know, they were the testimonial. They were the living, breathing, walking testimonial, the aspirational thing that I wanted that I didn't didn't currently have. And what they were selling me was a really simple way to go from A to B. So that is sort of in a nutshell how social media operates. It looks at your vulnerabilities and your insecurities and it presents you with these wonderfully simple things. If you just drink this tea, your entire health will improve.
When you think about like that's crazy that I believe that. Like of course that's not gonna be the case, but
Sal (19:27.666)
think it's crazy. I actually think it's incredibly human to sort of see that and we want simple solutions. It's why 90 % of capitalism operates on that basis. And I think it's also really important to bring some self-compassion to that piece as well.
Alexis Zahner (19:34.722)
We do.
Alexis Zahner (19:44.12)
I've since made peace peace with it, but sort of as you alluded to as well, sir, when we extrapolate that example out into things like religious views, cultural views, political views, geopolitical views, it can become really, really problematic because what we're what we can then come to believe if we're using things like anecdote, like polish, like conviction, like strong messages and compelling narrative to make our decisions.
And we're not looking for things like evidence and expertise and fact-checking and peer-validated research. That is when we start to believe things that are untrue, whether it be things like misinformation, the very purposeful propagation of disinformation, so misinformation with a malicious intent, which we saw through things like the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. There was
a group of people called the disinformation dozen. So 12 individuals that were responsible for 60 to 70 percent of all vaccine misinformation and disinformation. So compelling narrative and conviction and these surface cues can really trick us into believing the wrong people. So they're some of the things that you will still continue to be attracted to, and those things are very appealing.
But it's the moment when we feel super attached to what we're seeing, or we feel like, that person's definitely right, or that product definitely must fix this problem. That sense of surety is probably one of the first signs to slow down because maybe I'm not giving this as much thought or interrogating some of the things below this, like our cognitive biases or our ideas.
identity affiliation with things that need to sort of be inspected a little bit more before we kind of commit to some of those bigger decisions, especially.
Sal (21:43.054)
wanna double click the links in identity and cognitive bias that you just mentioned, but I do just wanna briefly share something that occasionally happens for me is this kind of other end of the scale as I get quite, when I, for example, around the COVID-19, I remember asking someone about the source of the information they were sharing with me and they said it was a doctor on YouTube and I'm like, asked how did you know it was a doctor and they had a white coat and it said doctor in the description. I immediately can get quite judgy about that.
Alexis Zahner (21:48.15)
Yeah.
Sal (22:11.864)
But I do know that I really have to check myself there because it is so easy to judge others in those kinds of situations and think, they haven't done the research. When there are countless times in countless ways that I don't do the research either, but I don't hold myself to the same account because I'm living in my own little bubble of bias towards the sources that I'm looking at as being inherently credible because I'm looking at them.
Alexis Zahner (22:35.52)
It's it's so true. And I think different institutions, like if you come from an academic institution or you come from like your previous experience, Sally, as a lawyer, you have certain practices in place that you use to validate and check information that in other institutions or other modalities might not see as the same kind of way of doing that. But because that is how it's done around here, and you, Sally, identify as a lawyer, that's how we do things.
That in itself is a lens in which you're applying to the information, the source of the information, and how you're just going about the whole process of fact-checking that information as well. So that's just that's one of the many layers of identity that can also be a barrier there. And that's where really smart people can also come undone as well. When we become so bedded down in our ways of fact-checking information, that can actually create a bit of a barrier to holding space for the complexity and the nuance as well, which is
Pretty interesting thing to think about.
Sal (23:32.49)
like I'm just zooming all the way out when I think about that. It's like, I have to take a step back and a step back to kind of get that meta view of, yeah. And can you like unpack for us? What can we do when we're starting to see that perhaps we might be, you know, our identity or our cognitive biases might be impeding our ability to actually see things clearly, might be making us more susceptible to being fooled.
Alexis Zahner (23:34.166)
Yeah.
Right, yeah.
Sal (23:56.044)
what can we do, what steps can we take to actually protect ourselves or to help ourselves get that little bit closer to what is genuinely the truth?
Alexis Zahner (24:03.64)
Totally. I think the first thing, first and foremost, is just to slow down. I think in any moment where you feel such a strong sense of conviction or a message feels so compelling and you feel drawn to it as a truth or as being the only right, the only way of looking at something, I think that's a really good opportunity to just pause and slow down a little bit because often strong feelings of certainty.
of vindication. Like I feel this all the time on social media when I have a strong opinion about something and I see someone who I deem to be smarter than me or more qualified than me actually kind of validate that opinion. I feel like, yes, I knew it all along, you know? yeah, right. And it's a sense of relief as well, because we feel like we're kind of being seen and heard in a way. It's kind of validating our identity, our sense of belief. And whilst that might feel good, it is a pretty good indication just to slow the roll a little bit.
Sal (24:41.304)
Mm-hmm.
Sal (24:58.286)
think that's a really important starting point. So basically slow down. And I think what you've alluded to there as well is that kind of, it's almost like the full stop or the period at the end of the sentence. When someone else validates what I've been thinking, I'm like, well done, you know, pull ups, just, that's good. That's done. That's slotted in. And my brain really appreciates that sense of finality to that experience. So awesome. Slow down. Great start. Are there any other things we can be doing?
Alexis Zahner (25:01.592)
Yeah.
Alexis Zahner (25:18.328)
Yep. Yeah.
Alexis Zahner (25:24.504)
Well, I just want to pause quickly one more on that as well. Just to also note that depending on the the subject domain, like if we're thinking politics, for example, politics these days almost tends to go very tribalistic. You know, we feel so affiliated with the people that share our beliefs. And in such a divisive period of time to be alive, we can just bed down in those echo chambers and assume that there is no other reality that exists outside of ourselves. So it's just again another important thing.
To preface for people that you might see yourself as expert or as really intelligent and really capable of vetting this information. But sometimes there's those layers of identity that we feel so like they are just who we are that just stop us from seeing outside of that. So I think, yeah, it's just, it's just such an interesting one. I think, you know, the second one for me, and it kind of just builds on from that as well, is.
In those moments where you do feel something so compelling or you feel so validated by an opinion, just have a look outside of that perspective. Like what alternate viewpoints might exist? And rather than kind of speeding up to make a decision because you're like, I've got the information I need. That person's repeated what I've said, therefore it must be correct. Just slow down and just see what other information might exist as well. I think that's a really just an important thing to do.
the next one, and this is this is so hard because I hear so often, and we've kind of spoken about this with the COVID thing as well, like the whole I've done my research. Like, what does that mean? What does that mean these days? Like, are you watching YouTube videos? Are you watching, are you watching TikToks? Are you reading peer-reviewed papers? And by the way, not all peer-reviewed research is equal. Some of that's rot. Like, that's just because it's published in a white paper.
Sal (27:01.752)
Couple of TikToks.
Alexis Zahner (27:15.008)
It doesn't mean the journal has integrity. So it's also like it is a minefield, and I get that. But it is really important that you look at specifically what credibility this person, this individual, or this information source has to be speaking about this domain. And the term doctor, for example, if they're a medical doctor, that opinion doesn't necessarily translate to credibility in the field of psychology or in the field of.
Environmental sustainability or in the field of whatever. So just be a little aware of how you might be a bit anchored to someone's title or someone's perceived experience and or expertise and how that credibility doesn't always transfer domains. And I think people get a little bit stuck there. Social media is a good one as well. If if someone pops up and says, I'm a doctor, this is why you should believe me, suddenly it's like they have the license to talk about whatever the heck they want in the next sentence, even though they might not be the right person to be speaking about.
Sal (27:44.334)
You
Sal (28:12.866)
really important point, I think, to have our gaze very sharply looking at those kind of aspects of how people are presenting and whether they genuinely have the expertise. And I think it does mean, I mean, in a sort of a time poor environment in which pretty much everyone is operating, it means perhaps we almost have to limit the amount of information that we're taking in and just be more mindful with each piece about its origins in order to make sure that, you know, like less information, but better. Yeah.
Alexis Zahner (28:34.786)
Definitely.
Alexis Zahner (28:39.746)
Yep, definitely. And also like the scale of the decision you're making, right? Like if you're using information to make a decision strategically in your business that might cost hundreds of thousands of dollars or jobs, that's the kind of level of decision that requires both system one and system two thinking, the slowing down, the deliberation, the alternate perspective seeking, the credibility checking.
the opinions of other people as well, you know, like there's complexity to these decisions versus, you know, in in my case, like the skinny tea is a pretty lowbrow example, you know, with no, no one I waste a bit of time, I spend a bit of money, but it doesn't didn't really impact the trajectory of my life. But I see friends who are making financial decisions based on TikToks or friends who are making career changes based on, I don't know, just something they've seen on the internet. So it's also just understanding for yourself
The the complexity of the decision you're making and making sure you've got enough information to make that decision and also like thinking, you know, is this decision like a haircut? Will it grow back in a month? Or could this still impact my life for years to come?
Sal (29:48.61)
really important, almost like match the scope of, you know, validation of your information to the scope of the decision. The bigger, the more. Yeah. Yeah. Fantastic. And does it also make sense for us to be sort of seeking, making sure that we're not, how do we like make sure we're not in that bubble of just having this sort of one particular flavor of information being delivered to us?
Alexis Zahner (29:58.335)
really? Yep.
Alexis Zahner (30:13.006)
I mean, it's an interesting line. I always come back to the saying that a good scientist seeks to disprove their hypothesis. So don't go looking for information that confirms what you already know. There's no growth in that, right? Like if I know the sky is blue, but I really want to know if that's for real, I'm not gonna find all the information that helps me prove that. In the same way, if I think this is gonna be an inv a good investment, or if I think this is a good training program, if I think this is a good career choice, I don't wanna just ask people in that space, in that scope.
Who are going validate the confirmation bias that I already have. What you wanna do is seek information that might disprove that so that you can actually grow perspective outside whether it's the echo chamber you're in or the social group that you operate in, the political affiliation that you have. The only way to truly grow our knowledge and awareness and perspective is to look outside of the chamber that we operate in. So
Sal (30:44.91)
Mm-hmm.
Alexis Zahner (31:06.69)
That's the saying I always come back to for myself: a good scientist seeks to disprove their hypothesis. Don't go looking for confirming data.
Sal (31:11.8)
Fantastic.
Which is also, think, a reminder to all of us to not just feed a question into chat and expand, rely on that particular answer. that's a, that's a whole separate conversation, but.
Alexis Zahner (31:21.538)
Well, do you know what AI is an interesting one because I will just like like double click quickly on that one because the whole the whole kind of purpose of AI and algorithms and how they operate is to help us find more of what it thinks it is we're looking for. So if you ask AI, am I this, am I that, should I do this, should I do that, it is going to try and feed you more information that it thinks is helping you make that decision.
But your course of actions already set by virtue of the way you framed that question. So it is really problematic if we're looking at trying to shift perspective or vet information when we use especially GPTs, because they are designed to help us find more of the same in a faster way. So super problematic. Don't ask Chat GPT for complex answers or nuance or things outside of that perspective. It's just going to give you more of the same.
Sal (32:15.414)
very important reminder, I think, for all of us, including myself.
Alexis Zahner (32:19.854)
Yeah, myself included too. Cause it's easy, right? Like when you need to get something done quickly, ask Chat at GPT, like what is blah blah blah blah blah. And it's like, good. I don't have to think anymore about that because it's just told me that I'm on the right track.
Sal (32:31.744)
And this is exactly where I think some of the emerging research is starting to show that it's impacting our critical thinking capacity, which is so important to all of this in the credibility crisis. Are there any sort of final thoughts or tips or concepts that you want to leave our listeners with perhaps a little bit, if there's any kind of positive or inspiring sort of vibe that you can bring to this situation and what, what, what do we really need to know about it to empower ourselves to?
Alexis Zahner (32:38.008)
Definitely.
Sal (32:59.956)
emerge from the credibility crisis intact.
Alexis Zahner (33:03.054)
I think the first thing I just want to acknowledge for everyone is I understand that life feels like it's speeding up. And I understand that the velocity and the volume of information that we're bombarded with every day makes this really challenging. I think all of us need to meet ourselves with a little bit of compassion there. And, you know, as you offered me just before, Sally, with the skinny tea scenario, you're not an idiot, you're not too gullible because you find yourself in these scenarios. This technology, and the state of the world right now is working against
Our very innate mental capacity and resources and ways of operating and making it really, really hard to do the things that we're really good at as human beings. And that is slowing down, going deep into things, deliberating on things, seeking nuance, unpacking complexity and uncertainty. And because of the kind of hamster wheel we feel like we're on, we're being forced to kind of make these really shorthand decisions. So my first kind of piece of advice is to
To just look at all the ways or all the things that you're using that feel like they're speeding life up and feel like they're creating this overwhelm of information and just see what's really necessary and see where you might be able to reduce some of those things. So whether it's getting these apps off your phone or or not indulging in them at all, I think so many of us feel like we need them to stay social. But actually, you know, I spent a year off social media and found that.
It actually was better for my relationships and for my thinking. And I didn't really miss out on, you know, too much. So I think that's a that's a really important starting place, is just to look at ways where you can slow down and actually put a buffer in place just around how much information that you're consuming. And then I guess the next thing for me would be to look at unpacking a little bit more some of those biases and identity markers that really put a lens over the way you think.
And seeing where you can peel back, we keep coming back to the onion, but peel back some of those layers to just understand what makes you make the decisions you make, what makes certain people and certain things so attractive to you. That really helps us and empowers us to have some autonomy over that decision making and recognize the ways in which algorithms and things like that are really infiltrating those parts of us.
Sal (35:00.366)
Hahaha!
Sal (35:20.062)
You've given us such great tips, Lex, for really coming back to our critical thinking capacities. I think these are things that we do need to sort of actively sharpen these days. I love also how you've articulated the intentionality with which we need to slow down. And I just want to acknowledge this podcast is not sponsored by the Encyclopedia Britannica, but I do feel like, you know, just go on back to ditch the phone, go back to the encyclopedia, like couldn't hurt.
Alexis Zahner (35:43.054)
Wouldn't hurt.
Definitely wouldn't hurt. And it's funny because slight digression, but one of the things I found, and it's an anecdote I write about in my book, is the reduction of what I call carefree wandering in today's life. Because algorithms do suggest us more of the same, we're less we just fall upon exciting and fun things less and less more because we're not kind of wandering in these ways. And the example I use as a kid was or in the book was when I was a kid, the first time I came across planets in the black hole.
Sal (35:57.742)
Mmm.
Alexis Zahner (36:16.222)
was because I was writing an assignment in like the fourth grade on potatoes of all things, and I had to look through the P section of the Encyclopedia Britannica, and I came across planets and plasma and black holes and Pluto, and I was just off to the races with this new topic that I had only encountered via carefree wandering. So I do think there's some part of us that's calling for us just to.
Sal (36:26.278)
man.
Alexis Zahner (36:42.626)
Be less suggested to and just allow for more spontaneity in our thinking as well.
Sal (36:47.608)
I think we're going to have to do a whole separate episode on carefree wandering. am so here for this concept. Now, like, so where aside from our show notes, where can people find your article, more information about the book? Where can we point them to?
Alexis Zahner (36:51.542)
So fun. I would love to.
Alexis Zahner (37:02.944)
Absolutely. So the my new book, Real Reconnecting to Yourself in a World of Likes and Lies, is actually finally open for pre-order, which is so exciting. it will be released in September. The pre-order period is really important. It's what helps me get it into bookstores. So if you love this conversation or you've been following us for a while and you'd love to support the book and get your hands on it,
the links will be in the show notes. You can also find it on Amazon and Booktopia, but I would just love for people to pre-order a copy. And this particular article, the credibility crisis, will be available on my StubSack, which is real with Alexis Zana. So you can check out the full conversation or the full article there as well.
Sal (37:46.946)
Amazing. Look, this has been so much fun, so much learning for me, like such a great conversation. And thank you to everyone for being with us today on Live and Work More Human.