Last month, I started a regular column on the power of intuition in investing that inspired many of you to write to me directly to discuss your experiences. While most of you viewed intuition positively, your responses indicated you still weren’t sure how to define it (i.e., that it lacked a central idea). You also expressed some reservations about applying intuition to investing because it is perceived as unreliable. Both these observations stem from the fact that we lack a simple, broadly adopted model of intuition to aid our understanding. With that in mind, here is my model. I hope it provides you with greater clarity.
A Simple Model of Intuition
Intuition is neither System 1 nor System 2 thinking as defined by Daniel Kahneman. Instead, intuition is a different category of mental action that is distinct from both instinct and deliberation. Intuition is a sense exactly like the five standard senses. Here is a simple model for understanding intuition as a sense:
Intuition is sensory stimulus followed by interpretation.
As with all of the senses, it takes time to map our abstract sensations to the specific causes/objects of that sensation. With hearing, for example, it can take a lot of effort to tell the difference between an oboe, a bassoon, and a clarinet. Or the difference between a viola and a violin. Or the difference between cellists Yo Yo Ma and Julian Lloyd Webber. In wine drinking, is that red a Merlot or a Pinot Noir? Even with vision, the least abstract of the senses, it takes effort and practice to map the objects that we perceive. Is that a peach or a nectarine?
If you say it is a violin when it is a viola, few would deny the authenticity of the stimulus or blame hearing, instead we would blame the interpretation of the stimulus. Intuition and its interpretation are comparable to the same problems we encounter with the five senses. Is my intuition communicating I should buy or sell that security? Are equity markets in bubble territory or priced just right? Is that executive telling me the truth, or is she telling me only a partial truth?
Why Intuition Is Difficult to Interpret
Interpretation of intuition is difficult because signals are:
- Ignored;
- Obscured; and/or,
- Misunderstood.
Lack of Awareness
Very few of us spend time trying to hear our inner voice, or the sixth sense, to which intuition is frequently referred. Intuition is operating always, but its signals are ignored. For example, unless we are eating food or drinking liquids, how many of us are focused on our sense of taste? Not many. Yet, taste is always there, just ignored. Intuition is more neglected even than taste. Without awareness of intuition, it is impossible to get better at interpreting its signals.
Too Much Emphasis on Analysis
Most people spend years trying to improve their analytical, or System 2, abilities. Educational systems throughout the world favor empirical over experiential learning. They prefer quantification to qualification. There are many good reasons for these choices, and I am very pleased with the fruits of my empirical, analytical education. But the specificity that this state of consciousness demands happens to be the very thing that obscures intuition. Instead, intuition thrives, as do all of the senses, in an environment of first, receptivity — and then, and only then, on specificity.
A thought experiment may prove useful. First, be honest with yourself as you are the only witness to this experiment. Take 30 seconds to tune into the feeling of the temperature of the room. Tune in now and come back here in half a minute. Did you do the experiment? During the experiment did you think to yourself, “I wonder what the point of this is?” or, “It feels like it is about 72° F/22° C?” or, “I think it is a little cold in here?” In the many years of doing this thought experiment, I have only encountered two people who only spent the 30 seconds with the feeling of the temperature of the room. Overwhelmingly most of us take our abstract sensations and immediately translate them into a form amenable to analytical thinking; namely numbers or words.
Yet, our experience of the feeling of the temperature of the room exists independent of our ability to describe it. A dog or cat in the same space would also have the sensation, if not the words or numbers to assess it. The results of this experiment are strong evidence of how rapidly we ignore the savoring of our senses and immediately move on to assessment and analysis. Intuitive sensation, even if it is recognized, which it usually is not, is often immediately converted from its native form — a sensation — into something nonnative: numbers or, more typically, words. So the intuitive sense is usually immediately smeared beyond recognition so again interpretation is impossible.
Lack of Interpretive Skill
Even if people pay attention to their intuition and savor the sensations it provides, the difficult task of translation remains. Poets, artists, and composers are skilled at translating their abstract sensations into a recognizable and transmittable form. But for most of us, this ability to translate remote and abstract sensations remains very difficult. Consequently, it could be that you know there is something strange about an investment in your portfolio, but you “just can’t put your finger on it.” Again, the result is that intuitive sensation is misinterpreted, leading to inaccurate judgments. Take heart, though, as translation of intuitive sensations is a skill that can be learned.
In coming months I will discuss how to begin bringing intuition more into your conscious awareness and how to translate it into something useful. Thank you again for your open-mindedness!
If you enjoyed this post, you should subscribe to The Enterprising Investor
Please note that the content of this site should not be construed as investment advice, nor do the opinions expressed necessarily reflect the views of CFA Institute.
Photo credit: ©iStockphoto.com/retrorocket
28 Comments
for an example of jason's quant skills check out his article on rescaled range analysis.
: )
Hello Jason,
Thank you for the initiative in this relatively unexplored terrain.
Reading the above comments I realize that 'intuition' might be a strong and vague word in a forum where numbers, analysis and models is the order.
Though not exactly the same, I use the word 'sanity check'. This is essentially the first and last step in the modelling process to ensure that the model/analysis is not 'out of whack'.
Cheers!
Gourav Shah
Hello Jason,
This is a good article and it's a brave decision to venture into this territory as most of the science is still unclear. One thing that strikes me here is that though the definition of intuition is appropriate, the boundaries are undefined. For example, what separates a logically conceived notion from an intuition for an individual? And even if the intuition is defined by your article (and it's a really sound definition), the intuition may have well been guided (unknowingly) by logic or other observations. These boundaries are faint when you would compare across populations. For example, most of the people go with their 'gut feeling' without any analysis and that would be truly an intuition in pure sense. However, some may work around a problem in a logical manner for a long time and then extend the research or thoughts to form a notion which may explain observations. This could be intuition for some. Einstein said it was intuition that helped him graduate from Newtonian physics to relativity but that according to most of us would be highly structured and creative thinking but not exactly intuition. Given that you are working on this, I would like to know your thoughts on how you deal with these varying boundaries and definitions of intuition from person to person though the standard definition holds solid. It was a ggood article and I look forward to read more on it from you.
Regards,
Jim
Hello Jimmy,
Thank you very much for your feedback; I agree that the boundaries of intuition are fuzzy to most. There is a shocking lack of framework to help those that believe intuition is a real function of the mind and who want to improve.
Several thoughts in response to your considerate questions and points:
1. Science has largely ignored intuition because it is difficult to measure. However, this is starting to change as physics, psychology, and neuroscience all being to consider consciousness. Technology is helping to map out brain correlation to mind function and there are hints in the scientific literature that intuition is a distinct phenomenon. But enormous work remains.
2. To me logic is a function of the analytical, "left brain." I put that in quotes because it is a functional distinction, not an actual physical distinction. Scientists have demonstrated that the hard divide between the left brain and right brain identified in the early 1960s holds mostly only in schizophrenics. Healthy brains show that functionality is distributed throughout the brain and not confined to one hemisphere or another. Nonetheless, logic only works with an initial assumption or observation. From where does this come? I would argue that intuition is the initial point of recognition into consciousness. I would argue extremely strongly that intuition is useless to most without being used to inform reasoning, creativity, memory, and knowledge. So where intuition ends and logic begins is an interesting discussion, but not a necessary one. Put another way, do we have to understand the science behind how a screwdriver works to help us tighten a screw in order to tighten the screw, or is it enough to pick up the screwdriver and to use it to tighten the screw? [Nonetheless, if you look in my book, The Intuitive Investor, there is an extended discussion in chapter 13 where I discuss the demarcation for which you are looking. Your question has inspired me to write more about this is a future post. Sneak preview of a linear model of descending from consciousness into matter: intuition to creativity to intellect to knowledge to memory to choice to action. You see logic enters into it in steps 3 to 6.]
3. As for the "gut feeling" point...yes, this is a common misunderstanding and one that served as a justification for me to begin writing these posts on intuition. Check out the other three posts on intuition I have written to see what I think the differences are between intuition, instinct, System 1, and System 2. Especially read: The Intuitive Investor: Defining Intuition [https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/the-intuitive-investor-defining…].
Thank you, thank you for your discussion! I hope this was helpful!
Jason
Jason,
Thanks for the detailed response; it helps understand your perspective.
Regards,
Jimmy
Hello again, Jimmy,
Excellent, I'm so pleased to hear it! Because of your question I will address this in a future piece.
Thank you for helping shape the direction of the column!
Jason
Thanks and waiting for next part.