Tricky Balance

Drake Bennett’s article sheds light on an intriguing topic that few of us have ever previously considered. We know, and at times even proclaim, we are lazy people and that we search for the easy path. However, the power of our lazy, or more appropriately, efficient, mind truly shapes how we view and react to the world around us. Rhetoricians can use this knowledge of cognitive fluency to carefully present an argument.
The key is finding a happy medium between cognitive fluency and disfluency, utilizing the best characteristics of both worlds. A fluent and easy to interpret statement provides several benefits. First, it makes the statement seem more familiar. By staying away from confusing word choice or format the statement will enter a person’s mind with ease. If someone has to really focus and think about what is being read or heard they will most likely conclude it is a challenging topic. Also, if they are presented a new format for something the brain must first decipher the layout of the piece and then it can focus on the written work itself. I know that I notice this problem whenever I open up a new text book. Each book is formatted in its own unique way. One might have the key words in bold and their definition placed within the reading itself, while others have them in the margins of the page or in the glossary in the back of the book. The fact that the formatting is different forces my mind to learn how to appropriately navigate through the text and become familiar with the layout before I am able to solely focus on the written information. If books were designed in a more familiar and fluent manner I would be able to focus on the reading material and learn what the text presents without being first confused and sidetracked by the awkward layout. Another example of the importance of cognitive fluency in text books is the word choice used by authors. All too often the topic of interest seems complicated simply because the author fails to write the book in more layman’s terms. Obviously the challenging read increases the brain’s ability to read and grow, but it would help a student understand the material better if, after the complicated jargon was used, there was a paragraph simplifying it. The paragraph might be used to explain it in less confusing words or to take a different, more easily interpreted, approach to teaching the material. I know personally that authors of text books who do conclude each section by simplifying the contents help me to go back and understand the, what at first seemed like challenging, material better.
Cognitive fluency may seem all fine and dandy but too much of it can create for a sterile and non-thought provoking environment. That is where the balanced use of disfluency comes into play. Elaborating on the first example above, what would be worse than each text book being unique is if each were exactly formatted the same. Yes, there would be great familiarity with them and the brain would know exactly what it is looking at, but there would be no thought provoked. Going from one text to the next would not be so noticeable and the brain would combine the subjects and not be able to separate what was learned reading one text book from what was learned of a different subject. Also, reading would become extremely boring because each and every page would look the same. Words would have less meaning due to their alikeness. By utilizing some disfluency authors help to make their work attractive, distinguishable, and thought provoking.
I agree with the author’s explanation of how cognitive disfluency can promote thought and critical thinking. If things are too similar and predictable the brain does not pay as much attention to them. We often forget days that we simply woke up, went to class, work, and studied. However, the days were there was some sort of disfluency we remember easier. Days where events are different stick in our mind because we think about the situations more and share stories about it with our friends and family. Disfluency can be used effectively to ‘spice things up’; however, over using disfluency and unfamiliarity confuses readers. As stated in the article strange fonts cause people to interpret the information as difficult to understand. Writers should be aware of this fact. If someone creates a blog with strange and unpopular font it is unlikely to become popular because readers want a sense of familiarity when they read. A disfluent and unfamiliar font causes the brain to uncomfortably have to interpret this and get used to it. This can be related to why people fear change. Changing situations and policies are often opposed due to the fact that they present a sense of risk and uncertainty. People do not know what to expect out of these new situations, this challenges the brain to work hard to predict possible outcomes. The brain would much rather know from past experiences what is most likely to happen in a particular situation. Discovering a comfortable balance between cognitive fluency and disfluency in our writing proves critical for its successful impact.
The author discussed the positives and negatives associated with cognitive fluency or disfluency, but he failed to engage in just how important the balance between them is. In the field of marketing this balance is crucial. Product names, slogans, and logos need to be simple enough so the consumer is not overwhelmed by their complexity. By creating a simple name or memorable slogan there is a higher chance the customer will find that product familiar and pleasing. If they see a familiar, and thus comfortable, logo that is most likely the product they will purchase at the store. A strange logo that is not understood will challenge the brain and give off a feeling of discomfort to the potential consumer and that product will stay on the shelves while the more generic and cognitively fluent product will be purchased. The balance cannot lie too far to the cognitive fluent side however. In marketing the idea is to get people to look at your product, stop and think about it, maybe talk about it with friends or family, and purchase the merchandise. If there is too much cognitive fluency this will not happen. By utilizing what we know about cognitive disfluency, a marketer can design a slogan or logo that will catch the consumer’s eye. They might stop and think about a certain product they never planned on buying because there is an amount of uniqueness to it. Interest is created and thought is sparked through using a cognitively disfluent approach. But if the product is too strange or has an extremely complex name that is not understood it will be bypassed for a more comforting and familiar designed product.
This balance comes into play in politics as well. When a candidate is running for office he or she needs to come across as a common, well understood American, and at the same time needs to seem educated and create public awareness and analysis. Using an extremely fluent approach in a campaign would have the benefits of looking like an average citizen. This could help gain trust compared to someone that uses a fancy, unique campaign that seems disfluent and different. Perhaps where the need for fluency comes into play most is in the candidate's name. Think about this last presidential election; the two final candidates where McCain and Obama. They were simple, short, and easy to pronounce. The fact that their names were simpler and easier to think about than, Huckabee, for example, lead voters to feel more comfortable giving them their support. An extremely simple campaign slogan might relax voters and help them support you, but too simple would not help your name or campaign promises stick in their head. There has to be some confusion through cognitive disfluency so that voters talk about you and the media analyzes what you say. If you are well understood the media won’t spend countless hours trying to break down and decipher your plans. Obviously, before any campaign starts it is crucial that everyone on the team knows what type of balance between cognitive fluency and disfluency will be used.
This article was the first time I have ever given thought to such a simple, yet influential, topic. People in various sectors of business and politics should be inclined to learn as much as they can about the dramatic impact of cognitive fluency. Their findings will be used to propel them into more prosperous and respected careers. Everyone needs to develop their own balance between cognitive fluency and disfluency to best utilize the resources around them.