Skip to main content

The Confidence Game - Maria Konnikova ****

One of my favourite TV shows is Hustle, and in effect what Maria Konnikova gives us in this 2016 title is the science of Hustle - the psychology behind the way that confidence tricksters are able to manipulate their marks, whether it’s to sell something dodgy or to live a fictional life. 

Konnikova breaks down a con to its traditional stages, from the first contact (the put-up) to the final subtlety where the true con artist does not go for a single take, but rather makes it seem like things have gone a little wrong, so the mark needs to double down and come up with even more. At each stage we are presented with one or more stories from real life, some quite as remarkable as the fictional cons in the TV programme, others far simpler. From Nigerian princes to Ponzi schemes, all of fraudulent life is here.

The temptation would be to focus on the stories at the expense of science, but Konnikova gives us plenty of depth in psychological studies that help explain why some con artists are so successful - and also why some overreach themselves and fail. It seems odd to be saying this in a review of a popular science book, but if anything Konnikova focuses too much on the reporting of studies, which tends to be rather drily put across, and perhaps could have provided a couple more stories, which are the parts where the book comes alive.

The only real negative I’d say is that I don’t think it’s acceptable these days to write up studies from psychology, especially those dating back to the previous century as many of these do, without going into the replication crisis and the reality that many studies in the field - quite probably including some cited here - are problematic. This can be because the sample size was too small, the maths has been poorly handled or the studies have proved impossible to reproduce. Apart from the mention of what probably amounted to a self-con in a parapsychology study, you might think that all of the studies mentioned were absolutely solid with no basis for concern.

Despite this issue, it’s still an excellent book. It's an effective exploration of what amounts to field trials of human fallibility. While the grifters are hardly ever the loveable rogues portrayed in Hustle, we do even hear about one fraudster with a degree of conscience. And it’s hard not to sympathise with a forger of modern art whose paintings surely demonstrated that the value put on paintings by the likes of Rothko and Pollock is ridiculous. It’s not really about art at all, or the forgeries would be considered just as good as the originals: it’s simply about the fashion attached to the artist’s name. Arguably, it's the art world itself that is home to the con artists here. 

Konnikova does a great job of grounding the reality of the con, and the personalities behind it, in the best explanations that psychology can offer.

Paperback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin Five Way Interview

Rakhat-Bi Abdyssagin (born in 1999) is a distinguished composer, concert pianist, music theorist and researcher. Three of his piano CDs have been released in Germany. He started his undergraduate degree at the age of 13 in Kazakhstan, and having completed three musical doctorates in prominent Italian music institutions at the age of 20, he has mastered advanced composition techniques. In 2024 he completed a PhD in music at the University of St Andrews / Royal Conservatoire of Scotland (researching timbre-texture co-ordinate in avant- garde music), and was awarded The Silver Medal of The Worshipful Company of Musicians, London. He has held visiting affiliations at the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge and UCL, and has been lecturing and giving talks internationally since the age of 13. His latest book is Quantum Mechanics and Avant Garde Music . What links quantum physics and avant-garde music? The entire book is devoted to this question. To put it briefly, there are many different link...

Should we question science?

I was surprised recently by something Simon Singh put on X about Sabine Hossenfelder. I have huge admiration for Simon, but I also have a lot of respect for Sabine. She has written two excellent books and has been helpful to me with a number of physics queries - she also had a really interesting blog, and has now become particularly successful with her science videos. This is where I'm afraid she lost me as audience, as I find video a very unsatisfactory medium to take in information - but I know it has mass appeal. This meant I was concerned by Simon's tweet (or whatever we are supposed to call posts on X) saying 'The Problem With Sabine Hossenfelder: if you are a fan of SH... then this is worth watching.' He was referencing a video from 'Professor Dave Explains' - I'm not familiar with Professor Dave (aka Dave Farina, who apparently isn't a professor, which is perhaps a bit unfortunate for someone calling out fakes), but his videos are popular and he...

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on...