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
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more