For this week’s post I wanted to expand on the question of the existing relationship of models and their influence on behavior.  I am comfortable with the concept of a model shaping policy and action that fulfills the model.  My concern is that there are many people who observe a model and deny it’s validity, therefore resulting in opposing behavior to the policies put in place.  Professor Himpele addressed this conundrum by acknowledging that there is a constant tension between opposing models that are influencing behavior.   The question that I still have is in regards to a model predicting an outcome and those who discredit them.  For example, when the Covid pandemic began there were many people who denied the bell curve model that was proposed early in the year.  Is the lack of preventative action by these groups a contributor to fulfilling the model, or is it something that has to be accounted for in a different model?  Should we be aware of the possible effects a model has on the behavior of those who distrust it?  I imagine that this effect is equal to the outcome of a model not existing.  It is entirely feasible to infer that the actions of those who are skeptic of a model would act the same as they would if the model didn’t exist.

But, the possibility that these people could act in spite of the model also exists.  There are many that will choose to do the opposite of suggestions, especially when the suggestions are coming from people of opposite political/social views.  I’m not sure if it is possible to measure the effects of this phenomenon, but I believe this effect does significantly shape the behavior of certain groups.