It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
I'm working on an assignment for uni and am trying to describe why some people are happy to surrender responsibility for data security to third parties. My thought is that is an 'out of sight, out of mind' issue so I need to read up on that phsychological phenomena but don't know if it has a formal name. Anyone know what it is?
This question / problem has been solved by Montage7image
Dissociation ?
I'm just guessing here, i know nothing about psychology...
I'm currently taking a college level course in high school...
And you may be thinking of is object permanence. It's the phenomena of knowing that something exists even when you don't "see" it.
The reason why you can play "peek a boo" with a small child is that they haven't cognitively developed enough to understand conservation of mass. This is why they're surprised after you reveal your face after covering it.
After a certain age, humans cognitively develop enough that they understand that even when they don't see something, it's still there.
The whole "out of sight, out of mind" could be a carry over from that. We don't focus as much of our attention on things that are not in our view because it wastes energy. So if responsibility is delegated to another group, then we keep it out of our attention because if we keep thinking about it, it just wastes energy.
I'm not a psychology expert or anything, but I hope this helps some.
I am in psychology. It's not dissociation- that's more like a psychological break where you lose touch with reality for a bit and kinda black out, usually in order to cope with something otherwise overwhelming.
It's not object permanence either. You have it correct about kids, but I wouldn't say this is an object permanence problem for adults. It doesn't really carry over in that way.
I agree though that it's probably just about not wanting to waste time and energy into something when you can get someone else to do it for you. It's more about prioritizing your time to focus on the things you feel are most important for you to do, and for a lot of people, they don't feel it's important that they be the one responsible for the data security when a 3rd party is willing to handle that for them.
In the corporate setting its called "cover your ass syndrome" when you know your hopelessly bad at something give it to someone else If they screw it up, sue them.
In the private setting its called laziness or ineptitude.
But seriously, I would look into conservation of resources theory
http://wfnetwork.bc.edu/encyclopedia_entry.php?id=4191&area=All.
Just FYI, I am not in psychology, My wife is a PhD candidate in psychology so everything I know I learned from her and a couple of intro level psyc classes.
Hey Alias,
I’m also a student and have been taking a psychology course dealing with personality theories. Having read a bit about Erich Fromm, I thought of one of his concepts. According to Fromm, the central problem that humans must deal with is freedom. His theory is highly existential. I remember a good metaphor where if you decided to stand at the edge of a cliff, then you would have to deal with the fact that there is niether an external force making you jump off the cliff, nor one that would save you if you fell. In this moment, you realize that you have the power to freely choose. You exist separate from the world, or more specifically from nature, and are self-aware. And this realization creates a basic anxiety.
Anyway, Fromm suggested that one of the defense mechanisms to escape freedom was authoritarianism. The authoritarian escape mechanism would mean that you give up your free will to another person, group, etc, or you would seek to control others. In either case, you are bound to another person, or entity in a symbiosis of sorts. In this way, you give up some of your individuality in attempt to escape the problem of freedom. So, if we take a dictator, for example, he or she would have to deal with providing for a nation. In turn, the nation would expect to be free from making certain choices. There are other escape mechanisms and this does not account for all of Fromm’s ideas, but I hope it helps.
Post edited March 28, 2010 by Montage7
avatar
Montage7: Hey Alias,
I’m also a student and have been taking a psychology course dealing with personality theories. Having read a bit about Erich Fromm, I thought of one of his concepts. According to Fromm, the central problem that humans must deal with is freedom. His theory is highly existential. I remember a good metaphor where if you decided to stand at the edge of a cliff, then you would have to deal with the fact that there is niether an external force making you jump off the cliff, nor one that would save you if you fell. In this moment, you realize that you have the power to freely choose. You exist separate from the world, or more specifically from nature, and are self-aware. And this realization creates a basic anxiety.
Anyway, Fromm suggested that one of the defense mechanisms to escape freedom was authoritarianism. The authoritarian escape mechanism would mean that you give up your free will to another person, group, etc, or you would seek to control others. In either case, you are bound to another person, or entity in a symbiosis of sorts. In this way, you give up some of your individuality in attempt to escape the problem of freedom. So, if we take a dictator, for example, he or she would have to deal with providing for a nation. In turn, the nation would expect to be free from making certain choices. There are other escape mechanisms and this does not account for all of Fromm’s ideas, but I hope it helps.

Fascinating stuff..affirms my belief war stems from fear of life/death.
Off topic but its psych..hard to resist. :)
avatar
Montage7: Fromm suggested that one of the defense mechanisms to escape freedom was authoritarianism. The authoritarian escape mechanism would mean that you give up your free will to another person, group, etc, or you would seek to control others. In either case, you are bound to another person, or entity in a symbiosis of sorts. In this way, you give up some of your individuality in attempt to escape the problem of freedom. So, if we take a dictator, for example, he or she would have to deal with providing for a nation. In turn, the nation would expect to be free from making certain choices. There are other escape mechanisms and this does not account for all of Fromm’s ideas, but I hope it helps.

It does indeed, extremely helpful, thanks for that mate!
You're welcome. I'm glad I could help.