The concept of naive cynicism is rooted in the broader study of social psychology—how we understand and interpret the actions and intentions of others. At first, researchers focused on how people attribute causes to behaviors, leading to the identification of biases like the fundamental attribution error. This bias highlights our tendency to blame people’s actions on their character rather than external circumstances.

Naive cynicism was coined in a 1999 research paper by psychologists Justin Kruger and Thomas Gilovich. In their studies, participants believed that others were biased toward their interests, but participants believed they would not exhibit this bias themselves.

Much has been written about how this can affect user behavior, but I think it’s worth discussing this bias as it relates to team dynamics.

It can affect everything from communication and trust to decision-making and overall outcomes. In a team setting, if members assume others are acting out of self-interest or have hidden agendas, it can create a breeding ground for mistrust and conflict.

For instance, during planning, a team member who proposes a cautious approach might be seen as trying to avoid work, rather than genuinely concerned about the project’s feasibility. Similarly, when a team celebrates success, naive cynicism might lead some to believe certain members are taking undue credit or exaggerating their contributions.

In critiques, naive cynicism can cause team members to dismiss constructive criticism. They might interpret it as jealousy or sabotage, rather than as an effort to help them improve.

This bias is rather prescient today with the ongoing conflict between Product Managers and UX Designers. We tend to blame the other party and point fingers, assuming malicious intent. Our colleagues are generally motivated by the same things we are. Sure, some people are self-serving, but most of us are not.