Researchers at the University of Chicago have investigated when and why people begin to avoid uncomfortable information, a behavior commonly referred to as the “Ostrich Effect.” Their study, published in Psychological Science in June, found that as children grow older, they become more likely to avoid information that could elicit negative emotions.
Radhika Santhanagopalan, who led the research team, explained the significance of studying this transition: “To understand the origins of decision-making behaviors—and how they change over time—the only population that can give you insight is children.”
Santhanagopalan’s background in both business and psychology exposed her to an apparent contradiction: adults often go out of their way to avoid distressing information—such as ignoring financial losses or medical results—while children are generally known for their curiosity. “Why is it that children are these super curious people, but then we somehow end up as these information avoiders as adults?” she asked. “What is this transition?”
To explore this shift, Santhanagopalan collaborated with Jane Risen from the Booth School of Business and Katherine Kinzler from the Department of Psychology at UChicago. The researchers identified five motivations for avoiding information: preventing negative emotions like anxiety or disappointment; avoiding negative feedback about likability or competence; protecting personal beliefs; safeguarding preferences; and acting in self-interest while maintaining an appearance of fairness.
These motivations were adapted into scenarios suitable for children. In one example, children were asked whether they wanted to learn why their favorite candy might be bad for them. According to Santhanagopalan, “We found that, whereas younger children really wanted to seek information, older children started to exhibit these avoidance tendencies. For example, they didn't want to know why their favorite candy was bad for them, but they were totally fine learning why their least favorite candy is bad for them.”
One exception involved feedback on competence: regardless of age, children did not shy away from learning if they performed poorly on a test. Santhanagopalan suggested this may be influenced by messaging around growth mindset in schools. “It’s possible that because they’re getting all this messaging about how you can change your aptitude if you put in the work,” she said, “maybe they’re more inclined to seek information because they know they can potentially change the outcome.”
The team also examined when children begin using what psychologists call moral "wiggle room"—using ambiguity for self-gain while preserving a sense of fairness. In experiments involving stickers awarded to themselves and partners, older children increasingly chose not to learn how many stickers their partner would get before making a decision benefiting themselves. As Santhanagopalan described it: “What the moral wiggle room does is allow them to pick the self-interested payoff, while also maintaining the illusion of fairness. That veil of ignorance allows them to act in their own self-interest.”
Santhanagopalan acknowledged there are valid reasons for sometimes avoiding negative information due to its potential emotional impact. However, excessive avoidance may contribute to problems such as increased political polarization and ideological rigidity.
She advised considering underlying reasons for avoidance and suggested reframing uncomfortable facts as useful rather than threatening. Intervening early with young children could help prevent habitual avoidance later on.
“Humans have this propensity to want to resolve uncertainty, but when the resolution is threatening, people might flip to avoidance instead. I think there's something to be said about being able to tolerate and even embrace some level of uncertainty,” Santhanagopalan said. “I think that might help in not falling prey to information avoidance.”
If unsure how best not to avoid difficult truths, she recommends following children's example by remaining curious.