It appears to be a general human weakness to "glom onto" a few select factors when making judgement calls and overemphasize those. Studies described in the "Supercrunchers" book (ISBN 9780553805406 ) generally back this up; and experts are not immune. It is the HobbyHorse version of factors. To counteract this inborn human tendancy, we need to force ourselves to be more broad in our judgment by paying attention to a wider range of factors than we want. --top
(Moved a discussion to BookStop, PageAnchor Source_Code)
I once read an article by an English (British) author who described the difference between European prisoners of war and American prisoners when hunger and disease were major risks. The conclusion was that European prisoners cooperated better than the American ones as the physical stresses accumulated. The ending of the article was something along the lines of, "This is the real test of one's humanity". I found that to be an odd exaggeration of conclusion. Even if true, perhaps an American's independent culture nature does make them have problems cooperating in stressful crowds. But perhaps there are other situations where the independence is an advantage. Either way, using it as a key ruler for one's humanity was poorly supported.
See also: NarrowStaffSelectionFactorsCategoryPsychology, CategoryIdealism