You see it a lot with e-commerce. Online shopping is said to offer an advantage. An array of “reviews” posted by other shoppers of the product you are considering. Amazon and others have converted these comments on the worthiness of a product into tools that help browsers decide if they want to become purchasers.

So, what’s the problem? Many have commented that the negative far outweigh the positive. Just think about it. When was the last time you went out of your way to express a pleasant—mild or otherwise—experience that resulted in what you wanted?

It’s human nature. A negative experience, and the resulting emotional state, do not need to be summoned. There is no need to find your anger. It’s already there, sometimes teeming to be expressed and relieved. An ordinary, yet positive, experience doesn’t evoke the same emotion. Yes, absolute joy from a once-in-a-lifetime experience may fit the bill, but how often does that happen with an online purchase?

It paints a picture of why negative reviews can skew the tool of online reviews. Many more are apt to voice their negative experience; fewer to take the time and energy to report that something provided did what was expected.

This emotional component is also what is said to make debunking falsehoods often very difficult. However, there is a new psychology, a trending method aiming to debunk falsehoods before they take shape. It’s called “pre-bunking.” Ironically, it is much like a vaccine. In fact, it is also referred to as the “inoculation theory.” The method exposes people to a weak form of the misinformation before they encounter the stronger, more viral version, helping them to build a resistance to the lie.

There is also what is called the “truth sandwich,” which advocates for starting with a truth, followed by the lie, then representing the truth reinforced by evidence.

Perhaps we develop this structure for a “review sandwich.” It might limit my time on Amazon wondering whether the reviewer’s concerns are legitimate or the result of a bad day not really fueled by their dissatisfaction with this particular old-timey keyboard (which might have made me feel like Ernest Hemingway, and perhaps made you feel like you were reading him).

Attrayee Chakraborty writes, “Let’s debunk five common myths that hinder effective AI use.” So, let’s do just that with her article, “Critical Thinking in the Age of AI: How to Utilize AI the ‘Right’ Way in Quality.”

And Mark Fridman writes, “Quality managers and engineers, like many other professionals, are often judged by what goes wrong.” So, let’s explore that with his article, “Force and Torque Sensor Integration Has Come a Long Way,” and everything else we have to offer in this month’s Quality.

Enjoy and thanks for reading!