'New Yorker' writer explores 'natural achiever' bias

Most people do not enjoy being told they are undeserving -- so it was understandable when yesterday's lecture by Malcolm Gladwell seemed to agitate the crowd.

Gladwell, a staff writer for The New Yorker, gave a talk titled "The Quarterback Problem: Fighting the Natural Bias," to a standing-room only crowd of about 175 people in Room 200 of College Hall.

After a generous introduction by School of Arts and Sciences Dean Samuel Preston, who called Gladwell "one of few people in recent years who have done a good job of explaining social science," the guest of honor took the podium -- sporting a massive Afro.

"As human beings, we have a presumption toward qualities in their natural state," he said in opening. From the outset, it was clear Gladwell saw this tendency as a problem in need of correction.

He gave a series of examples that illustrated his point, like reliance on standardized test scores and societal attitudes toward beauty, as he attempted to explain his argument against such a bias.

In his strongest example, Gladwell returned to the title of the lecture, explaining the so-called quarterback problem.

Coaches, he explained, try to pick the best quarterbacks during the draft each year and invariably tend to choose the tallest, strongest candidates. However, anecdotal evidence has shown that this method does not manage to yield future stars.

Gladwell went on to explain how this method shows a clear bias toward natural ability and that the "upside theory" -- a theory claiming that those who have never worked hard to improve have more potential to do so -- is used to justify picking the so-called natural athletes over hard-working players who are seen as having less room for growth.

He also extended his examples into everyday life, explaining how companies also try to pick candidates based on traits like natural intelligence.

"Whenever people do examine this idea of 'upside,' they find it is fallacious," Gladwell said. "The best indicator of your performance this year is your performance last year."

Gladwell explained that he felt the reliance on natural ability tends to give those who achieve great things through hard work secondary status in the eyes of many people.

"The naturalist bias is really and truly unfair," he said. "It is a way of reimposing boundaries and strictures on achievement."

During the question-and-answer session, opinion on the issues was closely divided, and several people challenged Gladwell with examples or their own contradictory theories.

Many who responded seemed to be offended by Gladwell's suggestion that those with abilities others consider innate are often wrongly given preference.

Yet, despite their disagreement, they said they did find the lecture thought-provoking. Even with Fling at the forefront of most minds, students were debating the issues raised as they hurriedly filed out afterwards.

Gladwell spoke as part of the Albert M. Greenfield Memorial Lecture series.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.