It is all about perspective. Well, perhaps. I was reminded recently of an old joke. I have heard it many times, in many ways. If the following offends your particular school loyalty, feel free to repeat it with the names changed to protect your sensibilities.
Two boys are playing football in (your locale) when one is attacked by a rabid Rottweiler (if you are a Rotty momma/daddy, change this to whatever breed you wish). The joke is as funny if it is a toy poodle, but harder for some to understand.
Thinking quickly, the other boy grabs a stick and strikes the attacking dog, averting the threat. A passing reporter witnesses the heroic act and comes over to gather facts for a story (perhaps today, the passer is an "influencer" who shoots a social media "short-form for Tick Tock?")
The reporter/influencer begins, "Young Gator Fan Saves Friend."
"I don't root for the Gators," the youngster replied.
The reporter-influencer is not deterred and immediately begins again—"Little Seminole fan is a hero for..."
"I would never root for the Seminoles," the young man corrects.
The reporter/influencer is confused. "Surely you cannot root for UCF?" and then immediately, "There are no other teams in Florida?!?!"
The heroic youngster quickly corrects, "I root for Alabama."
The reporter/influencer begins anew yet again and intones, "Rotten little redneck delinquent kills innocent and beloved family pet."
Told this way, you also accomplish insulting both Miami University and the University of South Florida by simple omission. Of course, if you tell it with the home state theme in a smaller state (Indiana), the omission part is a bit more challenging (Purdue, IU, and Notre Dame, but who would include Ball State or Indiana State in any frank or earnest football conversation?).
Nonetheless, the whole point here is perspective. There are any number of ways to look at anything, and much of our own perspective will be based on our personal experiences, encounters, education, socialization, and more. We will be "predisposed" to conclusions on a variety of levels.
When someone lives in Florida, why would we instantly gravitate to a belief that they are a Gator fan? Is the South Carolina resident automatically a Gamecock, a Hoosier a Boilermaker, or a Californian a Bruin? Why would we assume someone roots for any team, football, basketball, or hockey?
We make assumptions. It is a natural human reaction to the input of data. We presume that others share our interests: "I like badminton; she must also follow badminton." We form associations between thing one and thing two: "He lives in Florida, and the Seminoles are in Florida; he must root for the Seminoles."
We are each hard-wired to make assumptions. Over our lives, we gain experiences that are built on those assumptions, and each time the assumption proves correct, it is reinforced in our inherent predispositions. Those predispositions are invaluable to us in many contexts: ice is slippery, stoves are hot, and dogs bite.
We all know that these can be disproven. Some ice has been salted/sanded and is not slippery. Some stoves are turned off and are not hot. Not all dogs bite, but we greet each one with caution and inquiry before we assume we are safe. These predispositions can be quite helpful in various contexts.
To the contrary, there is no corresponding benefit to our assumption that if someone is from South Carolina, they must (1) follow football and (2) root for the Gamecocks.
In my latest book, Unseen Influence: Unconscious Predisposition in Dispute Resolution (2025), I have tried to peel back a few layers of the onion on these influences. I have applied their definition and essence to the field of dispute resolution. There are definitions, applications, and thoughts regarding how these various assumptions may be deceiving us in our day-to-day lives.
The example of the young ball fan here could be "context effect," "stereotyping," or the "well-travelled road." We might also be simultaneously impacted by all of these and a raft of other predispositions. These are influencing, impacting, and interacting in our day-to-day.
We cannot (and should not—see the hot stove above) seek to eradicate predisposition from our efforts and endeavors. What we should seek is a better understanding gleaned from introspection and insight. In the words of Mark Cohn, "Do I really feel the way I feel?" (Walking in Memphis, Atlantic Records, 1991).
We owe it to ourselves to be conscious and to consider how predisposition is coloring our perceptions, conclusions, and actions. It is an imperative in our daily lives, personal and professional. Download the book today and start that beneficial journey of awareness and consciousness.
There is a free webinar opportunity, the Perils of Misconception, sponsored by WorkCompCollege on February 19, 2026, at 1:00 Eastern. Debra Livingston will moderate the discussion, and I am looking forward to a lively conversation. Join Dr. Geralyn Datz and Dr. Les Kertay for this event!
