Cognitive Bias in GenAI Use: From Groupthink to Human Mitigation

“When you believe in things you don’t understand, then you suffer; superstition ain’t the way.”

–Stevie Wonder, “Superstition,” 1972

I thought of the words of Stevie Wonder’s song “Superstition” the day after I spent a late night doomscrolling social media, desperate for news about a recent national tragedy that touched a local family. I ended up taking a sleeping pill to get some reprieve and a decent night’s sleep.

While doomscrolling on social media is a uniquely modern phenomenon, the desire to seek confirmation and validation through affinity is not. It’s a form of Groupthink. After all, we choose to “follow” folks who are amused (or perhaps “consumed”?) by the same things we are. Cat video, anyone?

In the 21st century, Groupthink isn’t limited to groups anymore. It’s now personal and as close as your mobile phone or desktop. The intimate version of Groupthink began with social media memes and comments and has quickly expanded to include generative AI (GenAI) engagement.

Intellectually, we have mostly come to understand that Groupthink drives our social media feeds—with the help of overly accommodating algorithms. Now, similar dynamics are quietly emerging in how we use GenAI. Cognitive biases that seep into GenAI engagement, especially automation bias and confirmation bias, can warp our content and projects unless we understand what these biases are, how they manifest, and how to manage them.

A Quick Refresher on Groupthink

Irving Janis, an American professor of psychology, first defined the term ” Groupthink ” in 1972 as a “mode of thinking that people engage in when they are involved in a cohesive in-group, when members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.” In other words, we go along to get along, as the American idiom goes.

Read more

GenAI in Professional Settings: Adoption Trends and Use Cases

Some content and project professionals are making their GenAI wishes come true, some are still contemplating their first wish, and some feel trapped in the genie’s bottle. Such is the current state of GenAI use within organizational boundaries.

In the past few weeks, I have been engaging with practitioners through events and private discussions on the application of GenAI to everyday work. Most notably, I recently delivered a recorded presentation on Human-in-the-Loop for IPM Day 2025, set for release on November 6; led a virtual session for the PMI Chapter of Baton Rouge on September 17, 2025, titled “GenAI: The Attractive Nuisance in Your Project”; and participated in an October 2 webcast, “An Imperfect Dance: Responsible GenAI Use.”

What folks told me didn’t always surprise me.

What they told me matched, for the most part, some of the GenAI adoption patterns I’ve been researching. I’ll share those trends, as well as common and emerging use cases and persistent drawbacks, in this month’s blog post.

Read more

Step One in Component Content: Common Modules

No one likes to reinvent the wheel. And in the era of AI, none of us like to create content when we can leverage something that’s already out there. (Copyrights respected, of course.)

Actually, irrespective of AI, an aversion to unnecessary writing effort has always been a thing, especially among those of us who develop product-related content. Why rewrite a product-line description or a disclaimer when you can leverage what others (or you) have already written?

When I had my Eureka moment about this, near the turn of the millennium, I tried to create a content reuse process within an existing product documentation system. Seemed like common sense at the time. So, I set out to convince my colleagues to join me on that plain.

Today, of course, we have many options to componentize content, from WordPress to sophisticated CCMS tools. But where do you start if you’re not ready to make a giant leap to an expensive tool?

I believe the basics of my original process still apply. So, I will share it with you here.

Read more

Sprint but Iterate: How Product Content Pros Can Adopt/Adapt Agility (Part 2)

Sad as it is to say, self-directed, collaborative, and agile product development teams often don’t get content. That is, they don’t really understand where content comes from, how it is best developed, how to work with content creators, what’s required of the team as a whole, and why developing content can sometimes take longer than a 2-week sprint.

So it is often up to content professionals to educate (constantly), adapt (when necessary) and, above all, speak up about their requirements.

Read more