The Decision-Making Process
Humans don’t always make decisions by reasoning from evidence to conclusion. More often, they decide based on how something feels, then use logic afterward to justify it. Bias creeps into the decision-making process, and reason arrives later to explain it.
To varying degrees, people prioritize what feels right over what is correct. Reason and evidence are useful only to the extent that they support a desired outcome. This has two implications: first, we must filter extraneous information to stay focused and simplify decisions; second, this necessary process isn’t infallible: we may overlook uncomfortable facts or favor those that support our feelings, distorting our choices.
“Listen, it don’t really matter to me, baby — you believe what you want to believe” — Tom Petty
Reduced Independent Thinking
Reduced independent thinking correlates with reduced openness to evidence. The decision-making process may instead use “common sense” (appeal to popularity), deference to authority or faith (appeal to authority or scripture), external pressure, selfish motives, intuition, personal assumptions, or feelings.
As a result, logic and evidence can be deprioritized as unnecessary overthinking, diminishing input to the decision-making process.
Individual cognition tends to follow habitual patterns that favor either rigorous truth-seeking or comfortable ease, influencing how much reason guides decisions. Thought patterns amplify over time, with conscientious thinkers improving more, and at a faster rate, than those who think poorly. Consistently reflecting on our thought process and rigorously assessing our choices leads to not only better choices, but stronger thinking habits that predict better choices — think of it as QA (Quality Assurance) for your brain and its thoughts.
“If it ain’t broken, you haven’t tested it enough.” — QA mantra
Application in Fitness
In fitness, this shows up when clients resist the discomfort, uncertainty, or delayed reward inherent in effective training. They may make decisions that feel good in the moment but run counter to their stated goals. In such cases, logical coaching alone fails. Emotional connection becomes the critical leverage point for behavioral change — not through indulgence or lowered standards, but by framing discipline as self-respect and effort as agency. Emotional connection doesn’t require compromising standards, nor does it mean being nice or letting excuses slide — it demands firm, compassionate empathy.
Hold Your Standards
The temptation to encourage clients who put forth minimal effort, if indulged, can lead to lowered standards, loss of respect, and complacency — all of which ultimately lead to failure.
Coaching that relies solely on logic may struggle to retain clients, but emotional connection is not a free pass to lower standards or indulge minimal effort. Effective coaching engages clients towards discipline by balancing empathy with accountability to drive retention and results.