Based around the concept of thin-slicing, this book promotes the idea that your initial thoughts / gut feeling are often the right way to proceed (but not always). There are many case studies to hammer in the point and look at it from different perspectives. I feel the concept was a bit oversold, confused, and not pulled together nicely at the end.

In terms of the fundamental concept that we can learn to make better and faster decisions when we filter out excess data, I agree. This particularly holds if you are experienced in the field (i.e. with experience comes intuition).

As for the "Compelling", "Astonishing" and "Brilliant" words being used to describe this book, I think that maybe "Thought Provoking with Interesting Stories" might be a better way to describe it.

Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking by Malcolm Gladwell is a book that teachers people to rely on there instincts. It's that first few seconds that your mind can tell if a stranger is friend or foe. According to the book we have to train our minds to focus on the facts. That sometimes less information can be a good thing in some instances.One should rely on their "gut" feelings too.
By the way, I see from reading the reviews on this site some people have recommend my book, "The Enlightenment, What God Told Me After One Million Prayers: A Message for Everyone," and again I just want them to know how much I appreciate their recommendation, especially at such a excellent site. I wrote this book out of love and for the glory of God and Jesus, not for my own fame or fortune. I welcome people to read my book, I'm sure you'll find this non-fiction account of a loving God just as and inspiring.

The people who reviewed this book poorly may not have to deal with race issues. Even though I'm Navajo, Gladwell makes some astute humanitarian and race observations that have whirled around in my head for years. He makes affirmations about my theories of race and our denials of our repressed feelings. I did the test of associating good with African American image, and I even struggled with it. I liked Gladwell's honest approach.

He also exhibits a great writing style. Though I read Blink several weeks ago, I'm still talking about it. My gushing comments inspired friends to buy the book for friends, spouses, and even themselves. Get this, I broked away from my gym workout to discuss Blink with a friend. Since I take my gym seriously, this is an all time new one. I've lent my copy out, and when I get it back, I want to explore the researchers of classifying facial expressions. In the meantime, I'll get Tipping Point.

Thank you, Malcolm, for your work. It's great to find an author who sees the world as I do. We must find avenues to get along without the superficial talk and denial. I'll write again if I mimic my reaction at the gym after reading Tipping Point.

I had heard about this book for a long time, so I raced on over to the website and took a long, hard--oh, I mean a short, easy blink at it. I'm not sure what it's about, but I'm sure I don't want to read it. Well, I mean, I did read it, but just really, really fast. It was great! By the way, since I both did and didn't read it, and chances are its an average book, I gave it a 3! Hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

this follow-up to The Tipping Point was a bit of a disappointment. There was a lot of good data in it, but I felt that his entire thesis was flawed. Its all about "thinking without thinking," by trusting your "gut." Yeah, that always works out... there was some good data about folks who could read emotions by observing facial muscles, and how the mind operates when under stress, but otherwise it wasn't very thoughtful.

i almost did not read this book because of its title.. "the power of thinking without thinking" implied that its a sappy self help book that tells you how to think .. i don't like books telling me how to think..only my wife gets to do that...
but i thought i'd give it a shot seeying as i really liked his other book "the tipping point" .. it might have not been as good as the tipping point but it is very stimulating.. i don wanna give away the idea .. i'm sure the book jacket does that perfectly .. its about rapid cognition and the power of te subconsious .. i think the book's point was self contradicting at time and i completely did not like the last couple of chapters.. i would definately recommend it to anyone .. i give it 4.5/5

Ok I read the other book - Tipping Point and said I wasted my time so why did I read this one? Good question! In the end I was trying to figure out if my sometime "Shoot from the hip" method of decision making I use when under pressure is flawed or not. In the end Malcolm tells us in some situations yes it is perfectly reasonable to make a decision in a "blink" but in others more than "one blink" is necessary. Gee thanks for the insight.

The best thing about the book it gave me renewed confidence in making quick decisive decisions. That in fact, there are many things that make up our decision making thought process and sometimes it's not possible to explain your answer. In other cases it would take a team of people weeks to prove your "blink" decision.

I'm not quite done with the book but it is so interesting! I really like it and will probably read Gladwell's newest book, Outliers, as well. If you are interesting in marketing or communication this is a really great book to read. Highly recommend!

The information in the book was quite interesting, but I expected the concept to be expanded to include ways in which we could use this concept in our own experience. A bit of a dissapointment and way too long to get the point across.

I'm not quite done with the book but it is so interesting! I really like it and will probably read Gladwell's newest book, Outliers, as well. If you are interesting in marketing or communication this is a really great book to read. Highly recommend!

Book Review submitted by: Stephen J. Hage, SteveH9697@aol.com

Gladwell is able to take complex situations and reduce them to ideas and concepts that cut through the complexity to reveal an incredibly simple structure. And, it's that structure that becomes the focus for not only wading through but ultimately being able to understand what's "really" going on.

He revealed that ability with his first book, The Tipping Point and carried it through in writing blink.

In trying to understand what blink is about Gladwell explains it best:

"It's a book about rapid cognition, about the kind of thinking that happens in the blink of an eye. When you meet someone for the first time, or walk into a house you are thinking of buying, or read the first few sentences of a book, your mind takes about two seconds to jump to a series of conclusions. Well, Blink is a book about those two seconds, because I think those instant conclusions that we reach are really powerful and really important and, occasionally, really good."

We're taught early on that the right way to make a decision is to gather as much information as possible and carefully weigh all the pros and cons. But sometimes, there just isn't enough time or information. Other times there's just too much of it. Those are the kinds of situations blink is about; situations like war, street shootings and dealing with things that appear to be something they are not.

Gladwell's approach is lucid and satisfying. His style is conversational and avuncular.

The subject is serious but the read is comfortable and easy. And, when you finish it you truly will have learned something valuable and useful.

Read blink and I promise you won't be disappointed or sorry you did.

Book Review submitted by: Stephen J. Hage, SteveH9697@aol.com

Gladwell is able to take complex situations and reduce them to ideas and concepts that cut through the complexity to reveal an incredibly simple structure. And, it's that structure that becomes the focus for not only wading through but ultimately being able to understand what's "really" going on.

He revealed that ability with his first book, The Tipping Point and carried it through in writing blink.

In trying to understand what blink is about Gladwell explains it best:

"It's a book about rapid cognition, about the kind of thinking that happens in the blink of an eye. When you meet someone for the first time, or walk into a house you are thinking of buying, or read the first few sentences of a book, your mind takes about two seconds to jump to a series of conclusions. Well, Blink is a book about those two seconds, because I think those instant conclusions that we reach are really powerful and really important and, occasionally, really good."

We're taught early on that the right way to make a decision is to gather as much information as possible and carefully weigh all the pros and cons. But sometimes, there just isn't enough time or information. Other times there's just too much of it. Those are the kinds of situations blink is about; situations like war, street shootings and dealing with things that appear to be something they are not.

Gladwell's approach is lucid and satisfying. His style is conversational and avuncular.

The subject is serious but the read is comfortable and easy. And, when you finish it you truly will have learned something valuable and useful.

Read blink and I promise you won't be disappointed or sorry you did.

This book just makes you see things entirely different. It is absolutely amazing. Malcom Gladwell is a great writer and thinker. I definitely recommend this book.

We tend to live in a world of snap judgments. Our first impulse is our best decision making process? Rely on our "adaptive unconscious" to make decisions. It may work on some level but I think that's the trouble with our whole society in general. We make all our decisions on a superficial level. No one takes time to re-think anything. If it looks good grab it. There are some things that must be reconsidered especially the deeper things that most people would like to skim over. That is the decision making process that deals with their spiritual life. If you are considering making a decision about your spiritual life I would recommend "The Enlightenment, What God Told Me After One Million Prayers: A Message for Everyone" by John H. Eagan. A decision you won't regret.

As the 976th reviewer of this book,, there is not much new to add here. My perception was that I really don't know what Gladwell was attempting to say. Is "thinking without thinking" good or bad? More to the point, he presents information that supports both sides of the argument but no conclusions. Use it, don't use it, useful characteristic not useful? Answer: sometimes, but when is not evident. Additionally, Gladwell throws a lot of white noise into the mix. Things that don't seem to have relevance to what he is presenting (or not presenting). Like how too much information can sometimes interfere with decision making or how stressful situations make you "mind blind". Though the anecdotes were interesting, neither is about "thinking without thinking". Gladwell implies that "thinking without thinking" has characteristics of being instinctual, then says instincts can be cultivated through experiences then provides information that instincts are frequently wrong, then provides examples of how critical thinking can be wrong so I am left with the same question? What was the intent of the book? I don't necessarily need a roadmap, but it would have been nice to know the destination.

I was looking forward to reading Blink. The combination of an interesting topic and critical acclaim had me excited.

The first few chapters of Blink were moderately intriguing. Gladwell seemed to be getting at the point that thin-slicing (drawing instantaneous conclusions subconsciously) is both powerful and accurate. Then the book starts to wander though and the reader is presented with many examples of thin-slicing being incorrect and even deadly. Gladwell then wraps it up (sort of) by offering that sometimes thin-slicing yields correct conclusions and sometimes it yields incorrect conclusions. Really? That seems like a trivial thesis and one that I probably didn't need to read 300 pages to reach. The material in this book could have been parsed significantly and served as the basis of an article, with greater final effect than this book.

Although there are some good stories along the way, I doubt many readers will find it hard to put this book down at points. Those that truly enjoy it will probably do so more for the anecdotes than because it offers any deep insight.

This is probably the best book (rather I listened to the unabridged audio version) on RC I have come across.

I am regularly talking to clients about rapid cognition or rather gut feelings because they are so important and so many people reject their own and live to regret it. Malcolm Gladwell takes a laymans approach to a technical subject and hits bulls eye after bulls eye.

If you want to know why you sometimes make brilliant snap decisions and how valuable that ability can be, read this book.

One of the main reasons, I think, that Gladwell is such a popular author in a field like business psychology is that he's a terrific storyteller. This study of the way our minds create first impressions, the way we "thin-slice" in just a few seconds, or even fractions of a second, to draw conclusions about people and situations, especially in times of stress, is thoroughly fascinating, largely because of the case studies he describes in making his point. For instance, a thoroughly trained, deeply experienced art historian can look at a painting or statue and know almost instantly whether it's a fake or not -- even if he can't describe *how* he knows. It's this ability that has enabled the species to survive. But it also sometimes gets in the way of rational, preferred behavior. An autistic, for another example, lacks this ability to "read minds" from instant, authomatic analysis of facial expressions, a skill learned in infancy, and is dependent on explanations by others. Gladwell also gives us the real history behind the Pepsi Challenge and how the Coca Cola Company managed to fail so badly with New Coke. (It was confusion between the "sip test" vs. the "drink the whole can test.") And he examines the reasons for the killing of Amadou Diallo by a car full of New York City cops. (Not innate racism so much as complete failure of the cops' training.) And, finally, he describes in considerable detail "Millenium Challenge," the vastly expensive war game conducted in 2002, how and why the Blue Team (representing the U.S.) was savaged by a retired Marine Corps general heading the Red Team -- and how the results were were then refused and perverted by the Bush Pentagon for its own ends in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. This is the author's second book and he continues to both fascinate and educate.

Malcolm Gladwell's "Blink" is an enjoyable read - I breezed right through it and found it to be a book that I would look forward to opening up. Gladwell does a masterful job of weaving together 3 or more points at the same time without losing the reader and frequently leaving me amazed at his organizational skills.

That being said, does Blink get the job done? Does he prove his thesis about "The power of thinking without thinking"? Yes and no. He starts out with a great example of a supposed piece of Greek art that may or may not be a real piece of ancient art. His thesis plays out well there, with his comments on why certain musicians make it and others don't and his comments on police and the need to think quickly are all strong.

His arguments about Paul Van Riper and the war game he won, however, were more about the power of de-centralized decision-making versus centralized planning, in my opinion. Nonetheless, it's a good read and well worth your time.

From what I have read of negative reviews here- most people who don't like the book don't like it because they disagree with it. The idea itself is quite controversial, and I'm not sure I fully agree with Gladwell, but the manner in which he presents it is entertaining and enjoyable to read. His anecdotes do show some examples where "thin slicing" can come quite in handy, but he doesn't say this should overrule thought out processes- his point is that sometimes we can "thin slice" and be right, when overanalyzing leads to the wrong conclusion.
The book is very well written and great for anyone who likes to have something to talk about. I also recommend this book to anyone who likes the book "Freakonomics" because Gladwell uses a similar anecdotal writing stye to Levitt and Dubner.
You shouldn't let your doubts keep you from reading this book- you don't have to agree with Gladwell just because you read it. It's fun read even if you disagree.

As it's title suggests `Blink' is essentially about what happens within those first few seconds of meeting someone new. Reading the book, we quickly learn that first impressions are more important than we realize.

Gladwell uses stories as diverse as dating scenes and military maneuvers to show us just how powerful a first impression is and then shows us how we can use this to our advantage.

For a job seeker in particular, this can be a very powerful tool. Knowing how to give the right first impression can make an astounding difference to how successful we are in job interviews and life in general.

Danny Iny
Author of the free eBook "Forget Everything You Know About Looking For a Job... And Actually Find One!"
HuntingToHired, [...]

If you want to try something a bit more practical, try this: Tao Cycle Therapy: Natural Happiness via Self Directed Cure for Chronic Anxiety & Depression [Updated 2008 3nd Edition]

Having read The Tipping Point for our book club, I was looking forward to reading this book with the same group, and was not disappointed. Fascinating insights into a fairly obscure topic. Makes one really think about ones own prejudices and intuitions.

Although I found "blink" engrossing, Gladwell's talent as a writer often lets him get away with murder. The distinctions he makes sometimes seem arbitrary, particularly if one takes just a little more than 2 seconds to mull things over. Some of his extrapolations not only seem unjustified but mislead. For example, in his discussion of malpractice, Gladwell urges his patients to find their doctors "wanting" if they appear not to be listening or talking down. But the research on which Gladwell bases his malpractice discussion simply found a correlation between this sort of behavior and a physician's likelihood of being sued. There was no discussion of whether the physicians who were sued more frequently when this sort of behavior was present also had delivered less appropriate care with any greater frequency. While many of us would prefer a doctor who takes the time to listen, we also want a competent doctor. Would it necessarily be wise to pass up a doctor with an excellent clinical reputation simply because he/she was a cold fish? In a discussion about hospital emergency departments, Gladwell asserts that "what screws up doctors when they are trying to predict heart attacks is that they take too much information into account." He bases this conclusion on research performed in the 1970s that produced an algorithm for determining heart attacks that considered far less data than traditional methods of diagnosis and was far more accurate and safe. What seems obvious, however, is that the algorithm worked better not because it required less information but rather because it had identified the right information to use. And the algorithm had been developed after only "feeding hundreds of cases into a computer", so there also appears to have been nothing intuitive about which data would prove to be the best data to use in assessing the likelihood of heart attack. Gladwell ends his Afterword with the suggestion that, given the demonstrated bias against black defendants in criminal trials, "the accused shouldn't be in the courtroom" and "should answer all questions by e-mail or through the use of an intermediary." In this manner, the jury's and judge's bias would be mitigated. Constitutional issues aside, if juries and judges are on average (at least unconsciously) biased against black defendants, why shouldn't those same biases affect jury and judge perceptions of black witnesses? Do we also need to remove all witnesses from the courtroom? But after having removed all witnesses and defendants from the courtroom, how much potentially valuable information is lost by the inability to view witness and defendant (if the defendant chooses to take the stand) facial and body language of the sort that Gladwell earlier in the book asserts is so meaningful? Has one type of injustice been "solved" in exchange for creating the possibility of many more? My gut tells me that figuring out how to remedy courtroom racial bias is going to require more thinking than blinking.

I really love a good story, and the stories in this book were fascinating, especially since you weren't sure where each one was going. So much food for thought-- you may just read it in a few days, but spend weeks thinking about it (or telling your husband about it over and over...). Great!

I found this a tremendously interesting read: during two days or so it took me to read it, I really couldn't put it down. (A teacher, I put my students to work doing a bunch of soul-crushing busy work so I could finish reading it during classtime.)

It's full of great anecdotes, and Gladwell has a lucid and engaging style.

The problem is this: as far as what Gladwell's actually saying, his observations don't sum to much.

The basic thesis -- as I'm sure you know -- is that people in certain walks of life are frequently found to exhibit eerily reliable snap judgments, whereby they can arrive at the core of (what seem to us) monstrously complex problems in only a second or two.

Fair enough. The phenomenon certainly exists. Gladwell documents it well and you find yourself convinced that he's not making this up.

Alas. The book attempts to go further than that, and that's where it falls flat.

Gladwell never successfully articulates exactly how it is that his various "thin-slicers" actually work their magic. Further, he fails to give proper weight to the counter-evidence: loads of cases where snap judgments fail. Offhand, I would imagine that judging situations based on one's initial impression is, on average, a dumb way to go most of the time (even perilous in some contexts).

But so enthusiastic is Gladwell about the laundry-list of exceptions he has collected that it's almost to the point where he's implying that preternatural snap judgments are USUALLY reliable, rather than OCCASIONALLY reliable. Which is quite the daring claim.

Finally, Gladwell fails to provide any guidance on the question of how one could systematically learn to hone such a skill, assuming that it can even exist in one's discipline (I remain to be convinced that snap judgments have a role to play in all walks of life).

The end result of these shortcomings is that the only thing "Blink" does effectively is point out that the phenomenon exists. By itself this is not terribly useful.

Blink! what seemed like a fascinating subject pulled me in and then after 100 pages I put it down. Just like that, in a flash of a moment or a blink, I decided I can't finish this book. Might have made a fascinating magazine article in New Yorker magazine but like that magazine this book just started boring me. Blink.

The basic idea is interesting and held my attention for a while, but eventually lost my interest.

There's not much substance to this book. Rather than being a resource of information, it is merely a book of examples. There is no broad takeaway you can gather from it after reading except to say perhaps that many of our decisions are based on split-second thoughts. But did you really need to read this book to find that out?

This book was, by far, the most redundant thing I have ever read. It would have made for an interesting article in a newspaper or magazine; however, the book itself is way too long and repetitious for its topic. I am very disappointed that I spent money on this item. Too bad my "thin slicing" is apparently terrible and could not help me on this purchase.

Gladwell writes interestingly and clearly about some interesting research. But it doesn't stick together for me; seems more a compilation of essays than a cohesive book. Nor do I believe the main simplistic conclusion people tend to draw from it is justified or helpful.

More specifically, Blink doesn't at all justify the general simplification so many seem to be taking that it's ALWAYS (or even nearly always) best to go with immediate intuition/gut feel rather than more deliberate decision-making. Rather, one of the key aspects of judgement and decision-making is knowing when to go with a quick intuitive assessment and when a systematic approach is needed. Blink doesn't help me much with that at all; rather it seems to obscure the issue in my view.

Hence I see the first chapters of 'Nudge' as a better popular introduction to decision-making. The first author of Nudge (Thaler) has the depth of experience in decision-making research that Gladwell lacks.

Let me being this by saying that reading Malcolm Gladwell's books are always a pleasure; he constructs his works like a documentary film, and that makes the complex topics he writes about both engrossing and more approachable. If a reader were to read only the first half of this book, they may have a more positive impression of this book then it is worthy of.

However, this book is an utter disappointment because it never reaches a conclusion. I feel like Mr. Gladwell started this book in support of the unconscious mind as a powerful, accurate decision making force; and as he researched further, grew less sure of this position, until near the end of the book he warns us against relying on the unconscious At the very end, it's apparent that the author doesn't really know where he stands on this topic, and in the afterward, the reader is ping-ponged back and forth as Mr. Gladwell argues with himself.

His final conclusion that he leaves us with--that juries should not be allowed to view a defendant in person--flies in the face of other research that he presents earlier in the book--that the unconscious mind is able to pick up on "micro-expressions" that reveal obscured emotions and motivations.

Mr. Gladwell is clearly unable to make a decision on this topic, and that only leaves his readers ultimately confused.

Malcolm Gladwell is an entertaining writer. His book The Tipping Point almost made my Top Ten list last year, not only for the thoroughly enjoyable read (which it was), but also for the intriguing analysis into human behavior and consumerism that Gladwell offers.

Blink carries on The Tipping Point's tradition of great illustrations and fascinating data. This is a book about "the power of thinking without thinking." In summary, Gladwell shows us how our snap judgments are often more accurate than our deliberate decisions that we take months to make. Gladwell peppers the book with examples that prove his thesis, providing church leaders with plenty of stories that beg to be used as sermon illustrations.

Gladwell also writes about the "dark side of blink," when our snap judgments are wrong. He writes of police mistakes, voter shallowness, and the fact that Coke still outsells Pepsi, even when Pepsi wins hands-down in a taste contest.

This book is entertaining, educating, and provocative, and it challenges some of our presuppositions about how the mind works.

Malcolm blends storytelling and journalism into very interesting reading. Somehow the reading is not entirely satisfying, because there's really no point. Most readers take from the book that we can make decisions within a couple seconds and that can be more accurate than taking weeks or months to study the situation. Often it boils down to experience. At the same time, the book talks about how wrong our initial impressions can be, because of bias, stereotypes, and pressure.

So the lesson is that your initial impressions made within the first second or two can be dead on right...except when you're dead on wrong. Fun stories, though.

There are almost one thousand reviews for this book, most are positive, do I need to submit one? Yes.

The author discusses split-second thinking, or "in the blink of an eye" speed of thought. He postulates that those rapid decisions are usually better. He backs it up with many examples of decisions made with more time, more information, and more discussion that turned out wrong, when the initial decision was actually the correct one. How does this happen?

The subconscious mind processes many inputs and helps to steer our decisions. It is usually right and we need to trust it more often. I trade financial products and I have found that too much information does not give me a clearer picture of what is going to happen, especially in the short to very short term future. I don't know how many times each week while looking at the market, I get this flash of go long, or go short. I have started tracking these thoughts and they are correct almost 90% of the time. How is that possible? I don't know, but I assume my subconscious mind picks up small clues that my conscious mind misses, or needs more information to form an opinion.

The whole process is very exciting and while I can't explain the details, I can verify the results. Another book that delves deeper into the thought process and the subconscious decision-making process is Hare Brain, Tortoise Mind: How Intelligence Increases When You Think Less an excellent book, which I read a couple of years ago and I think I am ready to pull it off the shelf and give it a second read.

The book is based on an interesting premise and the writing style is very easy to read, it really sucks you in. I personally REALLY like Malcolm Gladwell's books/lectures/ideas -- he's defeinitely one of my favorites.

Note that after reading this book I'm not convinced that I completely agree with the fundamental arguement it's trying to make. I also didn't like it as much as Gladwell's previous book, Tipping Point. But, I don't want to sound overly critical. What I consider high quality writing isn't based upon whether or not I agree with the arguement the author is trying to make. The ideas are unique and creative and that alone is basis enough for me to give this book four stars. One last note is that you might want to look at the rebuttal to this book titled Think! (I have not read it but if you find Blink interesting you would probably also like Think!).

Gladwell (intuition/"thin-slicing"), Coleman (emotional intelligence/"limbic high-jacking"), De Bono (lateral thinking/"water logic")... Brains within brains... Thinking without thinking... Thinking about thinking... The states of non-duality and no-mind of not thinking at all and just being...

The lotus of consciousness is still flowering, it seems... The pollen of popularization is still spreading across the printing presses... And we, the readers, violently sneeze out the allergies of oblivion as we thumb through the pages of these operating manuals for our consciousness...

Excuse the late-night reviewing poetics. Seriously: be glad Gladwell writes so well - intuiton is no simple subject matter to "thin-slice."


Pavel Somov, Ph.D., Author of "Eating the Moment: 141 Mindful Practices to Overcome Overeating One Meal at a Time" (New Harbinger, Nov. 2008)

"Blink" almost instantly made it to my shelf of favorite books of all time. I won't go into a detailed description of Gladwell's theory of thin-slicing, as other reviewers have already done this in all the detail you need to know before you decide to purchase this book (which I highly recommend you do) Instead, I'll tell you what I took away from "Blink", and why I think it's such an important read.

"Blink" is more than just a series of entertaining anecdotes that support his theory. It is a book of lessons that provide insight into our minds, and the minds of those around us. Armed with this knowledge, we are better prepared to not only understand our own decision-making process, but to see, for a blink of an eye, what others are seeing when they make decisions about us. Many of the experiments and studies he describes contain information that can be directly applied to one's life.

A good example of this is the study done in Germany that turns our idea of `feeling happy' on its head. While everyone knows that when you're happy, you smile, a team of German scientists found that it works in reverse as well. The simple act of smiling improves your mood. One could just take this interesting factoid and store it in the lumber room of your mind along with all the other trivia. I chose to make it relevant. I can't tell you how many times it's happened since reading this book that I felt angry, frustrated, impatient, or irritated in some way, and then turned my mood around just by forcing myself to smile for a little bit.

Another sub-chapter of the book ("Arguing with a Dog") describes what Gladwell calls "temporary autism", a kind of mind-blindness that occurs when one is excited or stressed to the point that the heart rate rises above 145. I found this chapter very helpful in understanding the physiological process, as my work often requires me to deal with very stressed out people. (It helped with some easily excitable friends too!)

The sub-chapter titled `The Storytelling Problem", which detailed the vast difference between what people say they want in a mate and what they are in fact attracted to, made me feel a lot better after reading it. After years of hearing women describe their "perfect man" to me, and then seeing them fall for a perfect jerk instead, I've gotten more than a little frustrated. But now I know there is a psychological reason for this insanity. I wish I could make every single woman in the country read this chapter (or at least the single women in my city!) On a similar note, I wish I could make everyone read the chapter called "The Warren G. Harding Error", which details the power of looks and our subconscious predilection for "tall, dark, and handsome" men. This chapter is especially relevant in an election year, when we are looking at our two candidates and judging them. Do we really know upon what basis we are judging? Are TRULY picking the best man for the job, or are we voting on who has made the more "presidential" first impression? As much as most people won't admit that race plays any part in their vote, mightn't it anyway, even among those people who truly DO deplore racism? Do we like a candidate because of what he or she truly stands for, or are we voting for them because they smile more often, or joke more often, or were wearing our favorite color the first time we saw them? One section of the book even describes how people can be "primed", subtly influenced to think and behave differently, at least in the short term. Are we, as voters, being "primed" by the various media? I think these are all very valid and relevant questions we need to ask ourselves.

This is what I took away from "Blink"- a deeper understanding of the decision-making process, and what factors assist or subvert it. "Paul Van Riper's Big Victory" is a portrait of a decision-making model that works. "Pepsi's Challenge" describes a situation where thin-slicing doesn't work out. "The Chair of Death" describes an interesting hiccup in the thin-slicing process, where peoples' initial reaction can be negative, not because something is genuinely bad, but simply because it is unfamiliar. And "Blink in Black and White", which not only relates the problem of automatic subconscious racial stereotyping (even of ones OWN race) but supplies a test you can do yourself, was nothing less than chilling.

OK, Gladwell is a writer, not a scientist. If you're looking for an airtight theory complete with control group testing and a detailed analysis of every possible permutation of the concept, go read a scientific journal. And, as another reviewer pointed out, he does tend to end his books with a thud rather than a conclusion. Nonetheless, I think this should be required reading in every American high school. The idea is that compelling, and the issues involved are that important.

Let me start by saying that each chapter in the book is very interesting, easy to read and engaging. A real page turner from this point of view.

Now, having said that, as a whole I couldn't see what was the author getting at through the book. The book starts with the premise that some people can make a snap decision about something and be right, which is interesting. But then, the book goes into chapter after chapter of examples on exemptions to this. Which at the end feels like the original premise is completely false. The only conclusion I could get is that some expert in something might be able to make a quick decision and be right, which is mostly chance alone.

So in essence I found this book to be mostly unimportant.

In Blink, Malcolm Gladwell (a journalist who also wrote The Tipping Point) examines the process of snap decision making. He suggests that we are wrong in thinking that we make decisions rationally by absorbing extensive information and experience. In the end we make decisions unconsciously and essentially instantly. This works great for most decisions because we learn to "thin-slice"-that is, to ignore extraneous input and concentrate on one or two cues. Sometimes, we don't even consciously know what these cues are, as in Gladwell's anecdote about a tennis coach who can predict when a player is going to make a rare sort of error but doesn't know how he knows. The book also explores how this process can go horribly wrong, as in the Amadou Diallo shooting. Gladwell gets the science facts right and has the journalistic skills to make them utterly engrossing.

I'm a rabid fan of these "how it all works" type of psychology books. Two others I fell in love with recently are The Emotional Intelligence Quick Book and The Impulse Factor: Why Some of Us Play It Safe and Others Risk It All

An excellent book, just as good as Gladwell's previous landmark, "The Tipping Point," "Blink" is fascinating in the confirmation that "thin slice" first impressions are more than intuitive, they are the results of subconscious factual significant experience and realities, and in many cases subconscious bias. Interesting too, is the evidence that we can think "too much" and counter our "intuitive" knowledge judgments with obfuscating factual study - "introspection destroyed people's ability to solve insight problems" and, as is quoted, "what happens is that we come up with a plausible-sounding reason for why we might like or dislike something, and then we adjust our true preference to be in line with that plausible-sounding reason." I especially like the section on focus groups, how results on "first impressions" can be very wrong, "We like market research because it provides certainty...but the truth is that for the most important decisions, there can be no certainty" says Gladwell. I particularly like the example of how the Aeron chair by Herman Miller failed every focus group rating it took on looks, and "likely to purchase" reviews, yet became the best selling chair in the company's history (and then focus groups reversed their scores), ditto audience reaction to the best selling situation comedies of their time, "All in the Family" and "The Mary Tyler Moore Show." Applying the analysis to a polarizing product today in the automotive industry, as someone who is looking at the launch of the new reaction creating Ford Flex vehicle (September 23, 2008), I'm wondering whether or not what Gladwell said about the initial "looks" rating for the Aeron chair is true for the new Ford Crossover in the looks department - that is, as its very different looking, "Maybe the word `ugly' was just a proxy for `different." And when people get familiar with the `difference' time will change perception (as it did with the Ford Taurus over two decades ago). It will be interesting to see how this "real world" example of Gladwell's observations rolls out.

Definitely on my recommended book list. A must read for women in business.

Susan Bock
The Success Coach for Women in Business
www.SusanBockSolutions.com

Definitely on my recommended book list. A must read for women in business.

Susan Bock
The Success Coach for Women in Business
www.SusanBockSolutions.com

This is probably one of the best books I have read. This book is an excellent compilation of captivating studies in very different fields, carefully selected by the author to make his point. How by artificially altering your facial expressions your mood can change (for example if you put up a sad face you get grieved), how a psychologist can tell if a marriage is going to last by studying how the couple reacts in a simulated argument, etc.

We all take decisions "in the blink of an eye", even if it is only a decision of trusting a person or not. This is how our brain works, if you like it or not. Maybe we should not call them decisions, since the word decision implies some sort of reasoning and a process of weighing pros and cons, I would also not call this process thinking without thinking. Maybe we should call them judgements or pre-judgements (prejudices).

A lot of information is stored, retrieved, compared and judged in seconds in our unconscious, a process of which we are completely unaware of. So it makes perfect sense that the more experienced and educated our unconscious is, the better these pre-judgements will be. I do not believe that a lay person would detect a false work of art by pure instinct (by a feeling of "something is wrong with this work of art"), like experts did in one of the stories. Their unconscious perceived some "anomalies" quickly, by comparison with the huge amounts of previously recorded information of this period's artistic style. The experts could not explain why they felt that way, since consciously they had not noticed the anomalies yet. On the other hand, I think that a person with deep knowledge of people might have unconsciously detected that the art dealer selling the work of art was uneasy in some way, so he might have got a "hunch" that something was wrong.

This book tells you that you should trust your gut-feelings, but that you should "nurture" them with observation and expertise to make them more precise. Since these pre-judgements are influenced by our cultural environment and far quicker than ourselves and our conscious rational minds, they are also the basis of unfair prejudices that can make you act upon them and that are difficult to override (the author even claims that in situations in which time is of the essence, they are impossible to overcome, since we react upon them before thinking). Test your "racism" and "sexism" in a brief exercise in a chapter of the book, you will be surprised...

The best is probably to let our unconscious pre-judge and then we can still decide by a thinking process. Nature gave us both abilities, let's use them both.

If you have a short attention span, these short stories, loosely tied together by a few ideas is great for you. This is my favorite book of all-time. I seriously recommend this to anyone who is fascinated by the weirdness of the human mind.

This book is required reading for all incoming freshman at the top ranked engineering school in the U.S. The book is very readable, insightful, and useful.

A fascinating study of how the mind works and the effects our gut reactions can have on our decisions, "Blink" hammered Gladwell's point into me in an engaging and entertaining read. The writing is easy but intelligent, and I loved the specific examples and stories, particularly one about the war games. Not only do they help support Gladwell's notion but they're enough to create enjoyable stories by themselves.

The main idea I took away? First impressions aren't everything, but they're a lot more than you realize.

A very interesting and clever book. We know more than we might think when it comes to making judgments. Malcolm Gladwell provides excellent examples of how we can improve our decision making by paying more attention to our intuitive side. He's not suggesting that information gathering and research be ignored, only that we also consider the benefits to be derived from learning and making decsions in a different way. His examples are fascinating and the book's long term high ranking is well deserved. It's a hard book to put down.

As a person that has worked in manufacturing organizations all of my life, I often wondered how the grizzled veteran managers could always tell what was going to happen next. They didn't seem to be any smarter than the average Joe but somehow, they could predict the future. That is, the future of action or behavior A would result in item B materializing, just as sure as the sun rises in the morning.

This book is a landmark because it explains these mysteries to me. Not only is the book a highly interesting read, but it is an invaluable guide for those in managerial positions. Not only do I practice what it preaches but I also teach the concept to others.

I high recommend this book and have included it in my Amazon lists and guides. If you are in management, you need this book in your collection! Michael L. Gooch, SPHR Author of
Wingtips with Spurs

I think this is a must read, especially for those that enjoy psychology and understanding human behavior, human interaction and the reason we do many of the things the way we do. I think it is also a great self improvement tool