Become an active member of our fallacy-discussing community (or just become a lurker!)

Regression Fallacy

(also known as: regressive fallacy)

Description: Ascribing a cause where none exists in situations where natural fluctuations exist while failing to account for these natural fluctuations.

Logical Form:

B occurred after A (although B naturally fluctuates).

Therefore, A caused B.

Example #1:

I had a real bad headache, then saw my doctor.  Just by talking with him, my headache started to subside, and I was all better the next day.  It was well worth the $200 visit fee.

Explanation: Headaches are a part of life, and naturally come and go on their own with varying degrees of pain. They regress to the mean on their own, the “mean” being a normal state of no pain, with or without medical or chemical intervention. Had the person seen a gynecologist instead, the headache would have still subsided, and it would have been a much more interesting visit—especially if he were a man.

Example #2:

After surgery, my wife was not doing too well -- she was in a lot of pain.  I bought these magnetic wristbands that align with the body's natural vibrations to reduce the pain, and sure enough, a few days later the pain subsided!  Thank you magic wristbands!

Explanation: It is normal to be in pain after any significant surgery.  It is also normal for the pain to subside as the body heals -- this is the body regressing to the mean.  Assuming the magic wristbands caused the pain relief and ignoring the regression back to the mean, is fallacious.

Exception: Of course, if the “cause” is explained as the natural regression to the mean, then in a way it is not fallacious.

My headache went away because that’s what headaches eventually do -- they are a temporary disruption in the normal function of a brain.

Fun Fact: Seeing a doctor can have a real effect on pain relief, even if the doctor does nothing but provide a sympathetic ear. This is known as the psychosocial context of the therapeutic intervention and is often considered part of the placebo effect.


Poulton, E. C. (1994). Behavioral Decision Theory: A New Approach. Cambridge University Press.

Questions about this fallacy? Ask our community!

Uncomfortable Ideas: Facts don't care about feelings. Science isn't concerned about sensibilities. And reality couldn't care less about rage.

This is a book about uncomfortable ideas—the reasons we avoid them, the reasons we shouldn’t, and discussion of dozens of examples that might infuriate you, offend you, or at least make you uncomfortable.

Many of our ideas about the world are based more on feelings than facts, sensibilities than science, and rage than reality. We gravitate toward ideas that make us feel comfortable in areas such as religion, politics, philosophy, social justice, love and sex, humanity, and morality. We avoid ideas that make us feel uncomfortable. This avoidance is a largely unconscious process that affects our judgment and gets in the way of our ability to reach rational and reasonable conclusions. By understanding how our mind works in this area, we can start embracing uncomfortable ideas and be better informed, be more understanding of others, and make better decisions in all areas of life.

Get 20% off this book and all Bo's books*. Use the promotion code: websiteusers

* This is for the author's bookstore only. Applies to autographed hardcover, audiobook, and ebook.

Get the Book