This theory suggests that when a person focuses exclusively on their own preferred position, they are more likely to overestimate their popularity and thus fall victim to the false consensus effect.  This is because this position is the only one in their immediate consciousness. Implementing action that will promote the position will make it clearer and increase the consensus effect. However, if more positions are presented to the individual, the degree of inconsistency could decrease considerably.  It is possible to establish here a link between the two stated theories of social comparison and projection. First, as the theory of social comparison explains, individuals constantly view their peers as a reference group and are motivated to seek confirmation of their own attitudes and beliefs.  However, to ensure confirmation and greater self-esteem, an individual could unconsciously project his own beliefs onto others (the objectives of his comparisons). This end result is the wrong consensus effect. In summary, the erroneous predicting effect can come from both the theory of social comparison and the concept of projection. Gilovich, T., Savitsky, K. (1999).
The flagship effect and the illusion of transparency: self-centered assessments, as others saw. Current Directorates of Psychological Science, 8 (6), 165-168. Beaman, Klentz, Servant and Svanum (1979) did a field experiment to see if introspection would affect children`s honesty. The researchers expected that most children who steal would be considered false, but that they would be more likely to respond to this belief if they were more confident. They conducted this Halloween experiment in homes in the city of Seattle, Washington. In some homes, children who were trickery or treatments were greeted by one of the experimenters, showed a large bowl of candy and were asked to take only one piece at a time. The researchers discreetly observed each child to see how many pieces he actually took. In some houses, there was a large mirror behind the candy bowl; There was no mirror in other houses. Of the 363 children observed in the study, 19% did not follow instructions and took more than one piece of candy. However, children in front of a mirror were significantly rarer to fly (14.4%) like those who did not see a mirror (28.5%). After each round, the students, who had not been asked to lie, indicated which of the students they thought they had lied in that round, and the liar was asked to estimate the number of other students who would correctly guess who the liar was. As you can see in Figure 3.7, „The Illusion of Transparency,“ liars overestimated the detectability of their lies: on average, they predicted that more than 44% of their teammates knew they were liars, but in fact, only 25% of them were able to accurately identify them.
Gilovich and his colleagues called the effect „the illusion of transparency.“ This illusion brings to the home an important final learning point about our self-concepts: although we may feel that our vision of ourselves is obvious to others, it may not always be the case! If you try to determine if other people share your beliefs, you will probably think of people who most resemble you, such as your family and friends, and it is very likely that they have a lot in common with you.