That's not a problem, it's a higher function of the brain. Anything else would bring about a 'deer in headlights' response that we would consider to be less intelligent. If humans couldn't take a course of actions without specifically overcoming all problems regarding it, we'd never do anything at all.
We have a goal. We will accept flaws in a plan as long as they don't outweigh our expectation of reaching the goal. The problem with the study is that they think we blindly overlook those flaws and detect the ones in our opponent. That isn't the case. In reality, we don't like the opponent's GOAL, and use the flaws as reasons not to pursue it.
Notice they don't reallys say what the problems were? Notice they call Tom Hanks 'neutral'. I'm willing to bet that the study material looked like one of the Col's blogs...
