The Living Thing / Notebooks :

Social psychology

Which of those NPR-friendly studies actually replicated?

I’m no social psychologist, but I keep this notebook page around because I want to note somewhere convenient which of the dinner-table conversation starter factoids that people keep telling me have proven to be successful.

Does making someone hold a warm drink make them feel warmly toward you? How about does mentioning money make them greedy?

Lots of these results have imploded in the so called “replication crisis,” which is of interest to me because

  1. The good factoids I am interested in weaponising in applied psephology
  2. All of them, the good factoids and the bad, turn out to be tedious topics of conversation, (“I heard on This American Life that…”) and I would like to have the excuse to shut down at least the erroneous ones expeditiously so I can get at the canapés, without having to fight though explainerism.

See an interesting timeline and recap in Andrew Gelman’s short essay, The winds have changed.

Neuroskeptic dissects money priming

Fan crush moment: Daniel Kahnemann chimes in on priming via the blogosphere:

Clearly, the experimental evidence for the ideas I presented in that chapter was significantly weaker than I believed when I wrote it. This was simply an error: I knew all I needed to know to moderate my enthusiasm for the surprising and elegant findings that I cited, but I did not think it through. When questions were later raised about the robustness of priming results I hoped that the authors of this research would rally to bolster their case by stronger evidence, but this did not happen.

I still believe that actions can be primed, sometimes even by stimuli of which the person is unaware. There is adequate evidence for all the building blocks: semantic priming, significant processing of stimuli that are not consciously perceived, and ideo-motor activation. I see no reason to draw a sharp line between the priming of thoughts and the priming of actions. A case can therefore be made for priming on this indirect evidence. But I have changed my views about the size of behavioral priming effects – they cannot be as large and as robust as my chapter suggested.

Scott Alexander’s admittedly hand-wavey but interesting Devoodooifying Psychology about the kind of results that haven’t replicated:

A single thread seems to run through all of these examples: a shift away from the power of the unconscious. The unconscious doesn’t make you succeed or fail proportionately to your belief in yourself. The unconscious doesn’t change your behavior because of insignificant environmental cues. The unconscious doesn’t make you racially discriminate despite your own better nature. The conscious mind is strong enough to hold onto its preferred beliefs despite brainwashing techniques intended to force it otherwise.

So maybe we should update in general towards less of a role for the unconscious mind?

What is the unconscious mind anyway?

Refs

CoMa90
Cozzarelli, C., & Major, B. (1990) Exploring the Validity of the Impostor Phenomenon. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9(4), 401–417. DOI.
FlKe10
Fletcher, G. J., & Kerr, P. S.(2010) Through the Eyes of Love: Reality and Illusion in Intimate Relationships. Psychological Bulletin, 136(4), 627–658. DOI.
Gige00
Gigerenzer, G. (2000) Adaptive Thinking: Rationality in the Real World (Evolution and Cognition Series). . Oxford University Press, USA
GoMW10
Goel, S., Mason, W., & Watts, D. J.(2010) Real and perceived attitude agreement in social networks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(4), 611–621. DOI.
JJDD00
Jager, W., Janssen, M. A., De Vries, H. J. M., De Greef, J., & Vlek, C. A. J.(2000) Behaviour in commons dilemmas: Homo economicus and Homo psychologicus in an ecological-economic model. Ecological Economics, 35, 357.
Kahn03a
Kahneman, D. (2003a) A psychological perspective on economics. The American Economic Review, 93(2), 162–168. DOI.
Kahn03b
Kahneman, D. (2003b) Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. The American Economic Review, 93(5), 1449–1475.
KaST82
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982) Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.
KaTv79
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292.
KaTv84
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984) Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39(4), 341–350. DOI.
Kame12
Kamenica, E. (2012) Behavioral Economics and Psychology of Incentives. Annual Review of Economics, 4(1), 427–452. DOI.
KlMH13
Klofstad, C. A., McDermott, R., & Hatemi, P. K.(2013) The Dating Preferences of Liberals and Conservatives. Political Behavior, 35(3), 519–538. DOI.
KrDu99
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999) Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1121–1134. DOI.
PKCC10
Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., Cheng, B. H., & Keltner, D. (2010) Having less, giving more: The influence of social class on prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(5), 771–784. DOI.
SaWa08
Salganik, M. J., & Watts, D. J.(2008) Leading the Herd Astray: An Experimental Study of Self-Fulfilling Prophecies in an Artificial Cultural Market. Social Psychology Quarterly, 74(4), 338. DOI.
TvGa82
Tversky, A., & Gati, I. (1982) Similarity, separability, and the triangle inequality. Psychological Review, 89(2), 123–154. DOI.
TvKa73
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207–232. DOI.
TvKa74
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. DOI.
TvKa81
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458. DOI.