Bounded Rationali...
Follow
Find
31.4K views | +13 today
Bounded Rationality and Beyond
News on the effects of bounded rationality in economics and business, relationships and politics
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

New Study of Improvising Jazz Pianists Shows Similar Brain Circuits Used for Music and Language — PsyBlog

New Study of Improvising Jazz Pianists Shows Similar Brain Circuits Used for Music and Language — PsyBlog | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

Brain regions that process language are also involved in communicating through music. When jazz musicians are improvising, the areas of the brain activated include those associated with syntax and spoken language, a new brain imaging study finds.The study had jazz musicians ‘trading fours’: which is where musicians each improvise four bars of music (Donnay et al., 2014).

Typically, trading fours is like a conversation. Each player picks up the themes of the other and elaborates, changes or ‘replies’ in some way.

This suggests that trading fours is more than just a metaphorical conversation, it activates the same areas of the brain involved in building sentences.

A fascinating nuance of the study was that although areas associated with syntax were activated, the areas of the brain associated with themeaning of language showed lower activation.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

IntroductionToDynamicsAndChaosCourse - YouTube

Introduction To Dynamics And Chaos Course from SantaFe
The Complexity Explorer site provides online courses and other educational materials related to complex systems science. The Complexity Explorer project is being developed by the Santa Fe Institute and is funded by a grant from the John Templeton Foundation and by user donations.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Human Well-Being and In-Work Benefits: A Randomized Controlled Trial by Richard Dorsett, Andrew J. Oswald :: SSRN

Human Well-Being and In-Work Benefits: A Randomized Controlled Trial by Richard Dorsett, Andrew J. Oswald :: SSRN | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it
Abstract:      
Many politicians believe they can intervene in the economy to improve people's lives. But can they? In a social experiment carried out in the United Kingdom, extensive in-work support was randomly assigned among 16,000 disadvantaged people. We follow a sub-sample of 3,500 single parents for 5 ensuing years. The results reveal a remarkable, and troubling, finding. Long after eligibility had ceased, the treated individuals had substantially lower psychological well-being, worried more about money, and were increasingly prone to debt. Thus helping people apparently hurt them. We discuss a behavioral framework consistent with our findings and reflect on implications for policy.

 

more...
Eli Levine's curator insight, February 18, 2014 11:37 PM

At least this demonstrates what happens when conservative governments come in to take away benefits from those who already have and are actually in need.  How can they draw the conclusion that government benefits hurt, rather than improve quality of life when they yank the benefits out from under the people after only a few lump sums?

 

Silly British.

 

Probably funded by the Conservatives as well.

 

Think about it.

Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Loss Aversion, Audit Risk Judgments, and Auditor Liability by Jochen Bigus :: SSRN

Loss Aversion, Audit Risk Judgments, and Auditor Liability by Jochen Bigus :: SSRN | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it
Abstract:      
I investigate how different legal regimes affect auditor’s effort and investors’ investment decisions when the auditor is subject to probability weighting and loss aversion, which are two important characteristics of Prospect Theory. Probability weighting encourages an auditor to overrate the audit risk and the likelihood of damages leading to inflated audit fees which could help to explain the BigN audit fee premium. With loss aversion, an auditor is sensitive to the risk of damage compensation and, thus, tends to exert excessive caution which also generates excessive audit fees. Consequently, investors may choose not to hire an auditor and, as a result, may forego an otherwise profitable investment. These effects are more intense with a strict liability regime than with a negligence rule because with the latter, the auditor is not held liable when due care has been exerted. This removes the risk of incurring losses. The paper highlights the robustness of the negligence regime when preferences are unobservable.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

NECSI Executive Education: Antifragility | NECSI

NECSI Executive Education: Antifragility | NECSI | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

When strong winds blow, don't build walls, but rather windmills: there is a way to turn every bit of adversity into fuel for improvement.

This course introduces the principles of antifragility and complex systems science to explain how organizations and markets respond to volatility. Participants will learn which organizations can be considered fragile or antifragile, why certain patterns and trends matter while others are just noise, and how to create organizations that use volatility, variability, stress and disorder as information for making better decisions. This program does not require a math background.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Five insights from the behavioural sciences | Marketing Society Blogger Crawford Hollingworth

Five insights from the behavioural sciences | Marketing Society Blogger Crawford Hollingworth | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

Marketing Society Bloggers - Five insights from the behavioural sciences which could help to nudge and steer charitable giving - Crawford Hollingworth. 

Many of us want to give (or want to give more) to charity, but we often fail to deliver on our intentions. As with so many of our plans, there can be a gap between what we intend to do and what we actually end up doing and charitable giving is one of the plans that we can easily let slip; it needs some trigger action. These simple behavioural tools such as motivating people to give by telling them that others are giving and how much, or manipulating the anchors and reference points for donations, or giving donors the satisfaction of feeling as if their donation has made a real difference, or playing to the way we discount the future are all powerful ways to increase charitable giving and goal attainment very easily, with few additional costs to bear. These insights are also relevant to nearly all forms of fundraising - from attaining venture capital funding or departmental budgets or maybe even The Behavioural Architects’ fundraising for social projects!

 
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Daniel Kahneman changed the way we think about thinking. But what do other thinkers think of him?

Daniel Kahneman changed the way we think about thinking. But what do other thinkers think of him? | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

Thinking, Fast and Slow was a global bestseller, and had a profound impact on psychology and economics, as these tributes from other leading figures show. 

Steven Pinker is a psychology professor at Harvard University. He is frequently named one of the world's top intellectuals and has twice been a finalist for the Pulitzer prize.

I've called Daniel Kahneman the world's most influential living psychologist and I believe that is true. He pretty much created the field of behavioural economics and has revolutionised large parts of cognitive psychology and social psychology. His central message could not be more important, namely, that human reason left to its own devices is apt to engage in a number of fallacies and systematic errors, so if we want to make better decisions in our personal lives and as a society, we ought to be aware of these biases and seek workarounds. That's a powerful and important discovery.

 
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Intuition and Decisions

Intuition and Decisions | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

Workplaces are shifting from task-oriented environments to requiring more complex problem-solving. The way that business leaders made decisions in the past is no longer a guide to making future decisions; adopting a multifaceted approach that goes beyond traditional reasoning alone is fast becoming a crucial business practice. Such complexity allows for creativity and a focus on the role of human intuition in the workplace.

No doubt, data analysis and past results remain crucial to drive business decisions. Yet following gut instinct — even with all of its inherent risks — has pushed many an organization to success. Microsoft Corp. founder Bill Gates was quoted as saying that one often has to rely on intuition. Albert Einstein also was a believer: “The only real valuable thing is intuition,” he once said.

But cultivating and maintaining a work environment that encourages intuitive thought can be a challenge. In a competitive market, when attracting and retaining a quality workforce is necessary to achieve better business results, fostering an environment that leads to increased intuition is essential. Rather than overanalyzing data, which can lead to second-guessing, changing direction or bogging down a project, intuition can push decision-making. 

What Is Intuition?

more...
Eli Levine's curator insight, February 14, 2014 2:24 PM

I wonder if this "task oriented" way of doing business isn't just being eclipsed as we become more aware of the whole that is our world, rather than just the individual parts that make it up.

 

I see a lot of this in our current government set, where there are so many people who are good at tasks but not so many people who are good at arranging and putting tasks and perspectives together to form a whole image.  It's incredibly exhausting having to explain out each little piece of a project to an "S" personality type (from the Myers Briggs Personality Index) and it's frequently those "S" types who get to make the final decisions without having to or being able/comfortable with consulting their intuition.

 

When you fail to comprehend, accept, and work with the whole that is our world, you're more likely to run aground in spite of your accomplishments than if you were to enjoy the view and receive the tasks from "N" personality types.

 

Then again, I honestly don't know where or how I would fit into this world of ignorance and "S" types, who don't, won't and/or can't understand the whole that is our world and their world as well.

 

Silly brains.

 

Think about it.

Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN RISK BEHAVIOUR: DOES NURTURE MATTER?

Using a controlled experiment, we investigate if individuals’ risk preferences are affected by (i) the gender composition of the group to which they are randomly assigned, and (ii) the gender mix of the school they attend. Our subjects, from eight publicly funded single-sex and coeducational schools, were asked to choose between a real-stakes lottery and a sure bet. We found that girls in an all-girls group or attending a single-sex school were more likely than their coed counterparts to choose a real-stakes gamble. This suggests that observed gender differences in behaviour under uncertainty found in previous studies might reflect social learning rather than inherent gender traits.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Separate Valuation Subsystems for Delay and Effort Decision Costs

Abstract

Decision making consists of choosing among available options on the basis of a valuation of their potential costs and benefits. Most theoretical models of decision making in behavioral economics, psychology, and computer science propose that the desirability of outcomes expected from alternative options can be quantified by utility functions. These utility functions allow a decision maker to assign subjective values to each option under consideration by weighting the likely benefits and costs resulting from an action and to select the one with the highest subjective value. Here, we used model-based neuroimaging to test whether the human brain uses separate valuation systems for rewards (erotic stimuli) associated with different types of costs, namely, delay and effort. We show that humans devalue rewards associated with physical effort in a strikingly similar fashion to those they devalue that are associated with delays, and that a single computational model derived from economics theory can account for the behavior observed in both delay discounting and effort discounting. However, our neuroimaging data reveal that the human brain uses distinct valuation subsystems for different types of costs, reflecting in opposite fashion delayed reward and future energetic expenses. The ventral striatum and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex represent the increasing subjective value of delayed rewards, whereas a distinct network, composed of the anterior cingulate cortex and the anterior insula, represent the decreasing value of the effortful option, coding the expected expense of energy. Together, these data demonstrate that the valuation processes underlying different types of costs can be fractionated at the cerebral level.

Previous SectionNext Section 
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

“Money, Well-Being, and Loss Aversion”

Do the negative psychological consequences of a pay cut differ in magnitude than the positive psychological consequences of a pay raise? Researchers haves shown that people tend to be loss averse. That is, people anticipate losses, in money for example, will have greater negative effects than an equally sized gain will have positive effects. While a significant body of research demonstrates the effect anticipated losses or gains have on anticipated well-being, a recent study, published in Psychological Science, Boyce et. al set out to examine the actual effects of pay cuts and pay raises on actual psychological well-being. Boyce et al. utilized two large, longitudinal, national datasets from German and British Households to compare changes in income to changes in subjective well-being. The researchers found that actual raises and cuts in income have similar psychological effects as anticipated raises and cuts, and thereby provide the first evidence that the concept of loss aversion applies to both anticipated and actual experience. Thus, a lower income, if stable, may be better for psychological well-being than a higher, but less stable one. Such findings have significant sociopolitical implications, as small reductions in national income levels, for example, may negate the increases in subjective well-being that a nation’s inhabitants receive from overall income growth.

 
more...
Eli Levine's curator insight, February 10, 2014 1:51 PM

This is going to be very difficult to overcome, as it probably traces itself back to our ancient hominid ancestors.  Unfortunately, it's a hinderance to having an economy that works well for all of society (including for the pathologically greedy) and the environment in which we're living.

 

Avoiding loss is a good thing, in economic terms.  However, one must also factor in the unknown environmental and societal costs of doing business, which would lead to fewer monetary gains and a perception of loss by the people who own the means of production.  Therefore, while the smaller profit margin may lead to healhier results, even for the owners of production, the fact of the matter is is that this perception of loss is likely to grate upon their consciousness like a nail on a chalkboard.  This then seems like it is partially to blame for some of the excesses of the private elite  However, such behavior is caustic when looking at the economy from an systemic level that's interconnected with the socioety and the environment.

 

Therefore, we would necessarily have to evolve out of these habits which served us well in ancient times during times of scarcity.  Generosity is what pays in the eonomy, not greed.  However, it seems that we are biologically rooted to go against that grain, leading me to think that we won't actually get beyond this petty lust for cloth rag.

 

Think about it.

Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

The Psych Report | The Cognitive Burden of Poverty

The Psych Report | The Cognitive Burden of Poverty | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

Nobody is perfect. At times we have difficulty managing our finances, we don’t always take our medications as planned, and sometimes we don’t perform up to par at work. However, research shows that people experience these problems to different degrees. Across financial strata, research reveals that the financially less well-off engage in these behaviors more often than those who are financially stable (1). These behaviors are particularly concerning, because, for those with limited financial resources, they can lead to poverty as well as perpetuate it.

In their article, “Poverty Impedes Cognitive Function,” which appears in the latest issue of Science, University of Warwick Professor Anandi Mani and several other social scientists (2) suggest poverty, and the ever-present concerns that come with it, places an undue burden on an individual’s limited mental resources. Compared with those who are free from poverty, this burden leaves those in poverty with fewer cognitive resources with which to make choices and take action. Mani et al. write, the poor “are less capable not because of inherent traits, but because the very context of poverty imposes load and impedes cognitive capacity.”

However, it is important to note that their explanation is not limited to the traditional populations of poverty, defined by a specific income level or ability to access basic human needs. The authors define poverty “broadly as the gap between one’s needs and the resources available to fulfill them.” That is, people in poverty are those who feel “poor,” who feel they have less than they need.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

‘The Nudge team started out as a sort of Mission Impossible’: How the Government’s successful Behaviour Insights Team has had a profound effect on Whitehall

‘The Nudge team started out as a sort of Mission Impossible’: How the Government’s successful Behaviour Insights Team has had a profound effect on Whitehall | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

‘The Nudge team started out as a sort of Mission Impossible’: How the Government’s successful Behaviour Insights Team has had a profound effect on Whitehall

I am sitting in a featureless meeting room in the Cabinet Office with a man called David Halpern. And I’m about to hear one of the more surprising – but simple insights – into human nature that I’ve heard in a long time.
“Do you have kids?” Hapern asks.
“No,” I reply.
“Well, if you do, then this is worth remembering.”
Halpern begins to tell me about the work of American psychologist Carol Dweck, who has spent her career examining how you can improve the academic performance of children. In particular, one set of tests she devised to examine the effect of feedback on learning.

“So you do a maths test and divide your study group in half,” he explains. “In one group, after they have done the test, you say, good result – you’re very smart. And in the other half you say, good result – that was a really good effort. Then both groups are given a really hard maths test a week later. It is deliberately hard and, of course, some kids give up in the face of that.

more...
Eli Levine's curator insight, February 10, 2014 9:56 AM

Amazing!  Government work having a positive effect in producing greater economic productivity and greater individual autonomy within the economy!  This isn't even basic stuff like making sure that people are being compensated for the work that they do (which Mr. Cameron is opposed to on principle).  This is psychological meddling.  How very unconservative of Mr. Cameron's government.  Mind you, if it works it works. 

 

Mind you, if it helps, it helps. 

 

Just don't ever believe that the conservatives are really sa that ideologically pure or beholden to standardards of behavior. 

 

It's just window dressing from them.  No substance, 

 

Think about it.

Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Agent-Based Computational Economics (Tesfatsion)

Agent-Based Computational Economics

DescriptionAgent-based computational economics (ACE) is the computational modeling of economic processes (including whole economies) as open-ended dynamic systems of interacting agents. Here "agent" refers broadly to a bundle of data and methods representing an entity residing within the dynamic system. Examples of possible agents include: individuals (e.g., consumers and producers); social groupings (e.g., families, firms, communities, and government agencies); institutions (e.g., markets and regulatory systems); biological entities (e.g., crops, livestock, and forests); and physical entities (e.g., infrastructure, weather, and geographical regions). Thus, agents can range from passive system features to active data-gathering decision makers capable of sophisticated social behaviors. Moreover, agents can be composed of other agents, permitting hierarchical constructions.

 
more...
Eli Levine's curator insight, February 22, 2014 1:45 PM

The wave of the future for economic policy making.

 

Think about it.

Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

The Echo Effect: How Repeating People's Words Improves Social Interaction

The Echo Effect: How Repeating People's Words Improves Social Interaction | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

People who are masters at communication often make good use of repeating back the words they hear from the people they are speaking with.

When people use the same words, it creates less social distance between them and makes them feel more similar to each other. But when people use very different words, it creates more social distance and makes them feel more disconnected from each other.

Psychologists are now calling this the “echo effect.” The basic idea is that by repeating back the words people use, we can benefit our social interactions in a variety of ways.

A recent study published in the Journal of Language and Social Psychologyelaborates on this effect. They found that mirroring people’s words can be very important in building likability, safety, rapport, and social cohesion.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Conspiracy Theories

Conspiracy Theories | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it
Cass Sunstein gets a lot of flack from certain groups in the States for the philosophy of Libertarian Paternalism he and Richard Thaler outlined in 'Nudge'.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

5 Reasons to Calm Down Your Analytical Mind

5 Reasons to Calm Down Your Analytical Mind | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

Our “analytical mind” is the thinking part of our brains. It mostly takes place in the prefrontal cortex, which is associated with complex decision-making, problem solving, critical thinking, and self-monitoring.

Basically, it’s the part of our brains that makes us step back and think, “What should I think here?” or “What should I do here?”

It’s a very important function of a healthy mind, but it’s also not the only function. In certain situations, it can actually be useful to calm down your analytical mind.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

2.8 The Price of FREE - YouTube

Everybody likes a good discount. And if you were brave enough to go to the mall the past week or so, you probably saw a lot of people enjoying the post-Christmas sales, stuffing their shopping bags full, trying to get as much for their dollars as possible. But if the stuff in question had been free, our favorite behavioral economist Dan Ariely says there might have been a different story. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Dan Ariely » Blog Archive V2 of my online course (Free!) «

Dan Ariely » Blog Archive V2 of my online course (Free!) « | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

About a year ago we had a course called “A Beginner’s Guide to Irrational Behavior” on coursera.org

Creating the course was a lot of work, but it was also tremendously rewarding to create a community that was so involved in the exploration of human nature, and how to improve the decisions we all make day to day.

In about 4 weeks (March 11th) version #2 of this course will start.  This course will be based on some of the same materials from V1, but it should be an improved version given that in the meanwhile we learned a lot about the nature of online courses.

So, if you are interested, or know someone else who might be interested please pass along this link:  https://www.coursera.org/course/behavioralecon

Looking forward to another exciting course

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Are people violent by nature? Probably.

Are people violent by nature? Probably. | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

Do genes make us do it? The idea that human behavior is driven by genes makes many people uncomfortable, and nowhere is the dispute more bitter than when discussing the biological underpinnings of violence.

The war of ideas over violence and human nature has raged since the 1600s, when philosopher Thomas Hobbes first speculated that the "natural condition of mankind" was one of violence and conflict. In the 1700s, Jean-Jacques Rousseau saw things differently. Enthralled with accounts of the New World, he argued that civilization, not nature, shaped the human propensity for violence.

Social scientists have spent the last three centuries embroiled in debate over the degree to which human nature and culture are responsible for war.

In recent decades, biology has entered the fray. Since Jane Goodall first documented the disturbing reality that chimpanzee communities engage in lethal raids against other chimpanzees, evidence has been mounting in support of biological explanations for our species' capacity for warfare. Over the last few years, scientists have converged on something of a consensus: The human propensity for lethal violence against "out-group" members has deep evolutionary roots.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

DAN ARIELY on : Loss Aversion and The Endowment Effect

Loss aversion refers to the tendency for people to strongly prefer avoiding losses rather than acquiring gains and some studies suggest that psychologically losses are twice as powerful as gains. Originally demonstrated by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman in the late 1970’s, the idea of loss aversion has been further explored by behavioural economist Dan Ariely in his book, “Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions”. In his book, Ariely gives many examples of research where many people will not take advantage of a significant material or financial gain if it means giving something up.

What does this mean in terms of modern organisations? Well, organisations are constantly adapting to fluctuating circumstances by changing their organisational structures and processes. Most organisational changes are accompanied by a good deal of personal and group angst and varying degrees of resistance to the change. The benefits to the organisation and individuals may seem obvious yet the initiatives are still met with resistance. Loss aversion helps us make sense of this.

For most people, change means giving something up to do something new. Giving the theories of loss aversion, the personal benefits have to be significantly greater than the perceived loss if someone is to embrace change whether at a personal or organisational level. This situation is compounded by the fact that most change processes are usually initiated in a context of little or no information about the change. The norm seems to be that change is rumoured before being confirmed. Given such situations, most people have the chance to think about what they might lose well before considering what might be gained. No wonder people generally do no embrace organisational change!

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Nature or nurture: What determines investor behavior?

Using data on identical and fraternal twins’ complete financial portfolios, we decompose the cross-sectional variation in investor behavior. We find that a genetic factor explains about one-third of the variance in stock market participation and asset allocation. Family environment has an effect on the behavior of young individuals, but this effect is not long-lasting and disappears as an individual gains experience.
Frequent contact among twins results in similar investment behavior beyond a genetic factor. Twins who grew up in different environments still display similar investment behavior. Our interpretation of a genetic component of the decision to invest in the stock market is that there are innate differences in factors affecting effective stock market participation costs. We attribute the genetic component of asset allocation—the relative amount invested in equities and the portfolio volatility—to genetic variation in risk preferences.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

Neural Processing of Risk

In our everyday life, we often have to make decisions with risky consequences, such as choosing a restaurant for dinner or choosing a form of retirement saving. To date, however, little is known about how the brain processes risk. Recent conceptualizations of risky decision making highlight that it is generally associated with emotions but do not specify how emotions are implicated in risk processing. Moreover, little is known about risk processing in non-choice situations and how potential losses influence risk processing. Here we used quantitative meta-analyses of functional magnetic resonance imaging experiments on risk processing in the brain to investigate (1) how risk processing is influenced by emotions, (2) how it differs between choice and non-choice situations, and (3) how it changes when losses are possible. By showing that, over a range of experiments and paradigms, risk is consistently represented in the anterior insula, a brain region known to process aversive emotions such as anxiety, disappointment, or regret, we provide evidence that risk processing is influenced by emotions. Furthermore, our results show risk-related activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the parietal cortex in choice situations but not in situations in which no choice is involved or a choice has already been made. The anterior insula was predominantly active in the presence of potential losses, indicating that potential losses modulate risk processing.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

The Psych Report | When a Theory is Too Good to Be True: Fallacies in Perception Research

The Psych Report | When a Theory is Too Good to Be True: Fallacies in Perception Research | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

Over the past few decades, research in the fields of perception and psychophysics has seemingly demonstrated that our vision is inherently tied to the current psychological, emotional, or physical state of our body. Wearing a heavy backpack makes hills appear steeper (Bhalla & Proffitt, 1999); holding a baton makes objects appear closer (Witt, Proffitt, & Epstein, 2005); holding your arms out to the side makes doorways appear narrower (Stefanucci & Geuss, 2009). Findings like these suggest that the image we see is the product of our brain coordinating information about our visual environment with information about our bodily state. Subtle changes in, say, our body’s position, produce noticeable changes in how we perceive our environment, or so the theory goes.

Several scientists have argued that having distorted vision allows you to better adapt to your environment. Walking up a hill with a heavy backpack requires burning more calories, so seeing the hill as steeper allows your body to anticipate the extra burden. Holding a baton makes a nearby object easier to reach. Holding your arms out makes some doorways impassable.

There are many results like these, and when added together they build a bold, intriguing theory about how we see and interact with our visual environment. However, a growing body of research has raised substantial doubts about this theory, as well as the experimental validity of the evidence supporting it. An article in July’s Perspectives on Psychological Science, called How “Paternalistic” Is Spatial Perception? Why Wearing a Heavy Backpack Doesn’t—and Couldn’t—Make Hills Look Steeper (Firestone, 2013), offers a new perspective in this debate and argues why a theory like this, as intriguing as it may be, cannot actually be true.

 
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Alessandro Cerboni
Scoop.it!

The Psych Report | UK’s Behavioral Insights Team Leaves Government, Launches Joint Venture

The Psych Report | UK’s Behavioral Insights Team Leaves Government, Launches Joint Venture | Bounded Rationality and Beyond | Scoop.it

The UK’s Behavioral Insight Team will no longer be a section of the UK Cabinet Offices, the Guardian reported earlier today.  Instead the Behavorial Insights Team (BIT) will form for-profit joint venture with the UK Cabinet Offices and the innovation charity Nesta.

“Today the Behavioural Insights Team is being ‘spun out’ of government and set up as a social purpose company,” the newly launched Behavioural Insights Team websitestates. “We are now a world-leading consulting firm whose mission is to help organisations in the UK and overseas to apply behavioural insights in support of social purpose goals.”

The move comes as the BIT faced increasing demand for its work applying behavioral science to public policy from governments and organisations around the world. Demand that it was unable to meet under its old structure.

Moreover, as Halpern explained to the Guardian, “There is no reason for the UK taxpayer to be paying us to work for the White House.”

more...
No comment yet.