Dan Ariely on our buggy moral code | Video on TED.com
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/dan_ariely_on_our_buggy_moral_code.html

Behavioral economist Dan Ariely studies the bugs in our moral code: the hidden reasons we think it's OK to cheat or steal (sometimes). Clever studies help make his point that we're predictably irrational -- and can be influenced in ways we can't grasp.

TED Talks Behavioral economist Dan Ariely studies the bugs in our moral code: the hidden reasons we think it's OK to cheat or steal (sometimes). Clever studies help make his point that we're predictably irrational -- and can be influenced in ways we can't grasp.

*Updated post with great comments by Heather Rasley and Dean Kakridas, both of whom said much more in 3 paragraphs than I did in one whole blog post. How

interesting title

Is Google Rewiring Our Brains? http://is.gd/m748 [from http://twitter.com/msdaibert/statuses/1881375194]

Is Google Rewiring Our Brains, very interesting, http://bit.ly/lsRAr [from http://twitter.com/gregbond/statuses/1288562619]

Gord Hotchkiss: Are Our Brains Becoming “Googlized?” http://is.gd/m9nr / Is Google Rewiring Our Brains? http://is.gd/m748 searchengineland [from http://twitter.com/bibliothekarin/statuses/1289466114]

Once Mischel began analyzing the results, he noticed that low delayers, the children who rang the bell quickly, seemed more likely to have behavioral problems, both in school and at home. They got lower S.A.T. scores. They struggled in stressful situations, often had trouble paying attention, and found it difficult to maintain friendships. The child who could wait fifteen minutes had an S.A.T. score that was, on average, two hundred and ten points higher than that of the kid who could wait only thirty seconds.

who could wait only thirty sec

The marshmallow test -- longitudinal studies show that it may predict future success better than intelligence

The ability to delay gratification is a far better predictor of academic performance than I.Q. "Intelligence is really important, but it's still not as important as self-control."

In the late nineteen-sixties, Carolyn Weisz, a four-year-old with long brown hair, was invited into a “game room” at the Bing Nursery School, on the campus of Stanford University. The room was little more than a large closet, containing a desk and a chair. Carolyn was asked to sit down in the chair and pick a treat from a tray of marshmallows, cookies, and pretzel sticks. Carolyn chose the marshmallow. Although she’s now forty-four, Carolyn still has a weakness for those air-puffed balls of corn syrup and gelatine. “I know I shouldn’t like them,” she says. “But they’re just so delicious!” A researcher then made Carolyn an offer: she could either eat one marshmallow right away or, if she was willing to wait while he stepped out for a few minutes, she could have two marshmallows when he returned. He said that if she rang a bell on the desk while he was away he would come running back, and she could eat one marshmallow but would forfeit the second. Then he left the room.

Don’t! The secret of self-control.

Remember Guy # 3 for the future.

Author: Robert Fabricant Content:  Over the past several months, I’ve been fortunate to meet and talk to a number of people — among them Jan Chipchase of Nokia, Peter Whybrow of UCLA, and Caroline Hummels of Delft University of

Great Article on User Centered Design

Robert Fabricant asks how designers can influence behaviour.

Presented entirely unironically, but these are hilarious (random caps make everything funnier, obviously). I especially like #2: When in Company, put not your Hands to any Part of the Body, not usually Discovered.

reminds me of community service with children

Cat purrs train humans

I suspected this all along posted July 13 2009

Psychology

Why is this no big surprise? "EVER wondered why the pundits who failed to predict the current economic crisis are still being paid for their opinions? It's a consequence of the way human psychology works in a free market, according to a study of how people's self-confidence affects the way others respond to their advice."

good stuff

useful.

While there is no surefire on-the-spot way to sniff out dissemblers, there are some helpful tactics for uncovering untruths. Liars often give short or one-word responses to questions, while truth tellers are more likely to flesh out their answers. A liar provides fewer details & uses fewer words than an honest person, and talks for a smaller percentage of the conversation. Liars are often reluctant to admit ordinary storytelling mistakes. When honest people tell stories, they may realize partway through that they left out some details and would unselfconsciously backtrack to fill in holes. They also may realize a previous statement wasn't quite right, and go back and explain further. Liars, on the other hand, "are worried that someone might catch them in a lie and are reluctant to admit to such ordinary imperfections,"

Reid Technique

Liars often give short or one-word responses to questions, while truth tellers are more likely to flesh out their answers. According to a 2003 study by DePaulo, a liar provides fewer details and uses fewer words t

Everyone stretches the truth a little. Here's what to look for (and how not to get found out).

Another pellet, please

Ever find yourself sitting down at the computer just for a second to find out what other movie you saw that actress in, only to look up and realize the search has led to an hour of Googling? Thank dopamine. Our internal sense of time is believed to be controlled by the dopamine system.

p. 2 is the fun bit.

How the internet impacts our thinking

“Sometimes dogs are doing mistakes adapting in metro, but they are studying.” via donna

Interesting news from Russia in English language.

who russian dogs adapt to their urban environment, ride subway cars, scare people into dropping food. little grifters.

"Mitra’s team wanted to find out what would happen if an isolated bird raised his own colony. As expected, birds raised in soundproof boxes grew up to sing cacophonous songs. But then scientists let the isolated birds give voice lessons to a new round of hatchlings. They found that the young males imitated the songs — but they tweaked them slightly, bringing the structure closer to that of songs sung in the wild. When these birds grew up and became tutors, their pupils’ song continue to conform, with tweaks. After three to four generations, the teachers were producing strapping young finches that belted out normal-sounding songs."

A very cool study, and a well-written article.

via http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/08/can-culture-be-genetically-encoded-new-research-says-yes.html

GReader: Culture May Be Encoded in DNA [feedly] http://ow.ly/58hy [from http://twitter.com/ChipRiley/statuses/1700727055]

Knowledge is passed down directly from generation to generation in the animal kingdom as parents teach their children the things they will need to survive. But a new study has found that, even when the chain is broken, nature sometimes finds a way. Zebra finches, which normally learn their complex courtship songs from their fathers, spontaneously developed the same songs all on their own after only a few generations.

Dr Mark Norman, head of science at Museum Victoria, Melbourne, and one of the authors of the paper, said: "It is amazing watching them excavate one of these shells. They probe their arms down to loosen the mud, then they rotate them out."

Tool use among octopuses

David Dobbs tells us about a new theory in genetics called the orchid hypothesis that suggests that the genes that underlie some of the most troubling human behaviors -- violence, depression, anxiety -- can, in combination with the right environment, also be responsible for our best behaviors. Most of us have genes that make us as hardy as dandelions: able to take root and survive almost anywhere. A few of us, however, are more like the orchid: fragile and fickle, but capable of blooming spectacularly if given greenhouse care. So holds a provocative new theory of genetics, which asserts that the very genes that give us the most trouble as a species, causing behaviors that are self-destructive and antisocial, also underlie humankind's phenomenal adaptability and evolutionary success. With a bad environment and poor parenting, orchid children can end up depressed, drug-addicted, or in jail -- but with the right environment and good parenting, they can grow up to be society's most cr

People that are genetically prone to being at risk in poor environments are also more successful in good environments

found via kottke.org

"the very genes that give us the most trouble as a species also underlie humankind’s phenomenal adaptability and evolutionary success"

Most of us have genes that make us as hardy as dandelions: able to take root and survive almost anywhere. A few of us, however, are more like the orchid: fragile and fickle, but capable of blooming spectacularly if given greenhouse care. So holds a provocative new theory of genetics, which asserts that the very genes that give us the most trouble as a species, causing behaviors that are self-destructive and antisocial, also underlie humankind’s phenomenal adaptability and evolutionary success. With a bad environment and poor parenting, orchid children can end up depressed, drug-addicted, or in jail—but with the right environment and good parenting, they can grow up to be society’s most creative, successful, and happy people.

a bad environment and poor parenting vs the right environment and good parenting

“stress diathesis” or “genetic vulnerability” model Most of us have genes that make us as hardy as dandelions: able to take root and survive almost anywhere. A few of us, however, are more like the orchid: fragile and fickle, but capable of blooming spectacularly if given greenhouse care. So holds a provocative new theory of genetics, which asserts that the very genes that give us the most trouble as a species, causing behaviors that are self-destructive and antisocial, also underlie humankind’s phenomenal adaptability and evolutionary success. With a bad environment and poor parenting, orchid children can end up depressed, drug-addicted, or in jail—but with the right environment and good parenting, they can grow up to be society’s most creative, successful, and happy people. The Atlantic Online | December 2009 |

In my journey through these systems, I’ve been seeing how each gives incentives to their users. For instance, on Foursquare every time I check in it gives me points. If I check in a new place that it didn’t know about, it gives me a ton of points. It is rewarding my behavior. This “reward” turns very addictive. Twitter, on the other hand, has its own incentive system. It puts all sorts of things in your face, like how many Tweets you’ve done, how many people you’re following, how many followers you have, and how many lists you are on. Things that are measured become games and increase addiction. But Twitter has other games going on as well. Anytime someone uses your @name in a Tweet you see it. Remember that Dale Carnegie said in his book about how to win friends and influence people that your name is the sweetest and most important sound in any language.

I’m an addict. You already knew that, didn’t you? After all, I’m just about to pass my 30,000th Tweet and on Facebook I have more than 10,000 friends and on Foursquare I follow more than 3,000 people (about 1% of their user base as just reported). I’m not the only addict, though. On Google there are 402,000 results for “social media addiction.” Someone even made a rap video about social media addiction. In my journey through these systems, I’ve been seeing how each gives incentives to their users. For instance, on Foursquare every time I check in it gives me points. If I check in a new place that it didn’t know about, it gives me a ton of points. It is rewarding my behavior. This “reward” turns very addictive. Twitter, on the other hand, has its own incentive system. It puts all sorts of things in your face, like how many Tweets you’ve done, how many people you’re following, how many followers you have, and how many lists you are on. Things that are measured become games and incre

Twitter, on the other hand, has its own incentive system. It puts all sorts of things in your face, like how many Tweets you’ve done, how many people you’re following, how many followers you have, and how many lists you are on.

OK, hvis nogen ved disse ting så er det nok Scoble

This is pretty funny, and true.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1078529

"This article presents some common behaviors I've observed from my past few years of interactions with geeks, nerds, and other highly-smart technical people. For brevity, I will simply use the term "geek" throughout this article as a catch-all term for such people. I don't mean to pass any value judgments on people who exhibit such behaviors; these are simply my observations and personal theories for why these behaviors occur."

Strategies

Results like these suggest that feeling good about yourself may in part be a matter of having a hard time feeling bad, and that confidence and even success might be triggered by interventions that do nothing but make failure seem the more intimidating possibility. The human brain, for all its power, is suspicious of difficulty, but perhaps we can learn to use that.

Phrases that are easier on the ear aren’t just catchy and easy to remember, McGlone argues, they also feel inherently truer.

Annotated link http://www.diigo.com/bookmark/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.boston.com%2Fbostonglobe%2Fideas%2Farticles%2F2010%2F01%2F31%2Feasy__true%2F%3Fpage%3Dfull

in any situation where we weigh information. It’s a key part of the puzzle of how feelings like attraction and belief and suspicion work

"Cognitive fluency is simply a measure of how easy it is to think about something, and it turns out that people prefer things that are easy to think about to those that are hard. On the face of it, it’s a rather intuitive idea. But psychologists are only beginning to uncover the surprising extent to which fluency guides our thinking, and in situations where we have no idea it is at work."

Cognative fluency

Using examples from vacations to colonoscopies, Nobel laureate and founder of behavioral economics Daniel Kahneman reveals how our "experiencing selves" and our "remembering selves" perceive happiness differently. This new insight has profound implications for economics, public policy -- and our own self-awareness.

Fascinating discussion of happiness from a behavioral economics standpoint; hold on for the Q&A session afterwards, which is also interesting

Using examples from vacations to colonoscopies, Nobel laureate and founder of behavioral economics Daniel Kahneman reveals how our "experiencing selves" and our "remembering selves" perceive happiness differently

Vidéo TED : La mémoire et l'expérience par Ted Kahneman, Nobel d'Economie

"We think of our future as anticipated memories." Read about this talk on Bobulate.

TED Talks Using examples from vacations to colonoscopies, Nobel laureate and founder of behavioral economics Daniel Kahneman reveals how our "experiencing selves" and our "remembering selves" perceive happiness differently. This new insight has profound implications for economics, public policy -- and our own self-awareness.

Keepers at Furuvik Zoo found that the chimp collected and stored stones that he would later use as missiles. Further, the chimp learned to recognise how and when parts of his concrete enclosure could be pulled apart to fashion further projectiles.

This is fascinating. Experts say this shows that the chimp was "anticipating a future mental state - an ability that has been difficult to definitively prove in animals."

Chimps behaviour shows they are more intelligent than it seems

A story done on behavior economics and it's acceptance in the Obama administration.

RT @GuyKawasaki: Great piece on behavorial economics and social psychology. Must read! http://adjix.com/6ufc [from http://twitter.com/r1tz/statuses/2088997262]

Human beings don't always behave rationally. Now, policymakers are using research about human decision-making to design policies to protect humans from their own poor judgment — including everything from unwanted pregnancies to failing to save for retirement.

Economic models and how unpredictable human beings mess with them.

Report on flexibility in the future after 30 not really occurring.

“Do not spoil what you have by desiring what you have not; but remember that what you now have was once among the things only hoped for.”

“The shortest path to oneself leads around the world.”

NOOO I'M ALREADY 21 MUST SELF-ACTUALIZE BEFORE I GET SET IN MY WAYS.

Scientific American: Millions of us dream of transforming our lives, but few of us are able to make major changes after our 20s. Here's why

personality changes occur well past the age of 30 but that typically these changes are small in magnitude compared with the changes that occur between the ages of 20 and 40.

The Anosognosic’s Dilemma: "Existence is elsewhere." — André Breton, The Surrealist Manifesto | http://ow.ly/21xM1 [from http://twitter.com/avivao/statuses/16753976754]

The Anosognostic's Dilemma. Errol Morris, Dunning

Dunning

... just like patience

lazy or exhausted?

Before I flew out to my interview, a friend of mine who knew this person tipped me off on the executive’s interview style. The executive liked to use behavioral interviewing to weed out candidates for positions. I had never heard of this interview style before, so I set out to research as much as I could about it, aiming to be as prepared as possible. Here’s what I learned on the way to landing the job.

Setting your mind on a goal may be counterproductive. Instead think of the future as an open question.

Willingness is a core concept of addiction recovery programs—and a paradoxical one. Twelve-step programs emphasize that addicts cannot will themselves into healthy sobriety—indeed, that ego and self-reliance are often a root cause of their problem. Yet recovering addicts must be willing. That is, they must be open to the possibility that the group and its principles are powerful enough to trump a compulsive disease.

I'm not totally sure that I understand the conclusions the the scientist came to about goal setting, but I'm interested in figuring out what it means and how to apply it to more effective goal setting...

"Setting your mind on a goal may be counterproductive. Instead think of the future as an open question."

Setting your mind on a goal may be counterproductive. Instead think of the future as an open question

People with wondering minds completed significantly more anagrams than did those with willful minds. In other words, the people who kept their minds open were more goal-directed and more motivated than those who declared their objective to themselves.

will i