Suchergebnisse

"From phishing scams to pyramid schemes, our world is filled with people who want to fool us. In Nobody's Fool, expert psychologists Daniel Simons and Christopher Chabris break down the science behind deception to pull back the curtain on how we can all avoid being scammed-or even scam the scammers in return. Simons and Chabris identify ten specific features of our psychology that make us vulnerable to being tricked, from our innate tendency to treat all new information-not to mention anything that seems familiar or consistent!-as though it were true, to our failure to consider the important information that we're not receiving, to our tendency to be wary of randomness when in fact it's a sign of authenticity. They explain why all of us are fooled some of the time - whether it's by magicians, marketers, psychics, conspiracy theories, Internet bots, con artists, fraudulent scientists, or even ourselves. Weaving together entertaining stories with scientific research, Simons and Chabris show how Bernie Madoff pulled off his Ponzi scheme; why as much as half the art in leading museums is fake; why every piece of satire reaches people who take it seriously; and the one simple trick to better negotiation that we're all ignoring (yes, it's a genuine tip). They investigate everything from John Podesta giving his emails to Russian hackers to Andre Agassi's ability to read Boris Becker's mind-not to mention, how to tell if someone is lying about inventing cold fusion (even if you know nothing about physics), or if they are forging art (even if you can't tell Monet from Manet). Simons and Chabris put those principles to work, providing concrete ways that readers can build up their resistance to deception and revealing the crucial questions we should ask even before something starts to look suspicious"--

Abstract. Williams and Bargh (2008) reported that holding a hot cup of coffee caused participants to judge a person's personality as warmer and that holding a therapeutic heat pad caused participants to choose rewards for other people rather than for themselves. These experiments featured large effects ( r = .28 and .31), small sample sizes (41 and 53 participants), and barely statistically significant results. We attempted to replicate both experiments in field settings with more than triple the sample sizes (128 and 177) and double-blind procedures, but found near-zero effects ( r = −.03 and .02). In both cases, Bayesian analyses suggest there is substantially more evidence for the null hypothesis of no effect than for the original physical warmth priming hypothesis.

This study investigates the separate and joint effects of the inclusion of experts and collaborative planning on the performance of analytic teams. Teams either did or did not include members with expert-level task-relevant cognitive abilities, and either did or did not receive an intervention that fostered collaborative planning. Results support the authors' hypothesis that analytic performance requires both task-appropriate expertise and collaborative planning to identify strategies for optimally using that expertise. Indeed, high expertise in the absence of collaborative planning actually decreased team performance. Teams engaging in collaborative planning were more likely to effectively integrate their information on key aspects of the analytic problem, which significantly enhanced their analytic performance. Furthermore, information integration mediated the effects of the interaction of expertise and collaboration on performance. The implications of the findings for the optimal use of team member skills and the development of team performance strategies are discussed.

Preferences are fundamental building blocks in all models of economic and political behavior. We study a new sample of comprehensively genotyped subjects with data on economic and political preferences and educational attainment. We use dense single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data to estimate the proportion of variation in these traits explained by common SNPs and to conduct genome-wide association study (GWAS) and prediction analyses. The pattern of results is consistent with findings for other complex traits. First, the estimated fraction of phenotypic variation that could, in principle, be explained by dense SNP arrays is around one-half of the narrow heritability estimated using twin and family samples. The molecular-genetic–based heritability estimates, therefore, partially corroborate evidence of significant heritability from behavior genetic studies. Second, our analyses suggest that these traits have a polygenic architecture, with the heritable variation explained by many genes with small effects. Our results suggest that most published genetic association studies with economic and political traits are dramatically underpowered, which implies a high false discovery rate. These results convey a cautionary message for whether, how, and how soon molecular genetic data can contribute to, and potentially transform, research in social science. We propose some constructive responses to the inferential challenges posed by the small explanatory power of individual SNPs.

Purpose To evaluate if nudges delivered by text message prior to an upcoming primary care visit can increase influenza vaccination rates. Design Randomized, controlled trial. Setting Two health systems in the Northeastern US between September 2020 and March 2021. Subjects 74,811 adults. Interventions Patients in the 19 intervention arms received 1-2 text messages in the 3 days preceding their appointment that varied in their format, interactivity, and content. Measures Influenza vaccination. Analysis Intention-to-treat. Results Participants had a mean (SD) age of 50.7 (16.2) years; 55.8% (41,771) were female, 70.6% (52,826) were White, and 19.0% (14,222) were Black. Among the interventions, 5 of 19 (26.3%) had a significantly greater vaccination rate than control. On average, the 19 interventions increased vaccination relative to control by 1.8 percentage points or 6.1% ( P = .005). The top performing text message described the vaccine to the patient as "reserved for you" and led to a 3.1 percentage point increase (95% CI, 1.3 to 4.9; P < .001) in vaccination relative to control. Three of the top five performing messages described the vaccine as "reserved for you." None of the interventions performed worse than control. Conclusions Text messages encouraging vaccination and delivered prior to an upcoming appointment significantly increased influenza vaccination rates and could be a scalable approach to increase vaccination more broadly.