Well, okay, not really a serenade but the O’Reilly Emerging Technology Conference, which kicks off in San Diego next week, on 6 March. I (Matt) will be there, speaking about my new project, playsh, the Playful Shell. And since the conference organisers also published Mind Hacks, I figure a few readers of this blog may be going along too. If you are, please do hunt me down and say hello! It’s always fun to meet new folks.
Zac at ortholog.com writes about an experimental test of buying irrationality using Ebay. Quoting:
Test auctions on eBay showed that most people prefer to pay a low price for an item and also pay postage (American: "shipping") than pay a higher price and get free postage, even when the former added up to more than the latter. A CD for $5+$6 postage is preferred to a CD for $10+freepost. It wasn’t presented as that stark a choice: multiple auctions with different price-postage ratios revealed a net preference for low item price and a poor correlation between auction success and stated postage costs. Interesting but hardly surprising: the salience of the price is greater than the cost of shipping (the anchoring cognitive fallacy), and people in general are not as rational or systematic as they/we believe.
(Zac’s links. read the full post here)
In Influence, Cialdini highlights scarcity as one of the six principle factors of persuasion. In an auction they combine particularly strongly: scarcity of time (the item is only on sale for a limited period), scarity of product (items are sold individually, not just as one-of-many ‘off the shelf’) and competition (from other buyers). Add to this heady mix the price/postage sleight of hand and it is no wonder you get choice irrationalities.
Wikipedia now has both a mind and brain portal and a psychology portal which promise not only to keep you up-to-date with the latest encyclopaedic happenings, but also to broadcast news and messages for the psychology and neuroscience community.
Both have been launched in the last few weeks and like everything on Wikipedia, the quality improves as more people pitch in.
So if you’ve never thought of contributing to the world’s best and most dynamic online encyclopaedia, now’s your chance.
Quick on the heels of research showing how sex the old-fashioned way (but not other forms of sexual gratification) can protect against upcoming stressful events, a new study in the same journal shows sex with a partner is 400 per cent more satisfying than a self-loving session, as measured by levels of prolactin – a hormone associated with satiety. Both studies by Stuart Brody.
Update: Daniel Dennett will be in conversation with psychologist Dr. Susan Blackmore, philosopher and theologian Richard Swinborne and sociologist Tariq Modood at the Imax theatre in Bristol, March 15. Click here and scroll down.
Influence by Robert Cialdini is an excellent, excellent, book. Not only does it present voluminous evidence on the social psychology of persuasion and compliance, but it does succinctly and engagingly, mixing academic references with historical vignettes and personal anecdotes. The book discuss how techniques of persuasion work, grouping them under six major headings, and for each heading the book provides a ‘defence against’ section detailing how to stop yourself being unduly influenced. The final, glorious, touch is that in order to write the book Cialdini – who is a professor of social psychology – engaged in a three-year project of going undercover to explore first-hand how techniques of persuasion are used in the real world: applying for a waiter’s job to study how to increase customers’ tipping, attending tupperware parties, going on training programmes with door-to-door salesmen…it makes the book a wonderful blend of thorough research and astutely observed practice.
The book has been extensively and excellently summarised here, at happening-here.blogspot.com, so I’m just going to pull out some particularly fun examples of persuasion techniques, particularly as the relate to advertising and marketing.
Notes on Cialdini, R.B. (2001). Influence: Science and Practice. Forth Edition. Allyn & Bacon
A key idea is that we all use various cognitive ‘shortcuts’ (heuristics) we use to decide on what to buy. Advertisers can take advantage of these short-cuts to skew our behaviour. For example, there is a price-as-an-indicator-of-quality heurstic which means, if we’re not thinking carefully about a purchase decision, we might just use the assumption that ‚Äúbetter things are more expensive‚Äù, so if we want a ‘better’ thing we will just look at the prices to work out which product is better.
[Chivas Regal Scotch Whiskey] “had been a struggling brand until its managers decided to raise its price to a level far above its competitors. Sales skyrocketed, even though nothing was changed in the product itself (Aaker, 1991)” 
Or the coupons-give-you-a-bargain heuristic:
“A tire company found that mailed-out coupons which, because of a printing error, offered no savings top recipients produced just as much customers response as did error-free coupons that offered substantial savings” 
It’s easy enough to think of other common examples – supermarkets which use three for the price of two offers, or put up signs saying things like “Two for ¬£1”. Next time you see one of these check the price for how much just one costs – it might stem your enthusiasm for the seeming bargain you thought you were being offered
Here’s another trick, which takes advantage of another natural inclination – that of sticking by our word. Cialdini accuses toy producers of undersupplying stores with ‘craze’ toys just before Christmas – after a barrage of advertising parents promise their kids the toy but then can’t get hold of one. They buy them a substitute at Christmas and then also have to buy the craze toy in January. He cites the example of the Cabbage Patch Kids, dolls which were heavily advertised one year in the mid-1980s, and undersupplied during the holiday season. $25 toys were selling at auction for $700. (A charge was later brought against company for advertising something that was unavailable). In 1988, a spokesperson for Hasbo, which made the Furby toy (which also sold out at Christmas), advised parents to say I’ll try, but if I can’t get it for you now, I’ll get it for you later 
The same consistency principle lies behind the advice an encyclopaedia company gives during its sales-program: make the customs fill out the sales agreements themselves. Once they’ve ‘owned’ the action by doing it themselves they are far more likely to stick by it. (“There is something magical about writing things down” says Amway Corporation literature). Cialdini explains the popularity (with companies) of testimonial contests ‚Äì those where you think of 50 words why the product is good and stand a chance of winning something. The contest is not for the company to get a single winning entry, but for them to induce all the entrants of the competition to enhance their commitment to the product by writing a testimonial. Influence has an extended discussion of this, and how the power of small, initial, public voluntary actions can be used to produce later compliance to much larger requests for action
“Commitment decisions, even erroneous ones, have a tendency to be self-perpetuating because they can ‘grow their own legs'”
“You can use small commitments to manipulate a person’s self-image; you can use them to turn citizens into “public servants”, prospects into “customers”, prisoners into “collaborators.” And once you’ve got a man’s self-image where you want it, he should comply naturally with a whole range of your requests that are consistent with this view of himself”.
“…compliance professionals love commitments that produce inner change. First, that change is not just specific to the situation where it first occurred; it covers a whole range of related situations, too. Second, the effects of the change are lasting. So, once a man has been induced to take action that shifts his self-image to that of, let’s say, a public spirited citizen [or a guru’s disciple], he is likely to be public-spirited in a variety of other circumstances where his compliance may also be desired, and he is likely to continue his public-spirited behavior for as long as his new self-image holds.”
Social proof (social influence) is another extremely strong heuristic: ‚Äúif everyone else is doing it, I should do it to‚Äù
This too can be used unfairly – for example Evangelist Billy Graham has been known to ‘seed’ visits to towns in advance so that his arrival is met an outpouring of thousands of the faithful – apparently spontaneous, but actually highly organised. (p 101)
Positive association is also a powerful, and potentially automatic (see also) decision -shortcut
In one study, men who saw a new-car ad that included a seductive young woman model rated the car as faster, more appealing, more expensive-looking, and better designed than did men who viewed the same ad without the model. Yet when asked later, the men refused to believe that the presence of the young woman had influenced their judgments. 
The same kind of, automatic associations, lie behind findings that people leave larger tips if paying by credit card (credit cards associated with big spending, not always with paying back) and that “that when asked to contribute to charity (the United Way), college students were markedly more likely to give money if the room they were in contained MasterCard insignias than if it did not (87 percent verses 33 percent).” (p164). Funnily enough this didn’t hold for people with troubled credit histories!
Cialdini is quite clear that we can’t avoid using these short-cuts – after all they work most of the time – but we must come down hard on those who exploit them
‚ÄúThe pace of modern life demands that we frequently use shortcuts‚Äù (p. 234)
“We are likely to use these lone cues when we don’t have the inclination, time, energy, or cognitive resources to undertake a complete analysis of the situation. When we are rushed, stressed, uncertain, indifferent, distracted or fatigue, we tend to focus less on the information available to us. When making decisions under these circumstances, we often revert to the rather primitive but necessary single-piece-of-good-evidence approach.” (p235)
‚ÄúThe real treachery, and what we cannot tolerate, is any attempt to make a profit in a way that threatens the reliability of our shortcuts‚Äù (p. 239)
I don’t know how realistic this kind of individual/consumer vigilance is as a strategy, but Cialdini seems to believe that the only alternative is to change the whole pace of modern life
The evidence suggests that the ever-accelerating pace and informational crush of modern life will make this particular form of unthinking compliance [shortcuts] more and more prevalent in the future (introduction, p. x.)
My default assumption used to be that the careless use of decision heuristics probably only applies to unimportant decisions. This took quite a severe knock from Cialdini’s discussion on the social-contagion of suicide . If people can be influenced by publicity about a suicide to kill themselves (and all the evidence is that they are – and social proof is one of Cialdini’s six discussed shortcuts), then all of the decisions we make in life are open to be exploited by irrational factors under the control of others.
Refs below the fold
It allows you to rotate and ‘slice through’ a brain scan in 2D and 3D, and click on specific areas to get their names. It’s straightforward to use, and is available for Linux, Mac OSX and Windows.
Some of the most important buttons are in the bottom right hand corner of the main window but are poorly labelled. They determine whether you are selecting the lobes, sulci (the ‘trenches’) or gyri (the ‘ridges’) when asking for on-screen labels.
If the surface of the brain looks slightly odd in the BrainTutor software, it’s because BrainVoyager tends to accentuate the sulci during visualisation. This is presumably to enable a better view of the brain activation when it occurs on the surface.
It argues that our ability to reason about other people’s intentions underlies many common supernatural beliefs. In other words, we have a tendency to see intentions and consciousness even in mechanical aspects of the world.
The author is psychologist Dr Jesse Bering who has been using cognitive psychology to try and understand areas that are traditionally tackled by philosophy, such as belief in souls, causation and existential meaning.
In one experiment, Bering used puppets to describe a story in which a mouse is eaten by an alligator. Children of different ages were then asked to describe the mouse’s ability to feel or know things after its death.
Younger children were more likely than older children to attribute thoughts, desires and even biological states to the mouse, suggesting that the idea of an afterlife is more likely to be intuitive and not one that is learned through ongoing cultural experience.
Jesse is interested in how some of the beliefs surrounding these issues might be influenced or related to common aspects of the mind that have evolved to solve other, more practical problems of life and survival.
The article is only available in the print edition, or online to subscribers, but Jesse has kindly offered to provide a copy of the article to anyone who contacts him by email.
who crashed through their minds in jail waiting for
impossible criminals with golden heads and the
charm of reality in their hearts who sang sweet
blues to Alcatraz,
who retired to Mexico to cultivate a habit, or Rocky
Mount to tender Buddha or Tangiers to boys
or Southern Pacific to the black locomotive or
Harvard to Narcissus to Woodlawn to the
daisychain or grave,
who demanded sanity trials accusing the radio of hyp
notism & were left with their insanity & their
hands & a hung jury,
who threw potato salad at CCNY lecturers on Dadaism
and subsequently presented themselves on the
granite steps of the madhouse with shaven heads
and harlequin speech of suicide, demanding in-
and who were given instead the concrete void of insulin
Metrazol electricity hydrotherapy psycho-
therapy occupational therapy pingpong &
who in humorless protest overturned only one symbolic
pingpong table, resting briefly in catatonia,
returning years later truly bald except for a wig of
blood, and tears and fingers, to the visible mad
man doom of the wards of the madtowns of the
Pilgrim State’s Rockland’s and Greystone’s foetid
halls, bickering with the echoes of the soul, rock-
ing and rolling in the midnight solitude-bench
dolmen-realms of love, dream of life a night-
mare, bodies turned to stone as heavy as the
Link to full text of ‘Howl’.
Controversial artificial intelligence researcher and maverick cognitive science visionary Chris McKinstry took his own life last month.
Chris founded Mindpixel, a collaborative AI project which aimed to collate a mass of machine-usable human knowledge online. He also ran the now offline Mindpixel blog, where he posted AI news and opinions.
His ideas were often highly speculative, but always demonstrated a keen passion for understanding the mind and brain. A recent story for kuro5hin.org was an example of this, where he discussed his entry for the AI chatbot competition the Loebner Prize in terms of a seven dimensional hyper-surface.
Chris posted his intentions to end his life online, and, cognitive scientist to the end, finished it thus:
Oh and BTW, the mind is a maximum hypersurface and thought a trajectory on it and the amygdala and hippocampus are Hopf maps of it. No one knew this before me, and it seems no one cares. So be it. My time will come in a hundred or a thousand years when the idea again returns.
British secret intelligence service MI6 has agreed to compensate soldiers who were dosed with LSD without their consent during the 1950s, according to an article in The Guardian.
Similar experiments were carried out by a number of governments during the 1950s and 60s, in an attempt to create ‘mind control programmes’ and ‘truth drugs’.
One of the most notorius projects was a CIA run project known as MKULTRA that unethically tested a number of dangerous techniques on unwitting members of the public in an attempt to understand ‘mind control’.
In one particularly bizarre project, known as Operation Midnight Climax, the CIA created a brothel, spiked the drinks of punters with LSD, and secretly filmed the effects.
These experiments were largely initiated in reaction to concerns over ‘brain washing’, which American prisoners of war had been subjected to after being captured in Korea.
One LSD test on British Troops was recorded and is the subject of a well-known video, now widely circulated on the internet.
The compensation recently paid to ex-British troops echoes a similar payout to ex-patients of the Canadian psychiatric care who had similar unethical experiments conducted upon them, largely under the direction of the one-time head of the World Psychiatric Association Dr Ewan Cameron.
Link to ‘MI6 pays out over secret LSD mind control tests’ from The Guardian.
Link to ‘MI6 payouts over secret LSD tests’ from BBC News.
Link to Wikipedia page on MKULTRA.
Link to video of LSD testing on British troops.
The Implicit Association Test  is a sorting task which reveals something about our automatic, non-deliberate, associations .
The part of the test which betrays our automatic associations is a combination of two simpler sorting tasks. Both simple tasks involve sorting words and pictures into categories which are assigned to the left and right (by pressing the E and I keys, which are on the left and right of your keyboard). One task is to sort words (like ‘love’, or ‘failure’) into the categories ‘good’ and ‘bad’. The other task varies depending on what you want to detect automatic associations about. In the ‘race IAT’ the task is to sort pictures of the faces of white americans and the faces of black americans. The race IAT isn’t the only version, but it is the most (in)famous (you can also do the IAT on fat vs thin, arab-muslim vs non-arab-muslims, for different US presidents and in many other variations). The compound task involves sorting both words and pictures to the left and right where each side has two categories assigned to it – so ‘good’ and ‘black american’ on the left, and ‘bad’ and ‘white american’ on the right, for example.
What the IAT test does is compare your times for sorting good words when the ‘good’ side is also the ‘white’ side to when the ‘good’ side is also the ‘black’ side (and vice versa for sorting bad words, and for sorting white and black faces to the good and bad sides). By doing these comparisons the test can detect any evaluation of ‘white’ or ‘black’ as positive or negative that is affecting your time to classify the words or faces to the correct side. So, for example, if you take significantly longer to sort good words to the ‘black’ side than you do to the ‘white’ side then the result is an automatic preference for ‘white americans’ over ‘black americans’ 
What the Racial IAT indicates is that most Americans have an automatic preference for whites over blacks. Two things are important about this. First it isn’t really clear what mechanisms lie behind the effects found in the test (‘Voodoo’ is one suggestion!), nor is it clear what they mean . Second, the automatic preference shows up for most people, even in those who consciously express no race preferences and even in many black americans.
Now where did this automatic preference come from? It certainly can’t be deliberate attitudes, since the bias shows up in people (including many black americans) who have explicitly anti-racist attitudes. Some suggestions have been made, like they are the residual of previously held explicit attitudes, or the result of a ‘cultural bias’ (whatever that means) , but I think a strong, and more likely causal , possibility is that that these preferences are the result of systematic exposure to particular associations (i.e that white = good and black = bad). Associations can become established in memory merely by the repeated co-presentation of two things (conditioning), there doesn’t need to be any logical connection between the two. So if on television the adverts for flash cars and happy domestic scenes always feature white folks and the the crime shows more often have black folks as the bad guys you’re going to absorb those associations.
The researchers running the project imply as much in an answer in their FAQ
…it is very possible to possess an automatic preference that you would rather not have (and the researchers who developed this test are convinced that they, too, fall into this category). One solution is to seek experiences that could undo or reverse the patterns of experience that could have created the unwanted preference. But this is not always easy to do. A more practical alternative may be to remain alert to the existence of the undesired preference, recognizing that it may intrude in unwanted fashion into your judgments and actions. Additionally, you may decide to embark on consciously planned actions that can compensate for known unconscious preferences and beliefs.”
The interesting thing for me about the hypothesis that these automatic preferences develop from repeated exposure to particular associations is that you do not need to believe the associations on any deliberate level, nor do you need particularly to pay attention to them, all you need to do is to have them as part of your environment. In that way our Implicit Associations reflect a part of our minds which belongs as much to the environment of our experience as to ourselves – and, additionally, is as much common to everyone who has shared our environment as it is unique to our individual minds.
And this relates to advertising. Adverts are ubiquitous. Advertising shapes the statistical content of the stimuli we are exposed too, however much we decide to give ourselves certain experiences. Does the IAT give us a glimpse of the consequences we reap from an unclean mental environment? 
References below the fold
The programme is designed to be a satire of BBC schools programming that any UK school child in the early 80s will recognise.
The style is impeccably reproduced, so if you never had the pleasure of being educated via the medium of 1980’s school TV, this clip captures the magic (if the magic was being captured by some slightly stoned neuroscientists with too much time on their hands).
Link to page with embedded video.
Quick links from the past week in mind and brain news:
A new study from Duke University Medical Center suggests that half of US Presidents were mentally ill at some stage.
Food from the sea shore fuelled human brain evolution, claims researcher.
New study reports that boys and girls show different rates of cognitive development after being placed in care from orphanages.
Early humans were food for predators, and the need to avoid being lunch was a factor in human evolution, claims new research.
Neuroethicist Judy Iles answers five questions (with video) on crucial questions facing brain science.
Study of ‘crispy-crunchiness’ shows how our brains analyze the sound of food to determine crispness.
Men in their 50s have more satisfying sex lives than men in their 30s finds new survey.
Does mental exercise help keep the wits sharp? The Washington Post investigates.
Musicians use beta-blocker propanolol to prevent on-stage jitters, reports the New York Times.
Dr. William Hapworth on methamphetamine (and he gives a lecture too!).
I’ve just found an article from defunct Canadian digital art and culture magazine HorizonZero that traces the history of electronic music generated from human EEG recordings.
In the late 1960s, Richard Teitelbaum was a member of the innovative Rome-based live electronic music group Musica Elettronica Viva (MEV). In performances of Spacecraft (1967) he used various biological signals including brain (EEG) and cardiac (EKG) signals as control sources for electronic synthesizers. Over the next few years, Teitelbaum continued to use EEG and other biological signals in his compositions and experiments as triggers for nascent Moog electronic synthesizers.
Link to ‘A Young Person’s Guide to Brainwave Music’.
They do a surprisingly good job of it. If it wasn’t for the fact that Pinky is bouncing around on a piece of elastic shouting “Brainstem! Brainstem!” it would be fine academic material.
And it’s probably the only lecture you’re ever likely to see that includes an impromptu tamborine solo.
Link to page with embedded video clip.
Sunday‚Äôs Observer featured an in-depth profile by Rachel Donadio of Malcolm Gladwell, author of The Tipping Point and Blink.
‚ÄúWith a writerly verve and strong narrative powers, he leavens serious social science research with zany characters and pithy, easily digestible anecdotes.‚Äù
Gladwell‚Äôs publishing success ‚Äì Tipping Point has sold 1.7 million copies in N. America and Blink has sold 1.3 million ‚Äì has led to a lucrative career as a public speaker for which he is apparently now paid about $40,000 per lecture. On top of that he‚Äôs also a columnist at the New Yorker.
‚ÄúGladwell‚Äôs dazzling arguments ultimately offer reassurance. Indeed he seems a contemporary incarnation of a recurring figure in the American experience, one who comes with encouraging news: you can make a difference, you have the capacity to change.‚Äù
Link to book tickets to see Malcolm Gladwell in conversation with Robert McCrum, The Observer‚Äôs literary editor, on Weds 15 March at the South Bank Centre in London.
Link to profile as it appeared in the NY Times before the Observer.
Link to first audio clip from the interview.
Link to 2nd audio clip.
Link to 3rd audio.