Welcome to Stuff you should know a production of iHeartRadio.

Welcome to Stuff you should know a production of iHeartRadio.

Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh, and there's Chuck Charles w Chuck Bryant, the best all around Boy, and there's Jerry Rowland. And this is stuff you should know about.

Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh, and there's Chuck Charles w Chuck Bryant, the best all around Boy, and there's Jerry Rowland. And this is stuff you should know about.

Really, wish I hadn't have told you that. I think I've told you that before, though, so you forgot the first time, so maybe you'll forget again.

Really, wish I hadn't have told you that. I think I've told you that before, though, so you forgot the first time, so maybe you'll forget again.

I can't you know how people keep lists of like episodes we say we should do, or movies we've mentioned, or something like that. They should keep a list of the different things that we've talked about and then completely forgot we talked about, because I'm sure it would be extensive.

I can't you know how people keep lists of like episodes we say we should do, or movies we've mentioned, or something like that. They should keep a list of the different things that we've talked about and then completely forgot we talked about, because I'm sure it would be extensive.

Yeah, big list.

Yeah, big list.

So speaking of big list, Chuck, we're talking today about priming, which is the present tense of prime us, and what it refers to is a a psychological term where you are prompted to respond in a certain way, behave in a certain way, choose a certain selection based on some prompt that was given to you without your knowledge. It could either be so flashed so fast or something on a computer screen that your conscious awareness didn't pick up on it, or it could just be presented to you in a way that you're not you're not aware that it's actually related to the thing that you're being say, tested on.

So speaking of big list, Chuck, we're talking today about priming, which is the present tense of prime us, and what it refers to is a a psychological term where you are prompted to respond in a certain way, behave in a certain way, choose a certain selection based on some prompt that was given to you without your knowledge. It could either be so flashed so fast or something on a computer screen that your conscious awareness didn't pick up on it, or it could just be presented to you in a way that you're not you're not aware that it's actually related to the thing that you're being say, tested on.

Yeah, exactly. And this is a big, big thing in cognitive psychology, and you know, we're going to kind of get into the ins and outs of it. Some of it, there's there's a lot of for some of it, there's a lot of studies that sort of indicate that there's a lot to it. There's another part of this that we'll get to where there's a lot of studies that aren't so great or that have been fudged or data's been massaged or completely fabricated, where it seems like sometimes they've been found out as far as researchers go. But it all comes down to memory. And if you're if you're talking to a cognitive psychologist, they'll say that you have a couple of ways that you remember things. One is your explicit memory or your active or conscious memory. Like if you're trying to think of something and you actively engage your memory to think of a thing, that's what that is.

Yeah, exactly. And this is a big, big thing in cognitive psychology, and you know, we're going to kind of get into the ins and outs of it. Some of it, there's there's a lot of for some of it, there's a lot of studies that sort of indicate that there's a lot to it. There's another part of this that we'll get to where there's a lot of studies that aren't so great or that have been fudged or data's been massaged or completely fabricated, where it seems like sometimes they've been found out as far as researchers go. But it all comes down to memory. And if you're if you're talking to a cognitive psychologist, they'll say that you have a couple of ways that you remember things. One is your explicit memory or your active or conscious memory. Like if you're trying to think of something and you actively engage your memory to think of a thing, that's what that is.

If somebody asked, like what was Chuck's senior superlative in high school? I would think back to a fact that I learned, and I would say best all round boy, is.

If somebody asked, like what was Chuck's senior superlative in high school? I would think back to a fact that I learned, and I would say best all round boy, is.

It going to be one of those? And then implicit memory is the other one. And that's just what you remember on an unconscious level. So if someone asked me what was your senior superlo, wouldn't even have to think about it, best all around boy, boom, it just pops right out as if it were my name.

It going to be one of those? And then implicit memory is the other one. And that's just what you remember on an unconscious level. So if someone asked me what was your senior superlo, wouldn't even have to think about it, best all around boy, boom, it just pops right out as if it were my name.

Right, So those are and this is really kind of like breaking it down to a really rough basic level. It's much more complex than that. Well, we bring that up because yours. It's tapping into the different ways that you access memories that priming is based on. Yeah, and you said it falls under the rubric of cognitive psychology, and that is true. Cognitive psychology has shown very clearly that this actually works. That if you give somebody, say a word, and you show them a list of associated words, it's going to just happen that they they're able to pick out the associated word faster than other words. There, Well, we'll give you some examples. Rather than just me mushing it all together. Let's let's tease it out a little bit like a eighties per.

Right, So those are and this is really kind of like breaking it down to a really rough basic level. It's much more complex than that. Well, we bring that up because yours. It's tapping into the different ways that you access memories that priming is based on. Yeah, and you said it falls under the rubric of cognitive psychology, and that is true. Cognitive psychology has shown very clearly that this actually works. That if you give somebody, say a word, and you show them a list of associated words, it's going to just happen that they they're able to pick out the associated word faster than other words. There, Well, we'll give you some examples. Rather than just me mushing it all together. Let's let's tease it out a little bit like a eighties per.

Yeah, oh boy, Yeah, Let let's do that, because I think if we give some of these examples it'll make a little more sense. For instance, this first exercise that Dave helped us out with this they found this one. It's called the lexical decision, and that is the idea that if you put a word up on a screen for a couple of seconds as a priming word, then as the subject, will indicate the next word on the screen if it's real word or if it's a nonsense word, but that will be influenced that's your lexical decision you're making, but that will be influenced by that priming word that you saw. So in this case, Dave, do you use the example Doctor You're sitting there in the lab. Bill Murray's on the other side, got the shaker already. Doctor pops up on the screen for a couple of seconds. That's your priming word, and then all of a sudden other words pop up after that, and our job as a subject is to say whether that's a real word or a nonsense word. And obviously you would think if the word nurse pops up, you're going to be recognizing that a lot faster. So it's all about sort of the speed at which you recognize this as a real or nonsense word. Nurse would be a much faster decision than if it was basketball, right.

Yeah, oh boy, Yeah, Let let's do that, because I think if we give some of these examples it'll make a little more sense. For instance, this first exercise that Dave helped us out with this they found this one. It's called the lexical decision, and that is the idea that if you put a word up on a screen for a couple of seconds as a priming word, then as the subject, will indicate the next word on the screen if it's real word or if it's a nonsense word, but that will be influenced that's your lexical decision you're making, but that will be influenced by that priming word that you saw. So in this case, Dave, do you use the example Doctor You're sitting there in the lab. Bill Murray's on the other side, got the shaker already. Doctor pops up on the screen for a couple of seconds. That's your priming word, and then all of a sudden other words pop up after that, and our job as a subject is to say whether that's a real word or a nonsense word. And obviously you would think if the word nurse pops up, you're going to be recognizing that a lot faster. So it's all about sort of the speed at which you recognize this as a real or nonsense word. Nurse would be a much faster decision than if it was basketball, right.

And it's basically words that share a similar category are more easily accessed once you've been primed, almost like the way that we sort things is by putting them into large categories like doctor, nurse, hospital, stethoscope, right, and then once you open that category by thinking of doctor, you're going to be able to access the other stuff in that category much more easily than say something in a totally different category like cheese in the same category as delicious, that kind of stuff. Right, That seems for sure, that seems like what it's tapping into, and it actually seems to reveal that that's kind of how we store memories. There's another another demonstration that was pretty famous that shows for sure. Again, I just want to get this across. Cognitive priming really works. If you give people a list of words and one of those words has a letter missing, say a vowel, that could make multiple different words they're going to choose or they're going to fill it in differently based on the other words in the list. So, for example, if you have a list of words bread, milk, hot, and then the last word is so o, blank p, poop sure or soup Oh, I think would be a good one, right, yeah, And depending on whether you know how to spell, you might spell it with an oh or you doesn't matter, You're still getting the point across, right.

And it's basically words that share a similar category are more easily accessed once you've been primed, almost like the way that we sort things is by putting them into large categories like doctor, nurse, hospital, stethoscope, right, and then once you open that category by thinking of doctor, you're going to be able to access the other stuff in that category much more easily than say something in a totally different category like cheese in the same category as delicious, that kind of stuff. Right, That seems for sure, that seems like what it's tapping into, and it actually seems to reveal that that's kind of how we store memories. There's another another demonstration that was pretty famous that shows for sure. Again, I just want to get this across. Cognitive priming really works. If you give people a list of words and one of those words has a letter missing, say a vowel, that could make multiple different words they're going to choose or they're going to fill it in differently based on the other words in the list. So, for example, if you have a list of words bread, milk, hot, and then the last word is so o, blank p, poop sure or soup Oh, I think would be a good one, right, yeah, And depending on whether you know how to spell, you might spell it with an oh or you doesn't matter, You're still getting the point across, right.

Or in another example of the same, you know, missing letter, if it was shower, water, wash, so blank p, you might say poop there too. Actually, soap would probably be the word. So you know, it's just a very intuitive kind of thing happening because your brain is working in a very unconscious way because or I guess non conscious, because it is primed by the words that precede the one with a missing letter.

Or in another example of the same, you know, missing letter, if it was shower, water, wash, so blank p, you might say poop there too. Actually, soap would probably be the word. So you know, it's just a very intuitive kind of thing happening because your brain is working in a very unconscious way because or I guess non conscious, because it is primed by the words that precede the one with a missing letter.

Right. And then there's also another another There's a number of different ways of priming people cognitively, but one that just makes total sense, and I think we've all run into is repetition priming, to where if you are shown, like say, a pair of words, maybe sometimes one of which is a nonsense word, and you have to pick out the nonsense words. If you see, like in a list over and over again, doctor and nurse, doctor and nurse, it comes up three times out of a seven word pair list. You're going to move through those much more quickly because it's right there in the forefront of your mind, so it hasn't faded yet, so you're just going to pick it out faster and faster the more it's repeated. That's a form of priming too.

Right. And then there's also another another There's a number of different ways of priming people cognitively, but one that just makes total sense, and I think we've all run into is repetition priming, to where if you are shown, like say, a pair of words, maybe sometimes one of which is a nonsense word, and you have to pick out the nonsense words. If you see, like in a list over and over again, doctor and nurse, doctor and nurse, it comes up three times out of a seven word pair list. You're going to move through those much more quickly because it's right there in the forefront of your mind, so it hasn't faded yet, so you're just going to pick it out faster and faster the more it's repeated. That's a form of priming too.

Yeah, and these are all really super basic, you know, examples of cognitive priming, But it does show a lot about how our memory works. That were not just computers where we can just access a file by clicking on it very easily. We develop shortcuts in our brain. We take shortcuts when we see words relating them to other words, and so it just makes sense, you know, you could access something much much faster because you have been primed. In other words, our implicit memory can be tapped into a lot quicker than our explicit memory.

Yeah, and these are all really super basic, you know, examples of cognitive priming, But it does show a lot about how our memory works. That were not just computers where we can just access a file by clicking on it very easily. We develop shortcuts in our brain. We take shortcuts when we see words relating them to other words, and so it just makes sense, you know, you could access something much much faster because you have been primed. In other words, our implicit memory can be tapped into a lot quicker than our explicit memory.

Right. And at the end of each of these experiments, it kind of quickly became tradition where the researcher would stand up and point at this and be like, you've been primed, maybe adding a boo yah once in a while.

Right. And at the end of each of these experiments, it kind of quickly became tradition where the researcher would stand up and point at this and be like, you've been primed, maybe adding a boo yah once in a while.

Yeah, and Deon Sanders just moon walks through the background.

Yeah, and Deon Sanders just moon walks through the background.

Really, so we know that this is true also, not just because study after study has shown that this is actually correct. But when you put somebody in the Wonder Machine, the fMRI gotta do it. Yeah, they found that, like if you ask somebody the name of let's say, Anya Taylor Joy, say who was the star of the Witch, but also the Gorge, which isn't that good?

Really, so we know that this is true also, not just because study after study has shown that this is actually correct. But when you put somebody in the Wonder Machine, the fMRI gotta do it. Yeah, they found that, like if you ask somebody the name of let's say, Anya Taylor Joy, say who was the star of the Witch, but also the Gorge, which isn't that good?

I thought that was fairly entertaining for a not great movie. By the way, The Gorge, Yeah, it was highly watchable on like a rainy, not feeling so great day kind of movie.

I thought that was fairly entertaining for a not great movie. By the way, The Gorge, Yeah, it was highly watchable on like a rainy, not feeling so great day kind of movie.

Way, agreed, Yeah, agreed. It just wow, it takes a sudden turn. It's just really surprising. But yes, I agree. I think that's a good way to put it. You would stop and think like, oh, Anya Taylor Joy. And by the way, the Queen's Gambit is one of the best things I've ever seen in my entire life.

Way, agreed, Yeah, agreed. It just wow, it takes a sudden turn. It's just really surprising. But yes, I agree. I think that's a good way to put it. You would stop and think like, oh, Anya Taylor Joy. And by the way, the Queen's Gambit is one of the best things I've ever seen in my entire life.

Oh yeah, yeah, the chess one. Yeah, that was great.

Oh yeah, yeah, the chess one. Yeah, that was great.

Okay, but if you also said, you know, name a animal that you think of when we'd say the word dog. What they found in the fMRI is that different parts of your brain light up. So we do know that priming does have a certain effect and it is different than our normal kind of conscious recall, I.

Okay, but if you also said, you know, name a animal that you think of when we'd say the word dog. What they found in the fMRI is that different parts of your brain light up. So we do know that priming does have a certain effect and it is different than our normal kind of conscious recall, I.

Wonder if when they go into the fMRI Wonder Machine room. Now the person running it just goes I'm telling you what's gonna happen. Some part of light up and then another part of light up, and you'll all be super happy.

Wonder if when they go into the fMRI Wonder Machine room. Now the person running it just goes I'm telling you what's gonna happen. Some part of light up and then another part of light up, and you'll all be super happy.

Right, you've been primed.

Right, you've been primed.

You've been primed in Deander's very slowly moonwalks.

You've been primed in Deander's very slowly moonwalks.

So, okay, that's cognitive priming. Now, imagine if you were a psychologist and you said cognitive priming is kind of boring. What if we could use that same stuff to get people to eat more cheeseburgers, Yeah, or to vote for a particular candidate in a political election, Like, what if priming works for that?

So, okay, that's cognitive priming. Now, imagine if you were a psychologist and you said cognitive priming is kind of boring. What if we could use that same stuff to get people to eat more cheeseburgers, Yeah, or to vote for a particular candidate in a political election, Like, what if priming works for that?

Yeah? And that's you know, it's all fun in games to just sort of look at these little experiments on a campus somewhere. But if it has a real world use, especially when it comes to marketing and advertising and stuff like that, you can bet corporations are going to sink some money into doing that.

Yeah? And that's you know, it's all fun in games to just sort of look at these little experiments on a campus somewhere. But if it has a real world use, especially when it comes to marketing and advertising and stuff like that, you can bet corporations are going to sink some money into doing that.

Yes, So this is the handoff right here between cognitive psychology to social psychology. And social psychology has studied priming in great detail. It was a huge hit. You'll remember back to nudge Economics, we talked about it in our PR Live episode, like it was a big deal in like the Late ought to about the twenty twelve. I think something like those is just a big deal, and it makes a lot of sense, Like it's the basis of things like ideas like McDonald's uses red and yellow in its logo because those colors are associated with excitement or energy, your happiness, or they call it a happy meal because over time your kid will associate McDonald's with being happy or I'm loving it. It's just a jingle or whatever, and it makes sense. It's very catchy, but there's some part of your mind that it has been primed to later on associate McDonald's with love, a positive feeling. All of this is these examples of social psychology research supporting this idea that you can prime human beings to behave in a certain way just by using these same techniques that cognitive psychologists prove work. Dog cat soup, soap, that kind of stuff.

Yes, So this is the handoff right here between cognitive psychology to social psychology. And social psychology has studied priming in great detail. It was a huge hit. You'll remember back to nudge Economics, we talked about it in our PR Live episode, like it was a big deal in like the Late ought to about the twenty twelve. I think something like those is just a big deal, and it makes a lot of sense, Like it's the basis of things like ideas like McDonald's uses red and yellow in its logo because those colors are associated with excitement or energy, your happiness, or they call it a happy meal because over time your kid will associate McDonald's with being happy or I'm loving it. It's just a jingle or whatever, and it makes sense. It's very catchy, but there's some part of your mind that it has been primed to later on associate McDonald's with love, a positive feeling. All of this is these examples of social psychology research supporting this idea that you can prime human beings to behave in a certain way just by using these same techniques that cognitive psychologists prove work. Dog cat soup, soap, that kind of stuff.

Yeah, as long as you beat them over the head with it over and over and over again, because repetition is one of the real keys here. Your brain just being repeatedly exposed to that stimuli is going to you know, strengthen that association over time, and brands know that, and that's why it drives you crazy during you know, especially like sports playoffs or something, when you see those same ads over and over and over again. Yeah, it's a it's big business. They're putting a lot of money into into you know, sort of manipulating your brain essentially.

Yeah, as long as you beat them over the head with it over and over and over again, because repetition is one of the real keys here. Your brain just being repeatedly exposed to that stimuli is going to you know, strengthen that association over time, and brands know that, and that's why it drives you crazy during you know, especially like sports playoffs or something, when you see those same ads over and over and over again. Yeah, it's a it's big business. They're putting a lot of money into into you know, sort of manipulating your brain essentially.

Yeah, I've said it before and I'll say it again. For some reason, some ad exec chose morning reruns of Murder. She wrote, all right, start TV over the air channel network for the Burger King terrible singing.

Yeah, I've said it before and I'll say it again. For some reason, some ad exec chose morning reruns of Murder. She wrote, all right, start TV over the air channel network for the Burger King terrible singing.

There had to be some research into their viewership or something, right, it.

There had to be some research into their viewership or something, right, it.

Had to be. But the thing is, every single other ad is for like human life insurance or health insurance or dental insurance because you're you're just retired and now you have Medicaid. Like every other ad that's almost stood out, you know what I mean.

Had to be. But the thing is, every single other ad is for like human life insurance or health insurance or dental insurance because you're you're just retired and now you have Medicaid. Like every other ad that's almost stood out, you know what I mean.

Well, you know, our senior friends in the world are very concerned about their health and their healthcare, and they still love those cheeseburgers. That's two things we know.

Well, you know, our senior friends in the world are very concerned about their health and their healthcare, and they still love those cheeseburgers. That's two things we know.

I guess that's it. But it really grated on my nerves because I watched that almost every day.

I guess that's it. But it really grated on my nerves because I watched that almost every day.

All right, why don't we take a break here. That's a good table setting, I think, and we'll get back to how this is used in media and politics. Should be no surprise right after this. All right, so we're back, as promised. We're going to talk a little bit about the media and politics, hopefully in a way that's just sort of quick and easy and doesn't ruffle too many feathers, because what we've seen is media of all stripes do this, and politicians of all stripes do this. So it's not singling anybody out. But when the media gets involved in this kind of thing to shape public opinion, they do so sort of a three pronged fork, which is agenda setting, framing, and priming. Agenda setting being like, hey, what's what are we going to focus on editorially maybe in today's paper or every day until the election? How are you going to frame this thing to suit what we feel is probably our slant? And then priming it's basically, you know, similar to the first two, but this is the subconscious things where we're going to repeat things. We're going to use certain words, certain images as to just sort of reinforce how we framed it.

All right, why don't we take a break here. That's a good table setting, I think, and we'll get back to how this is used in media and politics. Should be no surprise right after this. All right, so we're back, as promised. We're going to talk a little bit about the media and politics, hopefully in a way that's just sort of quick and easy and doesn't ruffle too many feathers, because what we've seen is media of all stripes do this, and politicians of all stripes do this. So it's not singling anybody out. But when the media gets involved in this kind of thing to shape public opinion, they do so sort of a three pronged fork, which is agenda setting, framing, and priming. Agenda setting being like, hey, what's what are we going to focus on editorially maybe in today's paper or every day until the election? How are you going to frame this thing to suit what we feel is probably our slant? And then priming it's basically, you know, similar to the first two, but this is the subconscious things where we're going to repeat things. We're going to use certain words, certain images as to just sort of reinforce how we framed it.

Yeah, so just for a quick example, let's say the news decides to focus on crime, and that the framing they uses that crime is on the rise, and you hear about this over and over again, night after night on the news, or you read about it over and over again on your favorite news site. Eventually you're going to be primed to think that crime is on the rise, and you might even be a little scared of it. Or relating to politics, a politician might latch onto that and be like, crime's really hot right now. We're going to make crime like the main point. We're going to use it to set the agenda of our campaign, and we're going to tap into that fear that this person, this lack of safety that the people out there watching the news feel because they're being told over and over again crime is on the rise. Whether it is or not, as irrelevant.

Yeah, so just for a quick example, let's say the news decides to focus on crime, and that the framing they uses that crime is on the rise, and you hear about this over and over again, night after night on the news, or you read about it over and over again on your favorite news site. Eventually you're going to be primed to think that crime is on the rise, and you might even be a little scared of it. Or relating to politics, a politician might latch onto that and be like, crime's really hot right now. We're going to make crime like the main point. We're going to use it to set the agenda of our campaign, and we're going to tap into that fear that this person, this lack of safety that the people out there watching the news feel because they're being told over and over again crime is on the rise. Whether it is or not, as irrelevant.

Yeah, there's no data, feel that it is exactly.

Yeah, there's no data, feel that it is exactly.

They feel that crime is on the rise. So we a politician, are going to tap into that and use it to helpfully get an election, because now we can prime them to get that emotional response out of them over and over again until we finally move them to the voting stations to vote for me the politician.

They feel that crime is on the rise. So we a politician, are going to tap into that and use it to helpfully get an election, because now we can prime them to get that emotional response out of them over and over again until we finally move them to the voting stations to vote for me the politician.

That's right, I'd vote for you.

That's right, I'd vote for you.

By the way, I would never ever run for public life.

By the way, I would never ever run for public life.

Oh of course you wouldn't, but I would never. I would vote for you for like, you know, Neighborhood Watch or something.

Oh of course you wouldn't, but I would never. I would vote for you for like, you know, Neighborhood Watch or something.

Would you vote for me for best all Round? Boy?

Would you vote for me for best all Round? Boy?

Oh man, I mean you got that one in the bag, buddy. You don't need my.

Oh man, I mean you got that one in the bag, buddy. You don't need my.

Vote, thank you.

Vote, thank you.

Dog Whistling is something that you know, you've heard more and more as a sort of a term used and you know, social media politics, on the news, stuff like that, And that is when you use a word or phrase that you sort of are in not sort of, you are very much intentionally associating with a negative racial stereotype. But it's not explicit, so it operates on the unconscious level. And this is where they tap into implicit bias, something that everybody has, and you know, using these coded words. Basically there are things that I will never take one of these. It scares me to death. So I would never sit down for an implicit bias test because I don't want to know what my implicit biases are. It's absolutely terrifying because we all have them. I guess that's probably cowardly and I should know what my implicit biases are so I can try and correct those. But it's basically when they sit you down and then you say, all right, respond very quickly as quick as you can to a series of images or words, and anything within two hundred and six hundred milliseconds is your implicit memory. Anything after that you're thinking about, and they that's explicit memory.

Dog Whistling is something that you know, you've heard more and more as a sort of a term used and you know, social media politics, on the news, stuff like that, And that is when you use a word or phrase that you sort of are in not sort of, you are very much intentionally associating with a negative racial stereotype. But it's not explicit, so it operates on the unconscious level. And this is where they tap into implicit bias, something that everybody has, and you know, using these coded words. Basically there are things that I will never take one of these. It scares me to death. So I would never sit down for an implicit bias test because I don't want to know what my implicit biases are. It's absolutely terrifying because we all have them. I guess that's probably cowardly and I should know what my implicit biases are so I can try and correct those. But it's basically when they sit you down and then you say, all right, respond very quickly as quick as you can to a series of images or words, and anything within two hundred and six hundred milliseconds is your implicit memory. Anything after that you're thinking about, and they that's explicit memory.

Right. Two things about that. One If every if implicit bias is a universal thing and everybody has it, you're free, Okay, I have to feel as bad about it. I mean, it's definitely something you should work to correct, if you say, but you don't have to feel like it's just you.

Right. Two things about that. One If every if implicit bias is a universal thing and everybody has it, you're free, Okay, I have to feel as bad about it. I mean, it's definitely something you should work to correct, if you say, but you don't have to feel like it's just you.

Right.

Right.

That's one thing. And then the second thing, too, Chuck, is if it is true that we all are implicitly biased, say like along racial lines. I feel like you could explain it by saying, by it's an example of our evolutionary history not being caught up yet to our current social history. Like when we foreign modern societies, we jumped light years ahead as far as evolution goes, and the way that we think and see the world just completely just hit warp speed. But evolutionarily there's still a big lag catching up to it. So we're fearful of people who don't look like us, or have a slightly different culture, live in a different nation, just evolutionarily speaking, even though we know we shouldn't feel that way, that that's not actually how things are. That conflict between those two things is what the real issue is.

That's one thing. And then the second thing, too, Chuck, is if it is true that we all are implicitly biased, say like along racial lines. I feel like you could explain it by saying, by it's an example of our evolutionary history not being caught up yet to our current social history. Like when we foreign modern societies, we jumped light years ahead as far as evolution goes, and the way that we think and see the world just completely just hit warp speed. But evolutionarily there's still a big lag catching up to it. So we're fearful of people who don't look like us, or have a slightly different culture, live in a different nation, just evolutionarily speaking, even though we know we shouldn't feel that way, that that's not actually how things are. That conflict between those two things is what the real issue is.

Yeah, oh boy, that really lets us all off the hook.

Yeah, oh boy, that really lets us all off the hook.

I guess, right, So we don't have to do anything about it. It'll work itself out in ten thousand years.

I guess, right, So we don't have to do anything about it. It'll work itself out in ten thousand years.

Well, here's the thing, though, is when people sit down for these tests, they found that even people who explicitly disagree with any kind of racial stereotype and like, I would never do that, I don't have those at all. They even while I was about to say, fail those tests, they even chart on those tests as showing implicit bias.

Well, here's the thing, though, is when people sit down for these tests, they found that even people who explicitly disagree with any kind of racial stereotype and like, I would never do that, I don't have those at all. They even while I was about to say, fail those tests, they even chart on those tests as showing implicit bias.

Right, so we've made it pretty squarely into social psychology territory I now. And there were some there were some early experiments trying to figure out how you can persuade people using priming.

Right, so we've made it pretty squarely into social psychology territory I now. And there were some there were some early experiments trying to figure out how you can persuade people using priming.

Right, he's like the seventies, right, yeah.

Right, he's like the seventies, right, yeah.

Late seventies, early eighties, and so one of the first ones came out of nineteen seventy nine, and it was a social psychology experiment where you gave people scrambled, like a scrambled word list and said make a sentence out of this, right, And so you would get something neutral like her found new eye and I knew her is a sentence you could make out of that, or you would give something like leg break arm his You could say, break his arm. And so one group was given more hostile word scrambles to make sentences out of the other was more neutral, And then that was part one. After that they were asked to consider a hypothetical scenario in which somebody's kind of ambiguously responding or interacting with somebody. I think I saw that Donald is refusing to pay rent until his landlord paints his apartment, and the people who were given the hostile word scrambles rated Donald is much more hostile than the people who are given the neutral word scrambles. So what they're showing is that you can nudge people toward forming an impression about someone they know basically nothing about, based on priming them, yeah, to feel one way or another about them. And then that was like, if we can do that, man, what else can we do? That really opened the floodgates.

Late seventies, early eighties, and so one of the first ones came out of nineteen seventy nine, and it was a social psychology experiment where you gave people scrambled, like a scrambled word list and said make a sentence out of this, right, And so you would get something neutral like her found new eye and I knew her is a sentence you could make out of that, or you would give something like leg break arm his You could say, break his arm. And so one group was given more hostile word scrambles to make sentences out of the other was more neutral, And then that was part one. After that they were asked to consider a hypothetical scenario in which somebody's kind of ambiguously responding or interacting with somebody. I think I saw that Donald is refusing to pay rent until his landlord paints his apartment, and the people who were given the hostile word scrambles rated Donald is much more hostile than the people who are given the neutral word scrambles. So what they're showing is that you can nudge people toward forming an impression about someone they know basically nothing about, based on priming them, yeah, to feel one way or another about them. And then that was like, if we can do that, man, what else can we do? That really opened the floodgates.

Yeah, and you know we're about to tick through a series of little things like that that might be mind blowing for you where you're like, oh my god, I can't believe that works, but just you know, sort of put that in your pocket for now. There was one study where it was again it was unscrambling sentences. Half the people were given sentences that had words that were you know, like healthier, healthy, and active lifestyle words. The other half got neutral words, and afterward they said, all right, you guys are great. You can go ahead and leave there. You can you know, go up the stairs there and get out of here to the parking deck up there, or you can take the elevator. And people who unscrambled the healthy words were more likely to take the stairs afterward, so you know, they're like, hey, that's pretty much proof right there. They had been primed with these healthy words to make a healthier decision afterward.

Yeah, and you know we're about to tick through a series of little things like that that might be mind blowing for you where you're like, oh my god, I can't believe that works, but just you know, sort of put that in your pocket for now. There was one study where it was again it was unscrambling sentences. Half the people were given sentences that had words that were you know, like healthier, healthy, and active lifestyle words. The other half got neutral words, and afterward they said, all right, you guys are great. You can go ahead and leave there. You can you know, go up the stairs there and get out of here to the parking deck up there, or you can take the elevator. And people who unscrambled the healthy words were more likely to take the stairs afterward, so you know, they're like, hey, that's pretty much proof right there. They had been primed with these healthy words to make a healthier decision afterward.

Right And well, like you said, we'll talk about some of the more shocking or surprising studies, but before that, we need to mention a guy named John Barg who became basically the rock star of this field starting in the nineties. He essentially wrote a paper that said, like all of this is possible, Like, here's how you do that. Here's how you take the findings of cognitive priming and turn it into social or behavioral priming. And he was very famous for a couple of studies, many studies, but there's two that really stuck out to me that Let me give you an example. One is that he tested whether something is as random as temperature could affect your impression of another person.

Right And well, like you said, we'll talk about some of the more shocking or surprising studies, but before that, we need to mention a guy named John Barg who became basically the rock star of this field starting in the nineties. He essentially wrote a paper that said, like all of this is possible, Like, here's how you do that. Here's how you take the findings of cognitive priming and turn it into social or behavioral priming. And he was very famous for a couple of studies, many studies, but there's two that really stuck out to me that Let me give you an example. One is that he tested whether something is as random as temperature could affect your impression of another person.

Yeah, I thought that was interesting because it was like they'd use words and finally like, hey, I wonder if words worked, if images only alone could work? And then he was like, hold my beer, right, what about just temperature alone? So in this one, he asked participants to hold a something warm, like a cup of coffee or warm cup of soup or something, or a frosty cold beverage, and then they bring them in a room where they have a conversation with a stranger and they found that or he found he claimed to find that people who were with that warm bread beverage had a warmer impression of that stranger afterward, and people who had that cold beverage frostier had eight you know, they felt frostier toward that person.

Yeah, I thought that was interesting because it was like they'd use words and finally like, hey, I wonder if words worked, if images only alone could work? And then he was like, hold my beer, right, what about just temperature alone? So in this one, he asked participants to hold a something warm, like a cup of coffee or warm cup of soup or something, or a frosty cold beverage, and then they bring them in a room where they have a conversation with a stranger and they found that or he found he claimed to find that people who were with that warm bread beverage had a warmer impression of that stranger afterward, and people who had that cold beverage frostier had eight you know, they felt frostier toward that person.

Right, So that means that you can nudge people to feel a certain way based on metaphor. Priming using metaphor and not even words or images, but temperature.

Right, So that means that you can nudge people to feel a certain way based on metaphor. Priming using metaphor and not even words or images, but temperature.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Another one that he figured out was and this is the one he's really famous for. I think this is the one that came from his nineteen ninety six paper. But he tested to see how certain kinds of words affect certain kinds of behavior. And he took some nineteen twenty twenty one year old students and had them do that famous word scramble. Priming researchers love word scrambles. Yeah, and some had just a normal neutral set of words to pick out from. Another had sets of words that were associated with being old, so straight ahead that you'd be like, these are all old people words, but they were like bingo or florida or wrinkles, that kind of stuff. Right. That was part one, And then the students who were participating thought that they were done at that point, but he said, Okay, now we've got to do part two. But we're gonna have to go to the end of the hall and turn right and where there's another lab we need to go to for the second part of this test. But the real thing he was doing was clocking how long it took the students to make it from one end of the hall to the other. And he found the people who had who had worked with word scrambles that had age or old elder related words walked slower than the people who had the neutral words. And this was the one this experiment, Chuck, is what broke open. This is what led to nudge economics. This is what led to governments saying like, man, we could use this to like move people in a way that we want them. Two that's healthier and happier. This is the study that did that.

Another one that he figured out was and this is the one he's really famous for. I think this is the one that came from his nineteen ninety six paper. But he tested to see how certain kinds of words affect certain kinds of behavior. And he took some nineteen twenty twenty one year old students and had them do that famous word scramble. Priming researchers love word scrambles. Yeah, and some had just a normal neutral set of words to pick out from. Another had sets of words that were associated with being old, so straight ahead that you'd be like, these are all old people words, but they were like bingo or florida or wrinkles, that kind of stuff. Right. That was part one, And then the students who were participating thought that they were done at that point, but he said, Okay, now we've got to do part two. But we're gonna have to go to the end of the hall and turn right and where there's another lab we need to go to for the second part of this test. But the real thing he was doing was clocking how long it took the students to make it from one end of the hall to the other. And he found the people who had who had worked with word scrambles that had age or old elder related words walked slower than the people who had the neutral words. And this was the one this experiment, Chuck, is what broke open. This is what led to nudge economics. This is what led to governments saying like, man, we could use this to like move people in a way that we want them. Two that's healthier and happier. This is the study that did that.

Yeah, and here's my I mean, I hope I'm not giving anything away for act three when we sort of rained down our judgment upon this stuff. But like even when I was first going through this, I was like, I even know, there are so many variables to account for in these experiments that there's no way they're accounting for him like the taking the stairs or taking the elevator, like who was tired that day, who had a bum ankle or who you know, There's just so many different variables to account for on why someone would take the stairs or an elevator, or why somebody would walk slower down the hall. Maybe they were super bored by this experiment and so they walked a little more sluggish or something like that, and those types of variables there's they weren't accounting for. Ever, it seems like.

Yeah, and here's my I mean, I hope I'm not giving anything away for act three when we sort of rained down our judgment upon this stuff. But like even when I was first going through this, I was like, I even know, there are so many variables to account for in these experiments that there's no way they're accounting for him like the taking the stairs or taking the elevator, like who was tired that day, who had a bum ankle or who you know, There's just so many different variables to account for on why someone would take the stairs or an elevator, or why somebody would walk slower down the hall. Maybe they were super bored by this experiment and so they walked a little more sluggish or something like that, and those types of variables there's they weren't accounting for. Ever, it seems like.

I think we can just go ahead and reveal. Now what do you think?

I think we can just go ahead and reveal. Now what do you think?

Yeah? Sure, so.

Yeah? Sure, so.

I wish you had been illuminary in the field of social psychology and priming research back in the late nineties or eight two thousands, because you could have derailed this whole thing before it ever got started. Because if that seemed ridiculous to you, that idea that you could suggest old related or age related words to twenty year olds and they're going to walk slower because they were just thinking about being elderly. Yeah, if that seems ridiculous to you, you are one hundred percent right. Okay, it's a ridiculous study, and it's ridiculous that the entire field of social psychology, economics, the politics paid attention to this and went all in on it. But what we have, what we're actually talking about today, is one of the biggest black eyes in the history of psychology that didn't involve torturing human beings.

I wish you had been illuminary in the field of social psychology and priming research back in the late nineties or eight two thousands, because you could have derailed this whole thing before it ever got started. Because if that seemed ridiculous to you, that idea that you could suggest old related or age related words to twenty year olds and they're going to walk slower because they were just thinking about being elderly. Yeah, if that seems ridiculous to you, you are one hundred percent right. Okay, it's a ridiculous study, and it's ridiculous that the entire field of social psychology, economics, the politics paid attention to this and went all in on it. But what we have, what we're actually talking about today, is one of the biggest black eyes in the history of psychology that didn't involve torturing human beings.

Yeah, but you know, let's tick through a few of these that you found kind of quickly, because I think it just illustrates, though, how a company or or a political party would really latch onto this when they see stuff like this right without kind of like critically thinking on how they got there. One study exposure to fishy smells would induce suspicion on trust based economic exchanges in a trust game. In other words, like they smelled something fishy, so they're going to carry that over as in something smells fishy.

Yeah, but you know, let's tick through a few of these that you found kind of quickly, because I think it just illustrates, though, how a company or or a political party would really latch onto this when they see stuff like this right without kind of like critically thinking on how they got there. One study exposure to fishy smells would induce suspicion on trust based economic exchanges in a trust game. In other words, like they smelled something fishy, so they're going to carry that over as in something smells fishy.

Can you imagine reading that in a scholarly, scholarly journal and being like, man, that's that's really crazy.

Can you imagine reading that in a scholarly, scholarly journal and being like, man, that's that's really crazy.

I would say this paper smells like tuna.

I would say this paper smells like tuna.

There's another one. Remember power poses. I specifically remember John Hodgman realizing that I was nervous backstage at the Bellhouse once and telling me to do a power pose. Oh really, to get over my stage fright. And I was like, this isn't working. The reason it doesn't work is because that was a finding from priming.

There's another one. Remember power poses. I specifically remember John Hodgman realizing that I was nervous backstage at the Bellhouse once and telling me to do a power pose. Oh really, to get over my stage fright. And I was like, this isn't working. The reason it doesn't work is because that was a finding from priming.

Oh man, did you did you text him and say you're full of crap?

Oh man, did you did you text him and say you're full of crap?

No, I'm gonna let him hear this episode. Okay, there's another one. If you make a frownie face and you're shown upsetting pictures, you will self report that should be a red flag in and of us that you were upset by pictures of starving children, people arguing accident victims that had been maimed more than people who weren't making a frownie face at the time they saw the pictures.

No, I'm gonna let him hear this episode. Okay, there's another one. If you make a frownie face and you're shown upsetting pictures, you will self report that should be a red flag in and of us that you were upset by pictures of starving children, people arguing accident victims that had been maimed more than people who weren't making a frownie face at the time they saw the pictures.

Yeah, here's one that's interesting to me. Money primed people are more selfish. So if you're I guess they did this experiment with people who made a lot of money and people who didn't.

Yeah, here's one that's interesting to me. Money primed people are more selfish. So if you're I guess they did this experiment with people who made a lot of money and people who didn't.

I think it was they were winning money in like games.

I think it was they were winning money in like games.

Oh okay, okay, But the long and short of it is, if you were one of the money people, quote unquote, then you would not if someone spilled their pencils like one of the researchers, like, oh look at me, I spilled all these pencils, they wouldn't pick up as many pencils as someone who didn't have the money. So people without money are kinder. I can see where that's going in a way, But there are also just so many variables in that, you.

Oh okay, okay, But the long and short of it is, if you were one of the money people, quote unquote, then you would not if someone spilled their pencils like one of the researchers, like, oh look at me, I spilled all these pencils, they wouldn't pick up as many pencils as someone who didn't have the money. So people without money are kinder. I can see where that's going in a way, But there are also just so many variables in that, you.

Know, right, And also if your study is supporting just a general moral judgment against.

Know, right, And also if your study is supporting just a general moral judgment against.

A certain group, yeah.

A certain group, yeah.

It may have been biased in and of itself. Right, it's a good point. There's another one. I love this.

It may have been biased in and of itself. Right, it's a good point. There's another one. I love this.

At least last two are great.

At least last two are great.

If you think about stabbing a coworker in the back metaphorically, you are more inclined when given a choice to buy soap, detergent, or disinfectant than you are to buy batteries, juice, or candy bars.

If you think about stabbing a coworker in the back metaphorically, you are more inclined when given a choice to buy soap, detergent, or disinfectant than you are to buy batteries, juice, or candy bars.

Out damned spot.

Out damned spot.

Yes exactly. Why don't you give him the last one? Chuck?

Yes exactly. Why don't you give him the last one? Chuck?

Okay, if you were in this experiment, you were induced to lie to an imaginary person, either in an email or a phone call. And then and a test that followed that of the desirability of different products. People who lied on the people who lied on the telephone they actually said to lie out loud, preferred mouthwash over soap, and people who typed it out and light in the email preferred soap to mouthwash.

Okay, if you were in this experiment, you were induced to lie to an imaginary person, either in an email or a phone call. And then and a test that followed that of the desirability of different products. People who lied on the people who lied on the telephone they actually said to lie out loud, preferred mouthwash over soap, and people who typed it out and light in the email preferred soap to mouthwash.

Yeah, the first group preferred mouthwash to soap and less the soap was lifeboy. Right, So okay, yes, we should probably rein it back a little bit. Yeah, because our bias is showing. But for good reason. I mean, we should say priming is not just this point of ridicule. This, it just comple the bottom fell out of this really hot, super sexy field of research that everyone had bought into, like a mud slide going down a mountain, Like it just erupted. It was. It went so south so fast that today, about about almost fifteen years on, since the everybody was like, this is all made up. It's essentially a discredited field. Like there's almost no one working in this anymore, because most people are like, this isn't true.

Yeah, the first group preferred mouthwash to soap and less the soap was lifeboy. Right, So okay, yes, we should probably rein it back a little bit. Yeah, because our bias is showing. But for good reason. I mean, we should say priming is not just this point of ridicule. This, it just comple the bottom fell out of this really hot, super sexy field of research that everyone had bought into, like a mud slide going down a mountain, Like it just erupted. It was. It went so south so fast that today, about about almost fifteen years on, since the everybody was like, this is all made up. It's essentially a discredited field. Like there's almost no one working in this anymore, because most people are like, this isn't true.

Yeah, but that's not to say that they're like people didn't get a lot of like legitimate recognition for this stuff. Like there were people won Nobel prizes who worked on this stuff and wrote selling books, who worked on this stuff and made millions of dollars, like speaking to corporations about how they can better, you know, take advantage of their consumers. So it was it was swallowed, hook line and sinker.

Yeah, but that's not to say that they're like people didn't get a lot of like legitimate recognition for this stuff. Like there were people won Nobel prizes who worked on this stuff and wrote selling books, who worked on this stuff and made millions of dollars, like speaking to corporations about how they can better, you know, take advantage of their consumers. So it was it was swallowed, hook line and sinker.

So let's give you an example. Daniel Kahneman. He was a Nobel already a Nobel Prize winning economist. He wrote Thinking Fast and Slow, and it was essentially an introduction to nudge economics and priming for the average person. And it was a huge bestseller. I mean, everybody was reading that book back in the day. I think it was two thousand and two.

So let's give you an example. Daniel Kahneman. He was a Nobel already a Nobel Prize winning economist. He wrote Thinking Fast and Slow, and it was essentially an introduction to nudge economics and priming for the average person. And it was a huge bestseller. I mean, everybody was reading that book back in the day. I think it was two thousand and two.

Okay, yeah.

Okay, yeah.

In this book he says, this is a quote. Disbelief is not an option. The results are not made up, nor are they statistical flukes. You have no choice but to accept that the major conclusions of these studies are true. You have no choice but to say that this is true. So just get on board. This was like a Nobel prize wing economist who was a psychologist himself, who wrote that to the rest of the world, saying like, don't even question priming. This is true. Let's figure out how to use it to persuade people to do what we want.

In this book he says, this is a quote. Disbelief is not an option. The results are not made up, nor are they statistical flukes. You have no choice but to accept that the major conclusions of these studies are true. You have no choice but to say that this is true. So just get on board. This was like a Nobel prize wing economist who was a psychologist himself, who wrote that to the rest of the world, saying like, don't even question priming. This is true. Let's figure out how to use it to persuade people to do what we want.

Yeah, there was another guy. We talked about the nudge earlier. In two thousand and eight, another Nobel winning economist named Richard thaller Co wrote a bestseller called Nudge Colon Improving Decisions about health, wealth, and Happiness. And in that book he talked about social priming experiences, benign paternalism, or that nudge that you know you kind of mentioned earlier, towards making a better decision. And then there's this other economists name they're all economists, Daniel what's his name, Eirily?

Yeah, there was another guy. We talked about the nudge earlier. In two thousand and eight, another Nobel winning economist named Richard thaller Co wrote a bestseller called Nudge Colon Improving Decisions about health, wealth, and Happiness. And in that book he talked about social priming experiences, benign paternalism, or that nudge that you know you kind of mentioned earlier, towards making a better decision. And then there's this other economists name they're all economists, Daniel what's his name, Eirily?

I think so, yeah, And he.

I think so, yeah, And he.

Tested a lot of these supposed nudges. In one experiment, he had kids students grade their own tests, but before had half of them write out as many of the Ten Commandments as they could remember. And what he found was that those students were less likely to cheat on their self graded testing because they had just been primed to sort of think of like, hey, what's the right thing to do?

Tested a lot of these supposed nudges. In one experiment, he had kids students grade their own tests, but before had half of them write out as many of the Ten Commandments as they could remember. And what he found was that those students were less likely to cheat on their self graded testing because they had just been primed to sort of think of like, hey, what's the right thing to do?

Totally makes sense? Why even question it. He worked with a car insurance company for another study. Car insurance companies will sometimes have you say how many miles you've driven in a year, and you can just lie and your insurance rates will be affected on whether you lie or not. So to find out if you could make people be more honest about that, Erarily introduced an honesty pledge that the person would sign at the top of their insurance agreement or contract saying I won't fudge these numbers. And those people fudge their numbers less than people who didn't have that pledge to sign. So to prompt people to be honest, whether it's the Ten Commandments or pledging honesty or whatever, they're going to be more honest. And that's a perfect example of the nudge economic that just swept the world at the turn of the two thousands to the twenty tens.

Totally makes sense? Why even question it. He worked with a car insurance company for another study. Car insurance companies will sometimes have you say how many miles you've driven in a year, and you can just lie and your insurance rates will be affected on whether you lie or not. So to find out if you could make people be more honest about that, Erarily introduced an honesty pledge that the person would sign at the top of their insurance agreement or contract saying I won't fudge these numbers. And those people fudge their numbers less than people who didn't have that pledge to sign. So to prompt people to be honest, whether it's the Ten Commandments or pledging honesty or whatever, they're going to be more honest. And that's a perfect example of the nudge economic that just swept the world at the turn of the two thousands to the twenty tens.

Yeah, I wonder if they asked any of the participants coming in, are you.

Yeah, I wonder if they asked any of the participants coming in, are you.

Honest generally or not self report?

Honest generally or not self report?

Maybe we should take a break here. Yeah, it's a good time for a break, and we'll come back and sort of talk about the big problem with all this, which is, you know, scientifically speaking, the replication of these studies right after this.

Maybe we should take a break here. Yeah, it's a good time for a break, and we'll come back and sort of talk about the big problem with all this, which is, you know, scientifically speaking, the replication of these studies right after this.

Okay, Chuck, So we've talked about this before. The replication crisis in science. I think it's in the physical sciences. It's all over where people have had these landmark papers, groundbreaking papers that have changed the world, changed how people act, changed where research dollars go. When somebody finally gets around to trying to replicate that exact same experiment, they come up with different results, often negative results. They can't replicate the results that that study found. And like I said, that's throughout science this is a big problem. But in psychology and more specifically social psychology, the replication crisis is shaking the foundations of the thee and a reason why. Let's do a little thought experiment here. Imagine that you're a social psychologist, researcher, Okay, you're at the university and you've come up with an experiment that you believe the results of which will be used a corporations, political campaigns all over the place to persuade everyday people to change their behavior which will shape the world for years to come. But you don't really feel like leaving your office that day, so you just bring in a bunch of students, maybe fifteen of them, experiment on them, and then extrapolate those findings to a human universality, and then it gets packaged and exported to corporations and political campaigns. That, in a nutshell, is social psychology.

Okay, Chuck, So we've talked about this before. The replication crisis in science. I think it's in the physical sciences. It's all over where people have had these landmark papers, groundbreaking papers that have changed the world, changed how people act, changed where research dollars go. When somebody finally gets around to trying to replicate that exact same experiment, they come up with different results, often negative results. They can't replicate the results that that study found. And like I said, that's throughout science this is a big problem. But in psychology and more specifically social psychology, the replication crisis is shaking the foundations of the thee and a reason why. Let's do a little thought experiment here. Imagine that you're a social psychologist, researcher, Okay, you're at the university and you've come up with an experiment that you believe the results of which will be used a corporations, political campaigns all over the place to persuade everyday people to change their behavior which will shape the world for years to come. But you don't really feel like leaving your office that day, so you just bring in a bunch of students, maybe fifteen of them, experiment on them, and then extrapolate those findings to a human universality, and then it gets packaged and exported to corporations and political campaigns. That, in a nutshell, is social psychology.

Yeah, I mean, that's what happened. We have some specific examples of like real mouthfeasance that happened in these studies. In some cases even not just like oh, you know, they didn't account for all the very like in some cases they massage data. That Daniel Areley guy that we were talking about, yeah, and his colleague Francesca Gino, they were accused of massaging the data just to fit their hypothesis. Turns out that car insurance company came back and said that data doesn't even match what we sent you and what you published in that honesty pledge situation. Yeah, there was another guy, a Dutch guy named Diedrich Stoppel. He was a big, sort of big name in this field. He fabricated studies out of whole cloth.

Yeah, I mean, that's what happened. We have some specific examples of like real mouthfeasance that happened in these studies. In some cases even not just like oh, you know, they didn't account for all the very like in some cases they massage data. That Daniel Areley guy that we were talking about, yeah, and his colleague Francesca Gino, they were accused of massaging the data just to fit their hypothesis. Turns out that car insurance company came back and said that data doesn't even match what we sent you and what you published in that honesty pledge situation. Yeah, there was another guy, a Dutch guy named Diedrich Stoppel. He was a big, sort of big name in this field. He fabricated studies out of whole cloth.

Yeah, for sure. So it's bad for psychology, bad for social psychology. But priming research, it was just this is like it must have just felt like a bloodbath day after day if you were in the field, just bad news after bad news. It got so bad that ten years after he wrote Thinking Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman wrote an open letter but it was actually directed to John Barr saying like something, this is really bad, that priming research is the poster child for doubts about the integrity of psychological research. And he warned of becoming train wreck and was basically saying like, hey man, you guys, I'm just a believer. I'm just a fan. You guys screwed this up. You better fix it. And there's actually I found a really great website called Replicable Replicability Index. It's a blog by Ulric Shimack at the University of Toronto, and they have a something called the Reconstruction of a train Wreck where they go through and pick out like how Kahman sold this to the public and misrepresented it all sorts of different ways himself. So he's passed on RIP. I don't like to speak ill of the dead. And everything leading up to that, from what I understand, was a great career, but he just hitched his wagonto the wrong thing and then tried to distance himself from as much as he could.

Yeah, for sure. So it's bad for psychology, bad for social psychology. But priming research, it was just this is like it must have just felt like a bloodbath day after day if you were in the field, just bad news after bad news. It got so bad that ten years after he wrote Thinking Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman wrote an open letter but it was actually directed to John Barr saying like something, this is really bad, that priming research is the poster child for doubts about the integrity of psychological research. And he warned of becoming train wreck and was basically saying like, hey man, you guys, I'm just a believer. I'm just a fan. You guys screwed this up. You better fix it. And there's actually I found a really great website called Replicable Replicability Index. It's a blog by Ulric Shimack at the University of Toronto, and they have a something called the Reconstruction of a train Wreck where they go through and pick out like how Kahman sold this to the public and misrepresented it all sorts of different ways himself. So he's passed on RIP. I don't like to speak ill of the dead. And everything leading up to that, from what I understand, was a great career, but he just hitched his wagonto the wrong thing and then tried to distance himself from as much as he could.

Yeah, and you know, the community that worked in that field certainly woke up, and they weren't just like this is no big deal. They were like, all right, this is a real problem. So they tried have tried since then to try and clean things up a bit and address what they call qrps, or questionable research practices, of which there are many. We're going to talk about some of them right now, but one obviously you sort of mentioned this was they're just really small studies. You can't make these big, huge conclusions about human behavior when you studied twelve, you know, college freshmen, you know, on a Saturday morning. As part of the open science movement, and this is pretty cool. I didn't know about this, but researchers are now encouraged to register their studies ahead of time, including what their hypothesis is before they collect the data, and that'll keep them from what's called HARKing hypothesizing after results are known. So basically like, hey, here's what I think is going to happen. Now, let's do the study. But it's officially registered, so I can't sort of pick and choose what I what I look at.

Yeah, and you know, the community that worked in that field certainly woke up, and they weren't just like this is no big deal. They were like, all right, this is a real problem. So they tried have tried since then to try and clean things up a bit and address what they call qrps, or questionable research practices, of which there are many. We're going to talk about some of them right now, but one obviously you sort of mentioned this was they're just really small studies. You can't make these big, huge conclusions about human behavior when you studied twelve, you know, college freshmen, you know, on a Saturday morning. As part of the open science movement, and this is pretty cool. I didn't know about this, but researchers are now encouraged to register their studies ahead of time, including what their hypothesis is before they collect the data, and that'll keep them from what's called HARKing hypothesizing after results are known. So basically like, hey, here's what I think is going to happen. Now, let's do the study. But it's officially registered, so I can't sort of pick and choose what I what I look at.

Right, there's another big problem called pea hacking, which is taking data and then making it work statistically so that these random flukes suddenly became statistically significant. Yeah, that's a big problem. And that I read that it's not so much that researchers were sitting there purposely massaging their data over and over and over again to tease out some results that they could publish, but it was more like they were just falling force flukes being more significant than they were. That's what I read that that was really the big problem. That it wasn't like an entire field of bad actors.

Right, there's another big problem called pea hacking, which is taking data and then making it work statistically so that these random flukes suddenly became statistically significant. Yeah, that's a big problem. And that I read that it's not so much that researchers were sitting there purposely massaging their data over and over and over again to tease out some results that they could publish, but it was more like they were just falling force flukes being more significant than they were. That's what I read that that was really the big problem. That it wasn't like an entire field of bad actors.

Yeah, I mean I sort of get it in a way. And we've talked about this in our Scientific Method show and other episodes too, where you know, you put all this time and you want to you want to you want your thing to pan out that you think is true. So I get the inclination, but you can't you can't budge numbers, you can't look at stuff that just backs up your conclusion. You can't throw stuff in the file drawer that doesn't you got and this is one of the things they talked about, the file drawer, like you got to make all this stuff public. And part of the problem is the media, because they want to write about something splashy and super interesting, right, and so like there's a lot of things that play here that go into why somebody would do this beyond just being like, you know, you're a bad person.

Yeah, I mean I sort of get it in a way. And we've talked about this in our Scientific Method show and other episodes too, where you know, you put all this time and you want to you want to you want your thing to pan out that you think is true. So I get the inclination, but you can't you can't budge numbers, you can't look at stuff that just backs up your conclusion. You can't throw stuff in the file drawer that doesn't you got and this is one of the things they talked about, the file drawer, like you got to make all this stuff public. And part of the problem is the media, because they want to write about something splashy and super interesting, right, and so like there's a lot of things that play here that go into why somebody would do this beyond just being like, you know, you're a bad person.

Yeah, and so there's something called publisher perish, like you basically are advancing your careers if you get published in an academic journal. The problem is academic journals they're like the media. They wanted it to be splashing and sexy, so they don't really publish negative results anyway. So even if you wanted to, you'd have a hard time getting it published in a legitimate journal these days. So that's a big problem. Ultimately, Chuck the biggest problem, and this is what really tripped up social psychology. It's the drum that you've been beating this whole time. Humans are not predictable computers who will respond in a predictable way if you give them a specific stimulus. That's just not how humans work now.

Yeah, and so there's something called publisher perish, like you basically are advancing your careers if you get published in an academic journal. The problem is academic journals they're like the media. They wanted it to be splashing and sexy, so they don't really publish negative results anyway. So even if you wanted to, you'd have a hard time getting it published in a legitimate journal these days. So that's a big problem. Ultimately, Chuck the biggest problem, and this is what really tripped up social psychology. It's the drum that you've been beating this whole time. Humans are not predictable computers who will respond in a predictable way if you give them a specific stimulus. That's just not how humans work now.

And even the same person will react on a different day to the same exact experiment depending on the host of factors.

And even the same person will react on a different day to the same exact experiment depending on the host of factors.

Sure, so the same person will respond differently, you better believe different people will respond differently to the same stimulus. And then it also depends on who's presenting the stimulus. Is it being presented by a grad student who's posing as one of the participants, or is it like a professor wearing a white lab coat for some reason. That's definitely going to shape the information or the stimulus that's being received. And when you put all this together, it's essentially impossible to replicate a priming study, and if you get the same results, that's essentially a statistical fluke from what I understand.

Sure, so the same person will respond differently, you better believe different people will respond differently to the same stimulus. And then it also depends on who's presenting the stimulus. Is it being presented by a grad student who's posing as one of the participants, or is it like a professor wearing a white lab coat for some reason. That's definitely going to shape the information or the stimulus that's being received. And when you put all this together, it's essentially impossible to replicate a priming study, and if you get the same results, that's essentially a statistical fluke from what I understand.

Yeah, I mean, we've talked about the Stanford prison experiment a few times, and looking back, like especially when you see the movie I talk about who's presenting the experiment, it's like those guards showed up. It's like, you, guys, you look ridiculous. You know, you look like an eighteen year old who painted on a mustache and put on some you know, mirror aviator sunglasses trying to be a prison guard.