Key Integrative Themes

Host Myles Bess breaks down the research around why our brains can so easily make us believe that fake news is real news. SUBSCRIBE to Above the Noise: [https://www.youtube.com/abovethenoise?sub_confirmation=1] ABOVE THE NOISE is a show that cuts through the hype and takes a deeper look at the research behind controversial and trending topics in the news. Hosted by Myles Bess and Shirin Ghaffary. *NEW VIDEOS EVERY WEDNESDAY* Ever have an argument with someone, and no matter how many facts you provide, you just can’t get that person to see it your way? One big reason for this is cognitive bias, which is a limitation in our thinking that can cause flaws in our judgement. Confirmation bias is a specific type of cognitive bias that motivates us to seek out information we already believe and ignore or minimize facts that threaten what we believe. So how can you overcome confirmation bias? It’s tricky, because brain research shows that once a person believes something, facts don’t do a very good job changing their mind. Studies show that when people are presented with facts that contradict what they believe, the parts of the brain that control reason and rationality go inactive. But, the parts of the brain that process emotion light up like the Fourth of July. In this video, Myles dives into the research and offers some tips to combat confirmation bias. * What is confirmation bias? * Confirmation bias is the tendency to interpret new evidence as confirmation of one’s existing beliefs or theories. * What is fake news? * Fake news is a type of hoax or deliberate spread of misinformation. For a story to be fake news, it has to be written and published with the intent to mislead. SOURCES: How Fake News Outperformed Real News on Facebook https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook?utm_term=.ljW98PZ9p#.ya49Vow9A Most Americans Who See Fake News Believe It https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/fake-news-survey?utm_term=.qu5xrd1x3#.bnlmxlvmd Neural Bases of Motivated Reasoning: An fMRI Study http://www.uky.edu/AS/PoliSci/Peffley/pdf/Westen_neural%20basis%20of%20motivated%20reasoning_An%20fMRI%20study.pdf Dopamine and Confirmation Bias http://www.jneurosci.org/content/jneuro/31/16/6188.full.pdf How to Convince Someone When Facts Fail https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-convince-someone-when-facts-fail/ Follow KQED: KQED: http://www.kqed.org/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KQED/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/KQED?lang=en Teachers follow KQED Learning KQED Learning: https://ww2.kqed.org/learning/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/KQEDLearning/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/KQEDedspace?lang=en About KQED KQED, an NPR and PBS affiliate in San Francisco, CA, serves Northern California and beyond with a public-supported alternative to commercial TV, Radio and web media. Funding for Above the Noise is provided in part by S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation, David Bulfer and Kelly Pope, Horace W. Goldsmith Foundation, The Dirk and Charlene Kabcenell Foundation, The Koret Foundation, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Smart Family Foundation, The Vadasz Family Foundation and the members of KQED.

Remember that "ChatGPT makes you dumber" paper from MIT? I've just read it while preparing for the next iteration of my "GenAI in Research" course and it's even worse than I feared. I was sceptical of the sensationalist headlines, but expected just some nuanced misinterpretation of the results. In fact, I'd already seen posts talking about the small sample size or the fact that the observed changes in neural connectivity might be due to a familiarisation effect. However, the reality turned out to be much worse. I'm sharing this because I feel articles with titles "The truth is a little more complicated," e.g. recent Conversation coverage, validate the original text by treating it as a proper scientific paper. But it is not. The text violates basic requirements for presenting research findings. Honestly, the paper is such a mess that I don't even know where to start... Okay, let's start with the design of the experiment. Participants were split into 3 groups and got 20 minutes to write an essay on a given topic. One group was allowed to use ChatGPT, another could use a search engine, and the third could only use their brain. The sessions were repeated 3 times, and then, 4 months after the first session, there was a 4th session where participants switched modes, i.e., those who had been using ChatGPT were not allowed to use anything, and those who had been using only their brain switched to using ChatGPT. 55 participants completed 3 sessions, and then the authors removed one of them to make the distribution nicer. Yes, you heard that right—they just removed an observation for no reason. Here's a direct quote from the paper: "55 completed the experiment in full (attending a minimum of three sessions, defined later). To ensure data distribution, we are here only reporting data from 54 participants (as participants were assigned in three groups, see details below)." Like, seriously, what? They just want the number of observations to be divisible by three and drop a data point? That's not how science works. Anyway. At least, we have established that there were 3 groups in the experimental design. However, one of them mysteriously disappeared and the final results are reported only for two groups! So maybe there were 3 groups, maybe 2. Or maybe 5. And I'm not joking—there is a plot (Figure 12) suddenly showing 5 different groups without any explanation of what is going on. One of my favourite figures is Figure 7 (attached to this post). Can you guess what these p-values correspond to? Check out the paper and you might be surprised. But also note that the figure caption says "Percentage of participants within each group who provided a correct quote" while the axis label says "Percentage of Participants Who Failed." So, never mind the p-values as authors can't even decide if they're measuring success or failure. The most interesting part is just coming but apparently this post is already too long for LinkedIn so I have to continue in comments. | 74 comments on LinkedIn

What if the same playbook that made cigarettes addictive is now being used to make our food irresistible? This week we're exploring Ariana Huffington's eye-opening piece about how Big Food borrowed tactics directly from Big Tobacco, using the same scien

Did you know that about 30% of adults don’t get enough sleep? Sure, being tired sucks and many of us are busy and have reasons for not getting enough sleep. But did you know that sleep quality has a major impact on our emotions for the day? In this episode, you’ll learn more about sleep research, how sleep impacts your emotional experience during the day, how alcohol affects sleep, and why you have drinking dreams in sobriety. Resources I offer: Community & Meetings: Living a Sober Powered Life https://www.soberpowered.com/membership Sober Group Coaching https://www.soberpowered.com/sober-coaching Anger Management Program https://www.soberpowered.com/anger Weekly emails on Thursdays with the sober tip of the week, announcements, interviews, and more. https://www.soberpowered.com/email Free resources https://www.soberpowered.com/free   Thank you for supporting this show by supporting my sponsors. Learn more: https://www.soberpowered.com/sponsors If you enjoyed this episode please consider buying me a coffee to support my work https://www.buymeacoffee.com/soberpowered Sources are posted on my website Disclaimer: all of the information described in this podcast is my interpretation of the research combined with my opinion. This is not medical advice. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Can you reset your biological clock? The body’s circadian rhythm keeps you on track and disturbances to this rhythm cause physical and mental problems. This might sound familiar to autistics. Support the show NOW RATED IN THE TOP 0.5% GLOBALLY! --Free 30-day trial for the podcast listeners! https://try.sunsama.com/xi4blkokndgk (affiliate link which helps the podcast) No credit card needed. Want to be a guest or know someone who would be a good guest? Fill out this form: https:/...

Comedian W. Kamau Bell speaks with NPR's Michel Martin about his decision to perform at the Kennedy Center after President Trump assumed the organization's chairmanship.

Taking pre-determined, systematic breaks during a study session had mood benefits and appeared to have efficiency benefits (i.e., similar task completion in shorter time) over taking self-regulated breaks. Measuring how mental effort dynamically fluctuates over time and how effort spent on the learn …

Without most consumers realizing it, subliminal marketing messages can be present in their everyday shopping experiences. For instance, when visiting an Amaz...

Discussion of this myth provides rich opportunities to integrate topics across research methods, memory, cognition, sensation and perception, and social psychology.

Free Online Guide - A List of Advertising Tactics

Podcast Episode · Science Vs · 11/07/2024 · 36m

Neuron and dominoes

In this post, I share a classroom activity centered on a KPop video, which asks students to examine how values and tropes can literally shape what they “see.”

Get my new book (co-authored with Christopher Chabris), *** Nobody's Fool: Why We Get Taken In and What We Can Do About It *** available July 11, 2023. Learn...

What are the most replicated findings in psychological science? Researchers offer their picks.