Dan Ariely, author of Predictably Irrational, recently turned himself into a podcaster for his own channel, Arming the Donkeys. This week, he had a conversation with the best selling author, Malcolm Gladwell, discussing about social science, storytelling and how to write bestselling books.
Check it out on iTunes.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Behavior on two sinking ships
Imagine you were on a sinking ship, people around you were running, screaming and crying. A great panic was clearly underway and you soon realized this was a life-or-death situation and of course, you, like anybody else, want to survive. Now what would you do? Will you fight your way through to reach the lifeboat or will you be such a gentleman and follow the norm of letting the women and children go first? A recent study shows that, this really depends.
Using two datasets from two real accidents, the sinking of Titanic and Lusitania, researchers found out that under extreme conditions, people may behave drastically different. One critical factor is the scarcity of time.
"...differences in context are likely to matter in life-or-death situations. The comparison between the Titanic and the Lusitania suggests that when time is scarce, individual self-interested flight behavior predominates, while altruism and social norms and power through social status become more important if there is suffificient time for them to evolve..."
Sounds plausible, but a more myterious question is further imposed, how long will be sufficient enough to develop an altruistic norm? Aren't there always people with quite stable altruistic preferences? Why wouldn't these preferences take over instantly? What's the relationship between the severity of the situation and the time we need to develop an altruistic norm?
Also, there could be other important but untouched factors, one of which is the cause of the disaster. Whether the situation is totally man-made or largely natural may have direct effects on people's behavior.
Using two datasets from two real accidents, the sinking of Titanic and Lusitania, researchers found out that under extreme conditions, people may behave drastically different. One critical factor is the scarcity of time.
"...differences in context are likely to matter in life-or-death situations. The comparison between the Titanic and the Lusitania suggests that when time is scarce, individual self-interested flight behavior predominates, while altruism and social norms and power through social status become more important if there is suffificient time for them to evolve..."
Sounds plausible, but a more myterious question is further imposed, how long will be sufficient enough to develop an altruistic norm? Aren't there always people with quite stable altruistic preferences? Why wouldn't these preferences take over instantly? What's the relationship between the severity of the situation and the time we need to develop an altruistic norm?
Also, there could be other important but untouched factors, one of which is the cause of the disaster. Whether the situation is totally man-made or largely natural may have direct effects on people's behavior.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Shoe thrower index
The Economist has come up with an unrest ranking for the Arab world. They weighted-averaged a couple of key indicators to get the vulnerability indices for each Arabian country. The key factors include, years in power for the current ruler (15%), population that are under 25 (5%), percentage of this population to the whole (35%), GDP per capita (PPP, 10%), democracy level (15%), corruption index (15%), and finally, an index of censorship that proxies the freedom of speech (5%). Guess who is up on the front?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)