Skip to main content

Two Minds and Perception


This video describes a study where people were asked to give an opinion, then to explain their thinking. But in some cases the researcher presented them with information that was the opposite of what they had said. Most people didn't notice the switch, and they then gave reasonable explanations for something that they didn't actually believe! This study shows the difference between intutive-level decision making in the moment, and narratives that explain or justify behavior later on.

Special thanks to our colleague Dr. Priscilla Nodine at the CU College of Nursing for suggesting this TED Talk.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Does Psychotherapy Work? Look to the Intuitive Mind for Answers

  Jerome Frank's 1961 book Persuasion and Healing  popularized the idea of "common factors" that explain the benefits of psychotherapy, building on ideas that were first articulated by Saul Rosenzweig in 1936 and again by Sol Garfield in 1957. Frank's book emphasized the importance of (a) the therapeutic relationship, (b) the therapist's ability to explain the client's problems, (c) the client's expectation of change, and (d) the use of healing rituals. Later theorists emphasized other factors like feedback and empathy that are sub-components of the therapeutic relationship, and that can be clearly differentiated from specific behavior-change techniques like cognitive restructuring or behavioral reinforcement . Additional aspects of therapy that are sometimes identified as common factors include the opportunity to confront difficult past experiences, the opportunity for a "corrective emotional experience" with the therapist, and the chance t...

Trump vs. Truth: the Whorfian Hypothesis Revisited

Image of protest against the 1918 Sedition Act during World War I. That act was repealed in 1920. Many concerning things have happened in the United States over the past month, but the one I'd like to write about today is an effort to win arguments by redefining terms. In a recent article titled "In Trump's Washington, Words Become Weaponized," the New York Times  presents a variety of examples in which the White House's recent Executive Orders use terms in ways that are unusual, or in some cases literally opposite from the term's plain-language meaning. Here are some notable instances (if you're up on all the news, you can skip to the part after the bullets, but I do like to document my sources): The term "DEI" (for  diversity, equity, and inclusion ) was used as a pejorative in President Trump's press conference after a January 30 airplane crash, in which he said that "we need to have our smartest people" as air traffic controll...

Chatbot Changes and Challenges in 2023

I wrote last summer  about artificial intelligence tools that are increasingly able to approximate human speech in free-form conversations. These tools then burst onto the public stage with the release of OpenAI's ChatGPT  at the end of November last year. As you probably know by now, the acronym "GPT" stands for "generative pre-trained transformer," which highlights the three most important aspects of this technology: (1) it generates novel responses that aren't based on an a specific algorithm or decision rule, but instead rely on pattern recognition; (2) it has been pre-trained  by consuming massive amounts of writing from the Internet -- much more than a human could read in several lifetimes; and (3) it transforms  those prior writing samples using a trial-and-error process that predicts the next phrase in a sequence until it has come up with a response that seems intelligible to humans. ChatGPT works much like the auto-complete feature in your email or ...