Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change

pnas.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 208 posts

Re: Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change

#171

Post by d23 »

eliasmacpherson wrote: post #121
exo-pla-net wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The need for representative sampling is something understood by first year undergraduates on first exposure to the concept. What you've written is the reddit equivalent of criticizing a study with "correlation does not imply causation". Yeah, scientists are familiar with the idea, believe it or not. Scientists in fact go to great lengths to ensure their sampling is representative, and studies published in good journa…

Without getting into a snark, that is not a particularly good book to recommend. https://slate.com/technology/2016/12/kahneman-and-tversky-re... "Taken all together, the chapters Schimmack looked at earned an average grade of C-minus."

Thanks. I had the impression this book and his work was widely regarded. I'll have to put a mental asterisk next to some of the stories I was blown away by.

Re: Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change

#172

Post by eliasmacpherson »

d23 wrote: post #171
eliasmacpherson wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without getting into a snark, that is not a particularly good book to recommend. https://slate.com/technology/2016/12/kahneman-and-tversky-re... "Taken all together, the chapters Schimmack looked at earned an average grade of C-minus."

Thanks. I had the impression this book and his work was widely regarded. I'll have to put a mental asterisk next to some of the stories I was blown away by.

The book not so much (despite its initial critical acclaim on continuing commercial success), but at least his research summarized within seems to be reproducible and his reputation is intact. The research on priming in particular, was reliant on low sample size studies, and was not reproducible.

Re: Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change

#173

Post by asveikau »

mistermann wrote: post #149
asveikau wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, thank you. The internet is funny. Neutral tones can come across as aggressive. Aggression, generally, though, can totally be all in the head of the perceiver.

Oh, it isn't just the internet that's funny, overall society/humanity is this way - we are swimming in it daily, and complain about it endlessly. I sometimes wonder if the reason no one seems super interested in fixing things is because we've been living in it for so long, we instinctively write it off as being "just the way it is" &/or "there's nothing you can do about it".

Oh yeah, i know it's not just the internet either. Notice i said "the internet is that way", then, the next sentence describes "aggression" generically, without specifiers. Kind of intentionally worded that way.

But i do think the internet, and maybe programmer communities especially, have a tendency to be dry and confrontational, focused on debate or correcting other people.

Re: Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change

#174

Post by aliqot »

kube-system wrote: post #27
aliqot wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Patriot Act was an executive order

The Patriot Act is law, enacted by the 107th United States Congress. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act You can tell because of the word “act” which refer to it being a formal legislative action.

https://www.state.gov/executive-order-13224/

Re: Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change

#178

Post by marcosdumay »

bowsamic wrote: post #97
somenameforme wrote: post #84

There is a severe demographic problem with this study (among others). A current trend in the social sciences is using Amazon Mechanical Turk and Prolific to run surveys. These sites are based around paying people pennies to compete menial tasks (like complete surveys), and populated with large numbers of "professional" menial task executers. This study offered the big bucks of $1.50 - $2.25. There are two major probl…

It always amazes me how such studies are simply left up to the academics, because clearly taking representative samples of the population will need some kind of help from the government to organise it

There are many companies that specialize on this. Usually, it takes picking random people at many different streets, but does not require government intervention.

Re: Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change

#179

Post by kube-system »

aliqot wrote: post #174
kube-system wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Patriot Act is law, enacted by the 107th United States Congress. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act You can tell because of the word “act” which refer to it being a formal legislative action.

https://www.state.gov/executive-order-13224/

What about it? EO 13224 is not the Patriot Act.

Re: Widespread misperceptions of long-term attitude change

#180

Post by btilly »

godelski wrote: post #163
btilly wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So there are things that happened under Clinton that have been posited as contributing to the financial crash, so the guy who was President for the last 8 years leading up to the crash must be blameless. Yeah, not buying it. There are lots of things that happened under Bush that are also posited as contributing to the crash. And 8 years is more than long enough for Bush's policies to have contributed.

> so the guy who was President for the last 8 years leading up to the crash must be blameless. That's not the argument being made. The argument being made is that actions under a president outlast the president and have to be considered as part of their legacy. Bush isn't blameless but that also doesn't mean Clinton gets off Scot-free. The argument is about how attribution to current events doesn't solely lie upon th…

Saying "blameless" overstated the case.

But the comment I was responding to said:

> ...what led to the 2009 financial crisis was mostly done under the Clinton administration...

That goes well beyond "Clinton doesn't get off Scot-free" all of the way to, "Clinton should get most of the blame."

I'm firmly in agreement that Clinton contributed. But I'm going to need serious convincing that what he did was more important than, say, failing to enforce regulations against fraudulent advertising on subprime mortgages. Or blocking the 2005 GSE reform bill which would have allowed more action before that problem blew out of control.

Post reply on HN