Welcome to the Nexus of Ethics, Psychology, Morality, Philosophy and Health Care

Welcome to the nexus of ethics, psychology, morality, technology, health care, and philosophy
Showing posts with label Social Behavior. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Behavior. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 2, 2016

The spreading of misinformation online

M. Del Vicarioa , A. Bessib , F. Zolloa , F. Petronic , A. Scalaa, G. Caldarellia, H. E. Stanley, and W. Quattrociocchia
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

The wide availability of user-provided content in online social media facilitates the aggregation of people around common interests, worldviews, and narratives. However, the World Wide Web (WWW) also allows for the rapid dissemination of unsubstantiated rumors and conspiracy theories that often elicit rapid, large, but naive social responses such as the recent case of Jade Helm 15––where a simple military exercise turned out to be perceived as the beginning of a new civil war in the United States. In this work, we address the determinants governing misinformation spreading through a thorough quantitative analysis. In particular, we focus on how Facebook users consume information related to two distinct narratives: scientific and conspiracy news. We find that, although consumers of scientific and conspiracy stories present similar consumption patterns with respect to content, cascade dynamics differ. Selective exposure to content is the primary driver of content diffusion and generates the formation of homogeneous clusters, i.e., “echo chambers.” Indeed, homogeneity appears to be the primary driver for the diffusion of contents and each echo chamber has its own cascade dynamics. Finally, we introduce a data-driven percolation model mimicking rumor spreading and we show that homogeneity and polarization are the main determinants for predicting cascades’ size.

The article is here.

Friday, January 8, 2016

Moral Reasoning and Personal Behavior: A Meta-Analytical Review

By Villegas de Posada, Cristina; Vargas-Trujillo, Elvia
Review of General Psychology, Vol 19(4), Dec 2015, 408-424.

Abstract

The meta-analysis examined the effect of moral development on 4 domains of action (real life, honesty, altruism, and resistance to conformity), and on action in general. The database, comprised by 151 studies across 71 years, stemmed from a previous narrative synthesis conducted by Blasi (1980), updated with studies published up to 2013. Results showed that (a) moral development was significantly related to action in general and to each domain, (b) the effect sizes were similar for altruism, real life, and resistance to conformity, with coefficients higher than r = .20, (c) the effect size for honesty was lower than for the other 3 types of behaviors, and (d) demographic or methodological variables did not affect the association between moral development and action. Discussion centers on similarities among domains of action, perfect and imperfect duties, and the need for other constructs to account for moral action.

Here is an excerpt:

Morality is essential to social life, and moral decisions and actions are the expression of this morality. They are linked to our rational ability to judge and make decisions. Although this link may seem obvious to many psychologists, it has been denied by influential scholars in psychology and philosophy, who come from different streams of a noncognitive tradition. Moral reasoning has a consistent effect on action, across domains, age, sex, and methodological approaches, an effect that cannot be minimized. This effect, on the range of medium rather than low, indicates that the strategy of promoting moral reasoning to enhance morality is a sound strategy and a way to overcome immorality and moral indifference.

The article is here.

Thursday, June 25, 2015

Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory

By Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber
Behavioral and Brain Sciences (2011) 34, 57 –111
doi:10.1017/S0140525X10000968

Abstract:

Reasoning is generally seen as a means to improve knowledge and make better decisions. However, much evidence shows that reasoning often leads to epistemic distortions and poor decisions. This suggests that the function of reasoning should be rethought.  Our hypothesis is that the function of reasoning is argumentative. It is to devise and evaluate arguments intended to persuade.  Reasoning so conceived is adaptive given the exceptional dependence of humans on communication and their vulnerability to misinformation. A wide range of evidence in the psychology of reasoning and decision making can be reinterpreted and better explained in the light of this hypothesis. Poor performance in standard reasoning tasks is explained by the lack of argumentative context. When the same problems are placed in a proper argumentative setting, people turn out to be skilled arguers. Skilled arguers, however, are not after the truth but after arguments supporting their views. This explains the notorious confirmation bias.  This bias is apparent not only when people are actually arguing, but also when they are reasoning proactively from the perspective of having to defend their opinions. Reasoning so motivated can distort evaluations and attitudes and allow erroneous beliefs to
persist. Proactively used reasoning also favors decisions that are easy to justify but not necessarily better. In all these instances traditionally described as failures or flaws, reasoning does exactly what can be expected of an argumentative device: Look for arguments that support a given conclusion, and, ceteris paribus, favor conclusions for which arguments can be found.

The entire article is here.

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

The Myth of the Normal Brain: Embracing Neurodiversity

By Thomas Armstrong
AMA Journal of Ethics. April 2015, Volume 17, Number 4: 348-352

Here is an excerpt:

Such strengths may suggest an evolutionary explanation for why these disorders are still in the gene pool. A growing number of scientists are suggesting that psychopathologies may have conferred specific evolutionary advantages in the past as well as in the present. The systemizing abilities of individuals with autism spectrum disorder might have been highly adaptive for the survival of prehistoric humans. As autism activist Temple Grandin, who herself has autism, surmised: “Some guy with high-functioning Asperger’s developed the first stone spear; it wasn’t developed by the social ones yakking around the campfire”.

Similarly, the three-dimensional thinking seen in some people with dyslexia may have been highly adaptive in preliterate cultures for designing tools, plotting out hunting routes, and constructing shelters, and would not have been regarded as a barrier to learning.

The entire article is here.

Friday, January 3, 2014

Ideology Is Heritable Yet Societies Can Change Their Views Quickly

By Jonathan Haidt
Social Evolution Forum
Originally published December 16, 2013

Here is an excerpt:

From my perspective as a social psychologist, who studies morality from an evolutionary perspective, rapid attitude change is not hard to explain. I am impressed by the consistent data on heritability, showing that some very important parts of our moral and political views are innate. But innate does not mean hard-wired or unmalleable; it  means “structured in advance of experience, and experience can edit and alter that first draft.” (That’s a paraphrase from Gary Marcus). So even if one is born predisposed to questioning authority and seeking out diversity, life experiences can still alter one’s habitual reactions. Becoming a parent, especially of girls, seems to make people more conservative (they perceive more threats in the world).

The entire article is here.

Monday, November 18, 2013

Psyching Us Out: The Promises of ‘Priming’

By GARY GUTTING
The New York Times - Opinionator
Originally published October 31, 2013

Reports of psychological experiments are journalistic favorites.  This is especially true of experiments revealing the often surprising effects of “priming” on human behavior. Priming occurs when a seemingly trivial alteration in an experimental situation produces major changes in the behavior of the subjects.

The classic priming experiment was one in which college students had been asked to form various sentences from a given set of words.  Those in one group were given words that included several associated with older people (like bingo, gray and Florida).  Those in a second group were given words with no such associations.  After the linguistic exercise, each participant was instructed to leave the building by walking down a hallway.  Without letting the participants know what was going on, the experimenters timed their walks down the hall.  They found that those in the group given words associated with old people walked significantly slower than those in the other group.  The first group had been primed to walk more slowly.

The entire story is here.

Saturday, August 31, 2013

Where Does Morality Come From?

By John Corvino
Published on Mar 27, 2013

Is it possible to have a foundation for moral beliefs without appealing to Scripture? John Corvino argues that it is, making a plea for humility from all parties in the debate. At the same time, he challenges his fellow liberals to reject the claim that "morality is a private matter."



Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Social brains on drugs: tools for neuromodulation in social neuroscience

Molly J. Crockett & Ernst Fehr
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci (2013)
doi: 10.1093/scan/nst113
First published online: July 24, 2013

Abstract

Neuromodulators such as serotonin, oxytocin, and testosterone play an important role in social behavior. Studies examining the effects of these neuromodulators and others on social cognition and behavior, and their neural underpinnings, are becoming increasingly common. Here, we provide an
overview of methodological considerations for those wishing to evaluate or conduct empirical studies of neuromodulation in social neuroscience.

The entire research article is here.

Thanks to Molly Crockett for making this available.