mindspill

... on risk and disclosure

Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:46:46 GMT

This is one of the best articles I read on the web this year. Via

Some snippets:

Psychologists call this behavior "learned helplessness"--convincing ourselves that we have no control over a situation even when we do. ...

MY FAVORITE LEARNED HELPLESSNESS experiment is this one: People were asked to perform a task in the presence of a loud radio. For some, the radio included a volume knob, while for others no volume knob was available. Researchers discovered that the group that could control the volume performed the task measurably better, even if they didn’t turn the volume down. That is, just the idea that they controlled the volume made them less distracted, less helpless and, in turn, more productive.

Control is the thing, both Fischoff and Slovic say. It’s the countervailing force to all of this risk disclosure and the learned helplessness it fosters.

...

DREAD IS A POWERFUL force. The problem with dread is that it leads to terrible decision-making.

Slovic says all of this results from how our brains process risk, which is in two ways. The first is intuitive, emotional and experience based. Not only do we fear more what we can’t control, but we also fear more what we can imagine or what we experience. This seems to be an evolutionary survival mechanism. In the presence of uncertainty, fear is a valuable defense. Our brains react emotionally, generate anxiety and tell us, “Remember the news report that showed what happened when those other kids took the bus? Don’t put your kids on the bus.”

...

But even that “one in 50 million” characterization is problematic. It still causes people to exaggerate the risk in their minds, a phenomenon called "imaging the numerator." In one experiment that showed the dramatic effect of imaging the numerator, Slovic notes, psychiatrists were given the responsibility of choosing whether or not to release a hypothetical patient with a violent history. Half the doctors were told the patient had a "20 percent chance" of being violent again. The other half were told the patient had a "one in five" chance of being violent again.

Startlingly, the doctors in the "one in five" group were far more likely not to release the patient. "They lined up five people in their minds and looked at one of them and saw a violent person." They imaged the numerator. On the other hand, 20 percent is an abstract statistic that hardly seems capable of violence.

It sounds illogical, but our minds think that "one in five" is riskier than "20 percent."

What constitutes a visit to a country?

Thu, 24 Jan 2008 05:56:39 GMT

Salon.com has an interesting article on what constitutes “visiting” a country? If you go to the Iguazu Falls and move from one side to the other, does that mean that you've been to both Brazil and Argentina? If you land in Frankfurt in transit to Malaysia, does that mean that you've been to Germany? The article (found via Vagablogging) by Patrick Smith, gives some similar examples and asks what does it mean to visit a country, and should it really matter which countries you’ve visited.

I'm all in favour of making lists of the places I’ve visited. I consider travelling as a hobby and most people keep lists of their collections. Birdwatchers have their birding records, beer fanatics have their beer logs, probably even stamp collectors have their stamp lists, so why shouldn’t a traveler have a places list? Travelling is like collecting experiences in different areas, so it’s no different from any other hobby in this regard. (I’m also a bit of a sucker for lists, and lists will be really handy when the good old Alzheimer’s starts settling in.)

Now to the main point of the question, what does it mean to visit a country? Well, for starters if you never venture beyond the airport’s perimeter that doesn’t mean you visited anywhere except the airport. By certain airport naming conventions, you might end up in a different country than the airport name. For example, Ryanair’s idea of Vienna’s airport is in Bratislava, which isn’t even in Austria.

Probably the commonest way of attributing a visit to a place is to attribute the visit to being physically in the place, and maybe visit some of the most representative sights of the place. For example a visit to Paris would mean seeing the Eiffel Tower, Louvre etc. On a deeper level, one can immerse himself in the ambience of the place, try to interact with the locals, eat their food, and learn about the culture. There are many different levels you can visit a place, but there needn’t be a clear cut judgment on what a visit should mean.

Any country is living organism, always evolving and changing. In some countries the change is more visible than others. In places where there has been war, poverty, oppressive political institutions, the change tends to be more drastic and more visible than the more gradual change happening in more stable countries. This added time attribute to a visit makes each visit unique.

As for what you’re going to write down on the list. I list cities in my “have-been-to” list. I find cities more manageable in terms of size and more representative in what you have really seen. If I visit Moscow that doesn’t mean that I’ve visited the whole 6.5million sq miles of Russia, but I can still say that I’ve been to Moscow.

Facebook Profile Collection

Fri, 05 Oct 2007 05:44:48 GMT

I probably didn't get my gossip fix for the week so tonight I was checking out some profiles on facebook. My facebook profile browsing soon turned into picking out some ridicioulous profiles.

First of all, please, please try to be different. If your friend put up a picture of him drinking alcohol of some sort (something rather lame in the first place), you don't have to follow. All these profile photos where friends of the same person.

So you're looking for a relationship. Fair enough, nothing wrong with that. You've discovered facebook and think it's yet another means to get to your goal. You go through all the pain of setting up a profile, add some friends and then get to the real purpose of your facebook profile. Finding a date. (Don't deny that you use social networking sites to find dates if you're single. I know you do, better admit directly)

In facebook there's a field that helps you proclaim your aim, the looking for field. So you start with setting it to Dating. Then you try to mild it down a bit and add Friendship. Then you try not to be so fickle as aim only for dating, and add A relationship. Maybe stopping her is a good idea, but some people think they can stretch it a bit further. So they add Random Play, kinky. But the cherry on the cake is Whatever I can get. Now I know you're really desperate, and what you really deserve is a dirty midget infested camel.

The best relationship status list though was of this girl. The relationship status was In a relationship and at the same time, she was looking for: A relationship. Man, she sure was relying on the fact that her boyfriend is a total computer illiterate, and has no way to know what was happening behind his back. The cheeky bitch.

You've set your relationship status, and now want to give a sneak peek of what your potential conquest will get. You browse through your never-ending picture library, and painfully select the 3 photos that make you look like Jennifer Lopez better looking cousin. You laid your bait and now you're waiting for somebody to bite.

But hold on, your most considerate friends want to lend their hand in helping you find your prince. So what do they do. They add some pictures from their collection of you, and tag them so that people who browse your profile can see them. Problem is that these pictures aren't what you really call flattering. More likely they're the most embarrassing pictures of you getting drunk, looking horribly wasted, and weighing and extra 20 pound which you have lost by now.

Hint. It's time to change those bastard friends of yours.

Enough about relationship seeking. I actually managed to find a cool application for a change. It's catbook. A facebook for your cats. Think this will be better than my personal facebook page. It's more interesting that's for sure.

And, and, I found a nice picture on Karen's wall. It's called Six Degrees of Separation (Wiki article for explanation)

Survey: Do you iron your bedsheets?

Wed, 15 Aug 2007 21:32:44 GMT

The Bias Visor - what's the reason behind your judgements?

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 05:04:04 GMT

It's a nice warm day and the smell of fresh grass fills your nostrils as you walk towards the car to drive to work. Your neighbor's poodle dashes from across the street and starts rolling on the ground demanding attention. You start rubbing the dogs belly and playing with him until you realize that you're already 10 minutes late and better leave for work. You leave for work with a smile.

Outside it's cold and rainy. It's July and the sun seems to have taken a vacation and went to Madeira. You walk to the car and the poodle runs from across the street splashing in the puddle next to your feet. He rolls on the ground demanding attention but instead of feeling like patting it your first instinct is to kick it away and head straight to work.

Have you ever felt like the dog in this situation? One morning you're greeted with rubs and cuddles and the next morning you do exactly the same thing and get kicked? Why do we sometimes perceive things positively, and other times we perceive the same thing negatively?

I'm calling that undefined something that alters our perception of an event the bias visor. The bias visor can be mood, state of mind, level of stress, internal turmoil, internal peace, etc. I choose the visor analogy because this mental state works like a visor. It's like a screen (visor) that alters (biases) the perception of a neutral event to make it positive or negative. Neutral events are events that aren't logically positive like winning the lottery or logically negative like the death of someone.

Interactions between lovers are probably the best way to observe what I’m talking about. Have you ever been in an argument with your sweetheart and all of a sudden behaviour that she used to like starts annoying her? For example, say you've got a peculiar way to use vocabulary to describe situations. When the bias visor is in positive mode this is seen as funny and amusing, but when the visor is in negative mode it is seen as stupid and illiterate. The action, misusing words, is the same, but the reaction is positive or negative depending on the bias of the visor.

Knowing about the existence of the bias visor gives us a way of understanding people's reactions better. I think that when the presence of a bias visor is evident, identifying the real nature of the visor gives us insight on what the real problem is. Take the previous example of the vocabulary misuse. Imagine all of a sudden your better half starts complaining about your vocabulary. Then the habit of fitting the toilet paper roll the other way round starts annoying her. Then you're scolded because you placed the toothbrush mug on the left side of the sink instead of on the right. All these events are considered generally innocuous and relatively unimportant, but if all of a sudden they start seeming important and negative it's evident that a negative bias visor is affecting the judgment of the situation. The real cause of the problem is not the action itself but something deeper.

There are a million different reasons why somebody is affected by a bias visor. I believe that there are so many possible causes that it's best not to try and guess what they are. The best way to tackle the situation is to discuss it, and ask what the problem is. This way there's a greater chance of identifying the real reason behind one's interpretation of events consequently avoiding the risk of misinterpretations and misjudgments. Sometimes however the biased person might not know what the reason is, or else the person doesn't feel like talking about it. In this case I think the best option is to let it pass gradually and give the person space and time.

What do you think about this topic? Can you add some examples of the bias visor in action? I'm sure that what I'm talking about here is something that was discussed by psychologists at some time. If anybody knows the proper terminology for what I'm talking about then I'd be very grateful for a comment.

Would you buy condoms from Lidl?

Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:24:32 GMT

Lately Europe has been flooded by low cost supermarkets like Lidl, Aldi and Netto which sell everything under the sun and more. I used the term low cost because the business model of these supermarkets parallels the airline low cost model quite well. To keep low prices these stores keep overheads to a minimum by choosing cheaper property locations, using basic shop furnishings, keep minimal staff, stock cheaper brands and promote themselves aggressively.

Whether you like it or not it's a fact that we're influenced by brand names, packaging and ads. While the brands on sale may not be D&G or the culinary equivalent, the low prices are undeniably attractive and these supermarkets are very popular even if not everybody admits buying from them. I've already said that eating is expensive and time consuming so even I'm a Lidl convert especially when it comes to unimportant food.

This post came to mind when I saw some Scuba diving gear in Lidl. Now, that's one thing that I wouldn't mess around with and buy disreputable supplies to save a couple of bucks. This leads me to the question for you – what would you never buy from these supermarkets?

From the top of my head I would avoid condoms, running shoes and toilet paper.

2012 Olympics Logo - Is it so bad

Mon, 04 Jun 2007 18:43:43 GMT

Take a quick read at the BBC article but don't stop there READ THE DEBATE. If you find something positive written in the comments then go and buy a lotto ticket, you're gonna win!

...yes it is so bad

On Eating

Thu, 08 Mar 2007 01:30:56 GMT

Eating is expensive and time consuming

Expensive – Have you ever thought how much money you spend on food? I want the IPAQ 6915 PDA, all money spent on food could be spent on the PDA/phone fund.

Time consuming – I'd rather be editing photos, playing world of Warcraft, watching the office or hanging out rather than cooking and eating. The cleaning afterwards is the worst part of the deal.

The ideal solution to this problem would be getting free food without wasting time. Let's look at potential ways of achieving this, taking the ideal scenario in each case:-

Expensive
Get somebody else to pay for the food. This used to be the default back home when my parents used to pay for the food but now alternative approaches need to be investigated.

Be a guest – valid option except that you've got to get yourself invited which probably involves some different kind of investment on the other side. Probably works better if you're a good looking female.
Get the boss to pay for lunch – Best possible option (also solves the time problem since lunch would be on company time) however it's rare.
Gather the food yourself – not really a practical option considering there are no farms around from where to "borrow" the raw ingredients.

Time consuming
Eat when it's better to be eating rather then doing something else.

Eat at work – Eating the main meal during the lunch break will free time in the evening. Breakfast is also ideal for work. Not only you're given those glorious extra 10 minutes of sleep but you're effectively not losing productive time from work since you can have breakfast while you're still settling in for the day.
Eat while you're doing something else – Watch TV, read the paper, browse the web. These are not always practical options depending on the food in question.
Eat for pleasure – Going out for dinner.

In absence of the optimal solution you have to strike a balance between the two variables in question. You could save most of the time if you're willing to eat out (or get take away) everyday but then the bank account is taking the bigger hit.

This week I'm going to journal all my cooking and eating aiming to economise on cost and time. At the end of the week I'll calculate the cost of each dish (timewise and moneywise) and determine the most effective eating method. This will also serve as a reference list to answer the famous "what am I going to cook today?" question.

P.S. Mind you I enjoy good food and even enjoy cooking proper multi course meals BUT not I enjoy it only in company. When it comes to eating alone then the process must be fast and efficient without necessarily being nice.

P.P.S. There might be exceptions to the "I enjoy it only in company rule". For instance two weekends ago I went out for a solo dinner on Saturday night in a Japanese restaurant and it was great.

Eurovision 2006

Wed, 24 May 2006 23:25:17 GMT

In these last two years I always wrote something about the Eurovision (see 2004 and 2005) but this year I hoped that I'd get away with avoiding the subject. (Un)fortunately I couldn't resist the temptation and here I am writing about the European Song Festival another year.

For starters this year I only watched the Eurovision. Unlike my impressions here in Ireland people can't care less about the festival, in fact it was a chore in itself finding a pub that was showing it on TV. I watched the show with a festival-ultra in soccer lingo, but even with her insistent requests and charming attempts at convincing the bar-man we didn't get very far enough to listen to any songs except the Irish one and my country's song.

Being the fanatic that she is my friend made it her personal mission to convince all the people within a 10 meter radius to vote for our song. I laughed my heart out watching her conjuring every type of excuse why they should vote for our song. Apart from listening to 2 songs, and laughing out loud I have a recollection that I felt a certain urge to lend my body to the Ukrainian singer which was probably the best element of the Eurovision.

All the work and propaganda served for nothing because our country came last and we didn't even get a single point from Ireland. Actually the only point we got was from Albania probably as recognition for our charity work towards them.

At the end Finland won the Eurovision for the first time with the hard-rock group called Lordi. I only have to say that if for nothing else it was a recognition that rock still lives on, although I feel obliged to ask people who don't usually listen to this type of music and liked the song, to experiment further there's much more to it than Lordi. (Drop a mail for guided tour into this musical world.)

Do you go out shopping with your partner?

Tue, 14 Feb 2006 01:46:54 GMT

Last Saturday I went for what probably is my last Saturday afternoon shopping with her highness. Throughout these last shopping sprees I've been collecting some very unscientific evidence on the behaviour of men out shopping with their partners. I noticed the following types:-

The star gazer - his motor functions suggest that he's looking at the cloths but his mind is wandering far away.
The pet - The one who absently follows his partners scent and nods or yeses for each question
The interested - although a rare specimen this type actively interests himself in the perennial decision whether this skirt was destined to live in her closet or not
Still in the beginning of the relationship - These are easy to spot. They have all the characteristics of the average I-couldn't-care-less type but are evidently making an effort to appear supportive, maybe tonight they'll get rewarded and get the chance to tear away the goods just purchased.
The watcher - The people around are more interesting than the clothes on display.
The Texter - Shopping is the perfect excuse for texting everybody in the address book.
The Teen - Every rag is fine as long as he gets a chance to get in changing cubicle.

I posed the question to myself and concluded that in my case it's a mix of having the pleasure of good company, an opportunity to scornfully criticise unwearable cloths (and there are plenty out there), do some good-old-people-watching and imagine that I have a say in her choice of clothes. What about you?