Morals are Relative, Even at PopTech!
Oct/20/2011 18:10 Filed in: Current Events
The rain has finally relented here in Camden, ME, and PopTech is as insightful an experience as ever. In fact, the participants in Dave's seminar on the Science of Character gained some new insight into their own minds -- namely how relative their morals can be. Data after the jump. Read More...
PopTech
Oct/16/2011 23:43 Filed in: Administrative
Dave's at PopTech this week, and Carlo has been writing for Scientific American Mind, so there probably won't be any posts for the next few days. But check back next week for updates about the highlights from Camden, ME and our take on whatever the news brings next. Read More...
How Our Brains Turn Women Into Objects
Oct/12/2011 16:16 Filed in: Judging Character
Recent reports of a mountain lion or cougar stalking the campus of the University of Iowa prompted campus jokesters to tweet their surprise that Michelle Bachman was in town. A cougar, colloquially, is an attractive older woman who seeks out trysts with younger men, and to some, it seems that Bachmann fits the bill. This emphasis on appearance is nothing new for high-profile women, and feminist scholars are quick to point out its potential detrimental effects on perceptions of female competence. Read More...
Maybe Facial Expressions Are Not So Universal?
Oct/06/2011 09:59 Filed in: Emotion
If you only saw the close-up on the left, what do you think Serena Williams was feeling? Anger? Pain? Probably not pride, but that's what it was, as a quick glance to the zoomed-out image on the right reveals. This fact is a bit troubling for a long-held view that the face has approximately six unambiguous emotional expressions. Read More...
Beware the Neuromarketers (and the NYT Op-Eds)
Oct/02/2011 07:46 Filed in: Current Events
Martin Lindstrom's Op-Ed in the Saturday New York Times on how brain science confirms that people love their iPhones is causing quite a stir in the scientific community for two reasons. First, his analysis makes no sense based on any understanding of how the brain works. Second, and probably more troubling, is that the NYT was willing to print an op-ed that references data from experiments that haven't been peer-reviewed and are not publicly verifiable. Read More...
