Banking with Capital One helps you keep more money in your wallet with no fees or minimums on checking accounts and no overdraft fees.
Just ask the Capital One Bank guy.
It's pretty much all he talks about in a good way.
He'd also tell you that this podcast is his favorite podcast. Thanks Capital One Bank guy.
What's in your wallet?
Terms apply see Capital One dot com slash bank Capital One N -A member FDIC.
Look around everyone.
Every car you see is probably on auto Trader, like that sleek convertible that turn heads when it picked you up from the airport or the custom ride from your favorite van life couple on social media.
Even that vintage sports car that's tailing you a little too closely.
New cars, used cars, electric cars, even flying cars...
okay, no flying cars yet, but as soon as those things get invented, they'll be on Auto Trader.
If you see a car you like, it's probably on Auto Trader.
That's kind of their thing.
Auto trader. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh and there's Charles W.
Chuck Bryant, the best all around boy.
And there's Jerry Rollin, and this is Stuff You Should Know.
I really wish I hadn't told you that.
I think I told you that before, though, so you forgot the first time, so maybe you'll forget again.
I can't, you know how people keep lists of like episodes we say we should do or movies we've mentioned or something like that?
They should keep a list of the different things that we've talked about and then completely forgot we talked about, because I'm sure it would be extensive.
Yeah, big list. So speaking of big lists, Chuck, we're talking today about priming, which is the present tense of primus, and what it refers to is a, it's a psychological term where you are prompted to respond in a certain way, behave in a certain way, choose a certain selection based on some prompt that was given to you without your knowledge.
It could either be flashed so fast or something on a computer screen that your conscious awareness didn't pick up on it.
Or it could just be presented to you in a way that you're not aware that it's actually related to the thing that you're being say, tested on.
Yeah, exactly and this is a big thing in cognitive psychology and we're going to kind of get into the ins and outs of it.
For some of it, there's a lot of studies that sort of indicate that there's a lot to it.
There's another part of this that we'll get to, where there's a lot of studies that aren't so great or that have been fudged, or data's been massaged, or completely fabricated, where it seems like sometimes they've been found out as far as researchers go.
But it all comes down to memory.
And if you're talking to a cognitive psychologist, they'll say that you have a couple of ways that you remember things.
One is your explicit memory or your active or conscious memory, like if you're trying to think of something and you're actively engaging your memory to think of a thing.
That's what that is.
Or if somebody asked, like what was Chuck's senior superlative in high school?
I would think back to a fact that I learned and I would say best all -around boy.
Is it gonna be one of those?
And then implicit memory is the other one and that's just what you remember on an unconscious level.
So if someone asked me, what was your senior superlative, wouldn't even have to think about it, best all around, boy, boom, just pops right out as if it were my name.
Right, so those are, and this is really kind of like breaking it down to a really rough, basic level.
It's much more complex than that, but we bring that up because it's your, it's tapping into the different ways that you access memories, that priming is based on.
and you said it falls under the the rubric of cognitive psychology.
And that is true. Cognitive psychology has shown very clearly that this actually works.
That if you give somebody say a word and you show them a list of associated words, it's going to just happen that they're able to pick out the associated word faster than other words.
Well, we'll give you some examples rather than just me mushing it all together.
Let's tease it out a little bit, like an 80's perm.
Yeah. Oh boy. Yeah.
Let's do that. So, because I think if we give some of these examples will make a little more sense.
For instance, this first exercise that Dave helped us out with, this day, found this one is called the Lexical Decision.
And that is the idea that if you put a word up on a screen for a couple of seconds as as a priming word, then you as the subject will indicate the next word on the screen if it's real word or if it's a nonsense word, but that will be influenced that's your lexical decision you're making, that will be influenced by that priming word that you saw.
So in this case, Dave used the example, doctor.
You're sitting there in the lab, Bill Murray is on the other side.
Got the shocker already.
Doctor pops up on the screen for a couple of seconds, that's your priming word. And then all of a sudden, other words pop up after that.
And our job as a subject is to say whether that's a real word or a nonsense word. And obviously, you would think, if the word nurse pops up, you're gonna be recognizing that a lot faster.
So it's all about sort of the speed at which you recognize this as a real or nonsense word. Nurse would be a much faster decision than if it was basketball.
right and it's it's basically words that share a similar category yeah are more easily accessed once you've been primed almost like the way that we sort things is by putting them into large categories like doctor nurse hospital stethoscope right and then once you open that that category by thinking of doctor you're going to be able to access the other stuff in that category much more easily than say something in a totally different category like cheese in the same category as delicious that kind of stuff, right?
Yeah or basketball.
That seems sure that seems like what it's tapping into and it actually seems to reveal that that's kind of how we we store memories.
There's another another demonstration that was pretty famous that shows for sure again I just want to get this across cognitive priming really works if you give people a list of And one of those words has a letter missing, say a vowel, that could make multiple different words.
They are going to choose, or they're going to fill it in differently based on the other words in the list. So, for example, if you have a list of words, bread, milk, hot, and then the last word is S -O blank P.
Poop. Sure or soup, I think would be a good one, right?
And depending on whether you know how to spell, you might spell it with an O or an M.
or a U, doesn't matter, you're still getting the point across.
Right, or, in another example, of the same missing letter, if it was shower, water, wash, S -O blank P, you might say poop there too, actually, soap would probably be the word. So, you know, it's just a very intuitive kind of thing happening because your brain is working in a very unconscious way, or I guess, non -conscious, because it is primed by the words that proceed the one with the missing letter.
Right, and then there's also another, well there's a number of different ways of priming people cognitively, but one that just makes total sense, and I think we've all run into is repetition priming.
To where if you are shown like say a pair of words, maybe sometimes one of which is a nonsense word and you have to pick out the nonsense words.
If you see like in a list over and over again, doctor and nurse, doctor or nurse, it comes up three times out of a seven word pair list, you're going to move through those much more quickly because it's right there in the forefront of your mind.
So it hasn't faded yet, so you're just going to pick it out faster and faster the more it's repeated.
That's a form of priming too.
Yeah, and these are all really super basic, you know, examples of cognitive priming.
But it does show a lot about how our memory works that we're not just computers where we can just access a file by clicking on it very easily.
We develop shortcuts in our brain.
We take shortcuts when we see words, relating them to other words.
And so it just makes sense.
You could access something much, much faster because you have been primed.
In other words, our implicit memory can be tapped into a lot quicker than our explicit memory.
Right, and at the end of each of these experiments, it kind of quickly became tradition where the researcher would stand up and point at the person and be like you've been primed, maybe adding a booyah once in a while.
Yeah, and Deion Sanders just moonwalks through the background.
So we know that this is true also, not just because study after study has shown that this is actually correct, but when you put somebody in the wonder machine, the FMRI.
Yeah, they found that like if you ask somebody the name of, let's say Anya Taylor -Joy.
Say, who was the star of The Witch?
But also The Gorge, which isn't that good.
I thought that was fairly entertaining for a not great movie, by the way.
The Gorge? Yeah, it was highly watchable on like a rainy, not feeling so great day kind of movie way.
Agreed, agreed. it just, wow, it takes a sudden turn.
It's just really surprising.
But yes, I agree. I think that's a good way to put it.
You would stop and think like, oh, Anya Taylor Joy.
And by the way, the Queen's Gambit is one of the best things I've ever seen in my entire life.
Oh yeah, yeah, the chest one?
Yeah. That's great.
Okay, but if you also said, name an animal that you think of when we say the word dog, what they found in the fMRI that different parts of your brain light up.
So we do know that priming does have a certain effect and it is different than our normal kind of conscious recall.
I wonder if when they go into the fMRI Wonder Machine room now, the person running it just goes, I'm telling you what's gonna happen, a part will light up and then another part will light up and you'll all be super happy.
Right. You've been primed.
You've been primed and Deion just very slowly moonwalks.
So, okay. That's cognitive priming.
Now imagine if you were a psychologist and you said cognitive priming is kind of boring, what if we could use that same stuff to get people they eat more cheeseburgers?
Yeah. Or to vote for a particular candidate in a political election?
Like what if priming works for that?
Yeah, and that's, you know, it's all fun and games to just sort of look at these little experiments on a campus somewhere.
But if it has a real world use, especially when it comes to marketing and advertising and stuff like that, you can bet corporations are gonna sink some money into doing that.
Yes, so this is the handoff right here between cognitive psychology to social psychology.
And social psychology has studied priming in great detail.
It was a huge hit. You'll remember back to nudge economics.
We talked about it in our PR Live episode.
Like, it was a big deal in like, the late aughts to about the 2012, I think, something like that.
It was just a big deal.
And it makes a lot of sense.
Like, it's the basis of things like ideas like McDonald's uses red and yellow in its logo because those colors are associated with excitement or energy or happiness, or they call it a happy meal because over time, your kid will associate McDonald's with being happy or I'm loving it.
It's just a jingle or whatever and it makes sense, it's very catchy, but there's some part of your mind that has been primed to later on associate McDonald's with love, a positive feeling.
All of this is examples of social psychology research supporting this idea that you can prime human beings to behave in a certain way just by using these same techniques that cognitive psychologists prove were dog, cat, soup, soap, that kind of stuff.
Yeah, as long as you beat them over the head with it over and over and over again because repetition is one of the real keys here.
Your brain just being repeatedly exposed to that stimuli is gonna, you know, strengthen that association over time and brands know that, and that's why it drives you crazy during, you know, especially like sports playoffs when you see those same ads over and over and over again.
It's big business. They're putting a lot of money into sort of manipulating your brain, essentially.
Yeah, I've said it before and I'll say it again, for some reason, some ad exec chose morning reruns of Murder, She Wrote, start TV over the air channel network for the Burger King, terrible singing ad.
There had to be some research into their viewership or something, right?
It had to be, but the thing is every single other ad is for like Humana life insurance or health insurance or dental insurance because you just retired and now you have Medicaid.
Like every other ad it almost stood out.
You know what I mean?
Well, our senior friends in the world are very concerned about their health and their healthcare and they still love those cheeseburgers.
That's two things we know.
I guess that's it. But it was it really grated on my nerves because I watched that almost every day.
All right, why don't we take a break here?
That's a good table setting, I think, and we'll get back to how this is used in media and politics.
Should be no surprise right after this.
There's nothing like sinking into luxury.
Anibé sofas combine ultimate comfort and design at an affordable price.
Anibay has designed the only fully machine -washable sofa, from top to bottom.
The stain -resistant Performance Fabric Slip Covers and cloud -like frame duvet can go straight into your wash.
Perfect for anyone with kids, pets, or anyone who loves an easy -to -clean, spotless sofa.
With a modular design and changeable slip covers, you can customize your sofa to fit any space and style.
Whether you need a single chair, loveseat or a luxuriously large sectional, Anibay has you covered.
Visit washablesophus .com to upgrade your home.
Sophus start at just $699.
And right now you can shop up to 60 % off store -wide with a 30 -day money back guarantee.
Shop now at washablesophus .com.
Add a little to your life.
Offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply.
This episode is sponsored by Liquid IV.
Hey everybody, if you're prepping for a big summer, then that means you should plan to stay hydrated so you can get the most out of your body and live more during those warm summer months.
That's right, and that means you need to visit liquidiv .com and maximize your summer plans with sugar free hydration featuring the new raspberry lemonade hydration multiplier.
You can get 20 % off your first order with the code STUFF at checkout.
That's right, and even more than a great deal, it also tastes great too.
That's right, and my buddy, I have to tell you, I love liquid IV.
I use it a lot. It hydrates me very well.
I love that lemon lime.
It tastes really good.
And I put it in my little Dopp kit when I travel and I feel like I'm always pretty well hydrated.
Yeah, you're well hydrated because Liquid IV is made with an optimized ratio of electrolytes, essential vitamins, and clinically tested nutrients that turn ordinary water into extraordinary hydration.
So get ready for summer with extraordinary hydration from Liquid IV.
Get 20 % off your first order of Liquid IV when you go to liquidiv .com and use code stuff at checkout.
It's 20 % off your first order with code stuff at liquidiv .com.
Charlie is the CIA's most brilliant computer analyst whose life is turned upside down when his wife is murdered in a terrorist attack.
Wrought with grief, Charlie decides her killers must pay.
And without any field experience, Charlie must trek the globe and use his biggest weapon, his intelligence, to enact his revenge.
The amateur is a tense, unpredictable ride with surprises at every turn, and constantly finds new ways to up the stakes, says critics.
Starring Academy Award winner Rami Malek, Rachel Brosnahan, Katrina Balf, Michael Stuhlberg, and Academy Award nominee Laurence Fishburne, the amateur, rated PG -13, only in theaters and IMAX this Friday.
All right, so we're back.
Like as promised, we're going to talk a little bit about the media and politics.
Hopefully in a way, that's just sort of quick and easy and doesn't ripple too many feathers because what we've seen is media of all stripes do this and politicians of all stripes do this.
So it's not singling anybody out.
But when the media gets involved in this kind of thing to shape public opinion, they do so with sort of a three pronged fork, which is agenda setting framing and priming agenda setting being like, hey, what are we going to focus on editorially, maybe in today's paper?
Or every day until the election?
How are you going to frame this thing to suit what we feel is probably our slant?
And then, priming. It's basically, you know, similar to the first two, but this is the subconscious things where we're going to repeat things, we're going to use certain words, certain images to sort of reinforce how we framed it.
Yeah, so just for a quick example, let's say the news decides to focus on crime, and that the framing they use is that crime is on the rise.
And you hear about this over and over again, night after night on the news, or you read about it over and over again on your favorite news site, eventually you're going to be primed to think that crime is on the rise, and you might even be a little scared of it.
or relating to politics, a politician might latch onto that and be like, crime's really hot right now.
We're gonna make crime the main point.
We're gonna use it to set the agenda of our campaign.
And we're going to tap into that fear that this person, this lack of safety that the people out there watching the news feel because they're being told over and over again, crime is on the rise.
Whether it is or not is irrelevant.
They feel that it is.
They feel that crime is on the rise.
So we, a politician, are going to tap into that and use it to hopefully get an election, because now we can prime them to get that emotional response out of them over and over again until we finally move them to the voting stations to vote for me, the politician.
That's right. I would vote for you, by the way.
I would never, ever run for public office.
Oh, of course you wouldn't.
Never. I would vote for you for, like, neighborhood watch or something.
Would you vote for me for best all -around boy?
Oh, man. I mean, you got that one in the bag, buddy.
You don't need my vote.
Thank you. Dog whistling is something that you've heard more and more as a sort of a term used in social media, politics, on the news, stuff like that.
And that is when you use a word or a phrase that you sort of are, not sort of, You are very much intentionally associating with a negative racial stereotype, but it's not explicit.
So it operates on the unconscious level, and this is where they tap into implicit bias, something that everybody has, and, you know, using these coded words basically.
There are things that I will never take one of these.
It scares me to death, so I would never sit down for an implicit bias test Because I don't wanna know what my implicit biases are.
It's absolutely terrifying because we all have them.
I guess that's probably cowardly and I should know what my implicit biases are so I can try and correct those.
But it's basically when they sit you down and you say, all right, respond very quickly, as quick as you can to a series of images or words and anything within 200 and 600 milliseconds is your implicit memory.
Anything after that you're thinking about and that's explicit memory.
Right. Two things about that.
One, if implicit bias is an universal thing and everybody has it, you're free.
You don't have to feel as bad about it.
I mean, it's definitely something you should work to correct if you can, but you don't have to feel like it's just you.
That's one thing. And then the second thing too, Chuck, is if it is true that we all are implicitly biased, say, like along racial lines.
I feel like you could explain it by saying, by, it's an example of our evolutionary history not being caught up yet to our current social history.
Like, when we form modern societies, we jump light years ahead as far as evolution goes, and the way that we think and see the world just completely hit warp speed.
but evolutionarily there's still a big lag catching up to it, so we're fearful of people who don't look like us or have a slightly different culture or live in a different nation.
Just evolutionarily speaking, even though we know we shouldn't feel that way, that that's not actually how things are, that conflict between those two things is what the real issue is.
Yeah, oh boy. That really lets us all off the hook, I guess.
That's right, so we don't have to do anything about it.
It'll work itself out in 10 ,000 years.
Well, here's the thing though is when people sit down for these tests, they found that even people who explicitly disagree with any kind of racial stereotyping, like I would never do that, I don't have those at all, they even, well I was about to say fail those tests, they even chart on those tests as showing implicit bias.
Right. So we've made it pretty squarely into social psychology territory right now, and there were some there were some early experiments trying to figure out how you can persuade people using priming, right?
It's like the 70s right?
Yeah, late 70s early 80s.
And so one of the first ones came out in 1979 and it was a social psychology experiment where you gave people a scrambled word list and said make a sentence out of this.
Right And so, you would get something neutral, like, her found knew I.
And I knew her, is a sentence you could make out of that.
Or, you would give something like, leg break arm his.
You could say, break his arm.
And so, one group was given more hostile word scrambles to make sentences out of, the other was more neutral.
And then that was part one.
And after that, they were asked to consider a hypothetical scenario in which somebody's kind of ambiguously responding or interacting with somebody.
I think I saw that Donald is refusing to pay rent until his landlord paints his apartment, and the people who were given the hostile word scrambles rated Donald as much more hostile than the people who are given the neutral word scrambles.
So what they're showing is that you can nudge people toward forming an impression about someone they know basically nothing about based on priming them to feel one way or another about them.
And that was like, if we can do that, man, what else can we do?
That really opened the floodgates.
Yeah, and we're about to take through a series of little things like that that might be mind -blowing for you, where you're like, oh my God, I can't believe that works.
Just sort of put that in your pocket for now.
There was one study where it was, again, it was unscrambling sentences, half the people were given sentences that had words that were like healthy or healthy and active lifestyle words.
The other half got neutral words and afterward, they said, all right, you guys are great.
You can go ahead and leave there, you can go up the stairs there and get out of here to the parking deck up there or you can take the elevator And people who unscrambled the healthy words were more likely to take the stairs afterward, so they're like hey, that's pretty much proof right there, they've been primed with these healthy words to make a healthier decision afterward. Right.
Well, like you said, we'll talk about some of the more shocking or surprising studies.
But before that, we need to mention a guy named John Bargh, who became basically the rockstar of this field.
Starting in the 90s, He essentially wrote a paper that said, like all of this is possible.
Like, here's how you do that.
Here's how you take the findings of cognitive priming and turn it into social or behavioral priming.
And he was very famous for a couple of studies, many studies, but there's two that really stuck out to me that, let me give you an example.
One is that he tested whether something as random as temperature could affect your impression of another person.
Yeah, I thought that was interesting because it was like, they'd used words and finally like, hey, I wonder if words worked, if images alone could work.
And then he was like, hmm, hold my beer.
What about just temperature alone?
So in this one, he asked participants to hold something warm, like a cup of coffee or a warm cup of soup or something, or a frosty cold beverage and then they bring them in a room where they have a conversation with a stranger and they found that, or he found, he claimed to find, that people who were primed with that warm beverage had a warmer impression of that stranger afterward and people who had that cold beverage frostier had a, you know, they felt frostier toward that person.
Right, so that means that you can nudge people to feel a certain way based on metaphor, priming using metaphor and not even words or images but temperature.
Another one that he figured out was, and this is the one he's really famous for, I think this is the one that came from his 1996 paper.
But he tested to see how certain kinds of words affect certain kinds of behavior.
And he took some 19, 20, 21 -year -old students and had them do that famous word scramble.
Priming researchers love word scrambles.
yeah and some had just a normal neutral set of words that to pick out from another had sets of words that were associated with being old but not so so straight ahead that you'd be like these are all old people words but they were like bingo or Florida or wrinkles that kind of stuff right that was part one and then the students who are participating thought that they were done at that point.
But he said, okay, now we've gotta do part two but we're gonna have to go to the end of the hall and turn right and there's another lab we need to go to for the second part of this test. But the real thing he was doing was clocking how long it took the students to make it from one end of the hall to the other.
And he found the people who had worked with word scrambles that had age, or old elder related words, walked slower than the people who had the neutral words.
And this was the one, this experiment Chuck, is what broke open, this is what led to nudge economics, this is what led to governments saying like, man we can use this to like move people in a way that we want them to that's healthier and happier.
This is the study that did that.
Yeah and here's my, I mean, I hope I'm not giving anything away for Act Three when we sort of rain down our judgment upon this stuff.
But, like, even when I was first going through this, I was like, I even know there are so many variables to account for in these experiments that there's no way they're accounting for them, like the taking the stairs or taking the elevator.
Like who was tired that day?
Who had a bum ankle?
Or who, you know, there's just so many different variables to account for on why someone would take the stairs or an elevator, or why somebody would walk slower down the hall.
maybe they were super bored by this experiment, and so they walked a little more sluggish or something like that." And those types of variables, they weren't accounting for ever, it seems like.
I think we can just go ahead and reveal now.
So, I wish you had been a luminary in the field of social psychology and priming research back in the late 90s or 2000s, because you could have derailed this whole thing before whatever got started.
Because if that seemed ridiculous to you, that idea that you could suggest old -related or age -related words to 20 -year -olds and they're going to walk slower because they were just thinking about being elderly, if that seems ridiculous to you, you are 100 % right.
It's a ridiculous study and it's ridiculous that the entire field of social psychology, economics, the politics, paid attention to this and went all -in on it.
But what we have, what we're actually talking about today is one of the biggest black eyes in the history of psychology that didn't involve torturing human beings.
But, you know, let's take through a few of these that you found kind of quickly, because I think it just illustrates, though, how a company or a political party would really latch on to this when they see stuff like this without kind of like critically thinking on how they got there.
One study, exposure to fishy smells, would induce suspicion on trust -based economic exchanges in a trust game.
In other words, like, they smelled something fishy, so they're gonna carry that over as in, hmm, something smells fishy.
Can you imagine reading that in the scholarly journal and being like, man, that's really crazy.
I would say this paper smells like tuna.
There's another one.
Remember power poses?
I specifically remember John Hodgman realizing that I was nervous backstage at the bell house once and telling me to do a power pose to get over my stage fright and I was like, this isn't working.
The reason it doesn't work is because that was a finding from priming research. Oh man.
Did you text him and say you're full of crap?
No, I'm gonna let him hear this episode.
Okay. There's another one.
If you make a frowny face and you're shown upsetting pictures you will self report that should be a red flag in and of itself that you were upset by pictures of starving children people arguing accident victims that had been maimed more than people who weren't making a frowny face at the time they saw the pictures yeah here's one that's interesting to me money primed people are more selfish so if you're I guess they did this experiment with people who made a lot of money and people who didn't I think it was they were winning money in games.
Oh, okay, okay. But the long and short of it is if you were one of the money people, quote unquote, then you would not, if someone spilled their pencils like one of the researchers, like, oh, look at me, I spilled all these pencils, they wouldn't pick up as many pencils as someone who didn't have the money, so people without money are kinder.
I can see where that's going in a way, but there are also just so many variables in that.
You know? And also if your study is supporting just a general moral judgment against a certain group, it may have been biased in and of itself, right?
That's a good point.
There's another one.
I love this one. Oh.
These last two are great.
If you think about stabbing a coworker in the back metaphorically, you are more inclined when given a choice to buy soap detergent or disinfectant than you are to buy batteries, juice, or candy bars.
Ouch, damn spot. Yes, exactly.
Why don't you give them the last one Chuck.
Okay, if you were in this experiment, you were induced to lie to an imaginary person, either in an email or a phone call and then at a test that followed that, of the desirability of different products, people who lied on the telephone, they actually said the lie out loud, preferred mouthwash over soap And people who typed it out and lied in the email preferred soap to mouthwash.
Yeah, the first group preferred mouthwash to soap unless the soap was Lifeboy.
So, okay, yes, we should probably reign it back a little bit, because our bias is showing, but for good reason.
I mean, we should say, priming is not just this point of ridicule.
The bottom fell out of this really hot, super sexy field of research that everyone had bought into like a mudslide going down a mountain.
Like it just erupted, it went so south, so fast that today, about, about almost 15 years on since everybody was like, this is all made up, it's essentially a discredited field.
Like there's almost no one working in this anymore because most people are like, this isn't true.
yeah, but that's not to say that there like people didn't get a lot of like legitimate recognition for this stuff like there were people who won Nobel Prizes who worked on this stuff and wrote best -selling books who worked on this stuff and made millions of dollars like speaking to corporations about how they can better you know take advantage of their consumers so it was it was swallowed hook line and sinker so let's give you an example Daniel Kahneman he was a Nobel, already a Nobel prize -winning economist. He wrote Thinking Fast and Slow.
And it was essentially an introduction to nudge economics and priming for the average person.
And it was a huge bestseller.
I mean, everybody was reading that book back in the day, I think it was 2002, okay?
Yeah. In this book, he says, this is a quote, "'Disbelief is not an option, the results are not made up, nor are they statistical flukes.
You have no choice but to accept that the major conclusions of these studies are true.'" You have no choice but to say that this is true.
So just get on board. This was like a Nobel Prize -winning economist who is a psychologist himself who wrote that to the rest of the world, saying, like, Don't even question priming, this is true, let's figure out how to use it to persuade people to do what we want.
Yeah, there was another guy, we talked about the nudge earlier in 2008, another Nobel winning economist named Richard Thaller co -wrote a bestseller called Nudge Colin, Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness.
And in that book, he talked about social priming experiences, benign paternalism, or that nudge that you kind of mentioned earlier toward making a better decision.
And then there's this other economist named, they're all economists.
Daniel, what's his name, Aralee.
I think so, yeah. And he tested a lot of these supposed nudges.
In one experiment he had kids, students grade their own tests, but before had half of them write out as many of the Ten Commandments as they could remember.
And what he found was that those students were less likely to cheat on their self -graded testing because they had just been primed to sort of think of like, A, what's the right thing to do?
It totally makes sense.
Why even question it?
He worked with a car insurance company for another study.
Car insurance companies will sometimes have you say how many miles you've driven in a year.
And you can just lie and your insurance rates will be affected on whether you lie or not.
So, to find out if you could make people be more honest about that, Aralee introduced an honesty pledge that the person would sign at the top of their insurance agreement or contract saying, I won't fudge these numbers, and those people fudged their numbers less than people who didn't have that pledge to sign.
So you prompt people to be honest, whether it's the 10 Commandments or pledging honesty or whatever, they're going to be more honest. And that's a perfect example of the nudge economics that just swept the world at the turn of the 2000s to the 2010s.
Yeah, I wonder if they asked any of the participants coming in, are you honest generally or not?
Self -report. Maybe we should take a break here, yeah, it's a good time for a break, and we'll come back and sort of talk about the big problem with all this, which is, you know, scientifically speaking, the replication of these studies right after this.
All right. Tired of spills and stains on your sofa?
Wash away your worries with Anibay.
Anibay is the only machine washable sofa inside and out where designer quality meets budget -friendly prices.
That's right, sofas start at just $699.
Enjoy a no risk experience with pet friendly, stain resistant and changeable slip covers made with performance fabric.
Experience cloud -like comfort with high -resilience foam that's hypoallergenic and never needs fluffing.
The sturdy steel frame ensures longevity, and the modular pieces can be rearranged anytime.
Shop washablesofas .com for up to 60 % off site -wide.
Backed by a 30 -day satisfaction guarantee.
If you're not absolutely in love, send it back for a full refund.
No return shipping or restocking fees.
Every penny back. Upgrade now at washablesophas .com.
Offers are subject to change, and certain restrictions may apply.
This episode is brought to you by 20th Century Studios The Amateur.
Critics rave The Amateur as one of the most exciting spy thrillers in years, and Rami Malek as excellent as Charlie Heller.
Charlie is the CIA's most brilliant computer analyst whose life is turned upside down when his wife is murdered in a terrorist attack.
Wrought with grief, Charlie decides her killers must pay.
And without any field experience, Charlie must trek the globe and use his biggest weapon, his intelligence, to enact his revenge.
The amateur is a tense, unpredictable ride with surprises at every turn and constantly finds new ways to up the stakes, says critics.
Starring Academy Award winner Rami Malek, Rachel Brosnahan, Katrina Balff, Michael Stuhlbarg and Academy Award nominee Laurence Fishburne, the amateur, rated PG -13, only in theaters Here's an IMAX This Friday.
It's tax season. And by now, I know we're all a bit tired of numbers.
But here's an important one you need to hear.
Sixteen point five billion dollars!
That's how much money and refunds the IRS flagged for possible identity fraud last year.
Here's another 20%.
That's the overall increase in identity theft related to tax fraud in 2024 alone.
But it's not all grim news.
Here's a good number.
100 million! That's how many data points Lifelock monitors every second.
If your identity is stolen, Lifelock's US -based restoration specialists will fix it, backed by another good number, the million dollar protection plan.
In fact, restoration is guaranteed, or your money back.
Don't face identity theft and financial losses alone.
There's strength in numbers with Lifelock Identity Theft Protection, for tax season and beyond.
Join now and save up to 40 % your first year.
Call 1 -800 -LIFELOCK and use promo code IHART or go to lifelock .com slash IHART for 40 % off.
Terms apply. OK, Chuck, so we've talked about this before, the replication crisis in science.
I think it's in the physical sciences, it's all over, where people have had these landmark papers, groundbreaking papers that have changed the world, changed how people act, changed where research dollars go.
When somebody finally gets around to trying to replicate that exact same experiment, they come up with different results, often negative results.
They can't replicate the results that that study found.
And like I said, that's throughout science, this is a big problem, but in psychology and more specifically social psychology, the replication crisis is shaking the foundations of the field.
And a reason why, let's do a little thought experiment here.
Imagine that you're a social psychologist researcher.
Okay. And you're at the university and you've come up with an experiment that you believe the results of which will be used at corporations, political campaigns, all over the place to persuade everyday people to change their behavior, which will shape the world for years to come, but you don't really feel like leaving your office that day.
So you just bring in a bunch of students, maybe 15 of them, experiment on them, and then extrapolate those findings to a human universality, and then it gets packaged and exported to corporations and political campaigns.
That, in a nutshell, is social psychology.
Yeah, I mean, that's what happened.
We have some specific examples of real malfeasance that happened in these studies, in some cases even.
Not just like, they didn't account for all the variables.
In some cases, they massaged data that Daniel Ariely guy that we were talking about and his colleague Francesca Gino, they were accused of massaging the data just to fit their hypothesis.
Turns out that car insurance company came back and said, that data doesn't even match what we sent you and what you published in that honesty pledge situation.
There was another guy, a Dutch guy named Didric Stoppel, he was a big, sort of, big name in this field.
he fabricated studies out of whole cloth.
Yeah, for sure. So it's bad for psychology, bad for social psychology.
But priming research, it was just this is, like, it must have just felt like a bloodbath day after day if you were in the field, just bad news after bad news.
It got so bad that ten years after he wrote Thinking Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman wrote an open letter, but it was actually directed to John Barg saying, like something, this is really bad, that priming research is the poster child for doubts about the integrity of psychological research, and he warned of a coming train wreck, and was basically saying like, hey man, I'm just a believer, I'm just a fan, you guys screwed this up, you better fix it.
And there's actually, I found a really great website called Replicability Index, it's a a something called the reconstruction of a train wreck, where they go through and pick out how Kahneman sold this to the public and misrepresented it all sorts of different ways himself.
So he's passed on, RIP, I don't like to speak ill of the dead, and everything leading up to that, from what I understand, was a great career, but he just hitched his wagon to the wrong thing and then tried to distance himself from it as much as he could.
yeah and you know the community that worked in that field certainly woke up and they weren't just like on this is no big deal they were like alright this is a real problem so they tried have tried since then to try and clean things up a bit and address what they call QRPS or questionable research practices of which there are many we're gonna talk about some of them right now but one obviously it you sort of mentioned this was they're just really small studies you can't make these big huge conclusions about human behavior when you studied 12 college freshmen on a Saturday morning.
As part of the open science movement, and this is pretty cool, I didn't know about this, but researchers are now encouraged to register their studies ahead of time, including what their hypothesis is, before they collect the data.
And that will keep them from what's called, harking, hypothesizing after results are known.
So basically like, hey, here's what I think's going to happen, now let's do the study, but it's officially registered.
so I can't sort of pick and choose what I look at?
There's another big problem called p -hacking, which is taking data and then making it work statistically so that these random flukes suddenly became statistically significant.
Yeah. That's a big problem, and that, I read that it's not so much that researchers were sitting there purposefully massaging their data over and over and over again to tease out some results that they could publish, but it was more like they were just falling for flukes being more significant than they were.
That's what I read, that that was really the big problem, that it wasn't like an entire field of bad actors.
Yeah, I mean, I sort of get it in a way, and we've talked about this in our scientific method show and other episodes too, where you put all this time and you want your thing to pan out that you think is true, So, I get the inclination, but you can't fudge numbers, you can't look at stuff that just backs up your conclusion, you can't throw stuff in the file drawer that doesn't.
And this is one of the things they talked about, the file drawer, you gotta make all this stuff public.
And part of the problem is the media, because they wanna write about something splashy and super interesting.
And so there's a lot of things at play here that go into why somebody would do this beyond just being like you're a bad person.
Yeah, so there's something called publisher perish, like you're basically advancing your careers if you get published in an academic journal.
The problem is academic journals, they're like the media, they wanted to be splashy and sexy.
So they don't really publish negative results anyway.
So even if you wanted to, you'd have a hard time getting it published in a legitimate journal these days.
So that's a big problem.
Ultimately, Chuck, the biggest problem, and this is what really tripped up social psychology, it's that drum that you've been beating this whole time.
Humans are not predictable computers who will respond in a predictable way if you give them a specific stimulus, that's just not how humans work.
Even the same person will react on a different day to the same exact experiment, depending on a host of factors.
Sure, so the same person will respond differently.
You better believe different people will respond differently to the same stimulus.
And then it also depends on who's presenting the stimulus.
Is it being presented by a grad student who's posing as one of the participants or is it like a professor wearing a white lab coat for some reason?
That's definitely going to shape the information or the stimulus that's being received.
And that when you put all this together, it's essentially impossible to replicate a priming study.
and if you get the same results, that's essentially a statistical fluke from what I understand.
Yeah. I mean, we talked about the Stanford prison experiment a few times, and looking back like especially when you see the movie, I talk about who's presenting the experiment.
It's like, those guards showed up.
It's like you got, you look ridiculous.
You know, you look like an 18 year old who painted on a mustache and put on some, you know, mirror aviator sunglasses trying to be a prison guard. Yeah, and developed the Southern accent.
That one always stuck out to me.
Yeah, exactly. So one reason why...
I mean, when you're looking back, so we should say that there are still people, I think I did say working in this field, earnestly.
But they're essentially going through and picking out what could be salvaged from it.
And what they're finding is that priming does work, but like we said, it's going to work differently.
For different people there's very few universalities, if any.
But one thing that they have figured out that is legit with social or behavioral priming is that you can be primed most easily and most reliably if it's pointing you in a direction you already wanna go.
So let's say you want to lose weight.
If you're given a menu that has words like light or diet on it or something like that, you're more likely to choose those items than somebody who isn't interested in dieting.
Yeah, for sure. That's essentially what it got reduced back to, which is just barely beyond cognitive priming, but it's legitimate, and that's where they're starting out from again.
That's the current state of social priming, but just one more thing I wanted to talk about, Chuck, is why everyone bought into this.
Well, why do you think everyone bought into it?
I'll tell you why, thank you for asking.
Because it reduces humans to an understandable, predictable state.
Yeah, which is very easy to market and sell to.
Yeah, and understand, not feel threatened by, but also to feel superior to.
I ran across one explanation called MPC theory, non -player character theory, like referencing background characters in video games who don't think for themselves, they're just kind of automated, and something like social priming underscores that idea that other people are like that.
I'm not like that. I can think for myself, nobody's gonna dupe me into eating a cheeseburger or voting for them.
But other people, that happens too, and that's what priming research supported.
That other people are non -player characters, which elevates your sense of superiority and your sense of intelligence, while also deflating that of other people in your mind.
I have to say though, we've said the word cheeseburger so many times, I can't remember the last cheeseburger I had.
All I want right now is a cheeseburger.
Is that right? Yeah.
Okay. We'll get you one.
What kind do you want?
Well, you know, Dave said something about nasty McDonald's cheeseburgers in these articles.
I saw that. I was like, what are you talking about, McDonald's?
It's a classic. It's the best of the best. Yeah.
Well, you know, Dave may not like it.
Maybe he's a Hardee's guy.
Maybe he's one of those guys who eats his cheeseburgers on a brioche moon.
Oh. An egg roll? You got anything else?
I got nothing else.
These are always fun.
I like these. They are.
We don't very frequently tee off on something, but it does feel good when we do once in a while.
Chuck just said yeah, and as everybody who's ever listened to the podcast knows, he just unlocked listener mail.
came on. I was really tired, and when I originally fell asleep, against the window...
I take it the person isn't driving, when I originally fell asleep I was listening to The History of Sea Monkeys.
To my surprise though, I woke up and heard, White Supremacist and the KKK!
I panicked and jumped out of my seat, thinking I'd missed my stop by a long shot.
And I had finished an episode and started a completely different one.
I was not expecting the Sea Monkey episode to take that turn, you guys.
I was relieved to find out that not much time had passed, and I didn't miss my stop, but also a little distress to find out the dark history of such an innocent children's product.
I live in Istanbul as a foreigner, and your podcast gives me a little taste of home.
It's comforting on those days when I want to tune into two smart guys talking about something interesting.
I really appreciate you for all the work you do and all the fun moments you've given me on the bus.
And that is from Katie Sezenler.
Katie knows how to speak our language, doesn't she?
Katie really knows.
She knows how to flatter.
Thanks a lot, Katie.
Have fun in Istanbul.
That's very exciting and thrilling and I'm glad you did not miss your stop.
If you want to be like Katie and let us know where you live and some funny story about Stuff You Should Know, we love that kind of thing.
You can wrap it up, spank it on the bottom and send it off to stuffpodcast .com.
Stuff You Should Know is a production of iHeartRadio.
For more podcasts MyHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Do you know the symptoms of moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea or OSA in adults with obesity?
They may be happening to you without your knowing.
If anyone's ever said you snore loudly or if you spend your days fighting off excessive tiredness, irritability and concentration issues, it may be due to OSA.
OSA is a serious condition where your airway partially or completely collapses during sleep, which may cause breathing interruptions and oxygen deprivation.
Learn more at don't sleep on OSA .com.
This information is provided by Lilly USA LLC.
From 20th Century Studios The Amateur.
Critics rave The Amateur is one of the most exciting spy thrillers in years and Rami Malek is excellent.
The at every turn and constantly finds new ways to up the stakes.
Starring Academy Award winner Rami Malik and Academy Award nominee Lawrence Fishburne, the amateur rated pg -13 only in theaters and IMAX this Friday.
At T. Rowe -Price their experience helps them see investment potential differently.
Instead of quick answers they know that what really leads to confident investing is true curiosity.
In other words they love a good deep dive.
It's what drives them to ask the questions that really matter in our ever -changing world like can health care innovations create a healthier world?
And how will intelligent systems be part of a new tomorrow?
Their curiosity runs deep.
And with it comes the power to help you invest more confidently.
Better questions, better outcomes.
T. Rowe Price. Learn more at TRowePrice .com slash curiosity
