hku_psyc2020_in-class_experiments

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision
Previous revision
hku_psyc2020_in-class_experiments [2018/02/25 08:45]
filination created
hku_psyc2020_in-class_experiments [2018/03/19 05:02] (current)
filination
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== PSYC2020 in-class experiments ====== ====== PSYC2020 in-class experiments ======
  
-===== Week #1:  =====+Generally helpful materials:​ 
 +  * Dan Ariely flashcards about irrationality biases [[http://​advanced-hindsight.com/​wp-content/​uploads/​2018/​02/​CAHFlashcards01.pdf|Collection1]] / [[http://​advanced-hindsight.com/​wp-content/​uploads/​2018/​02/​CAHFlashcards2.pdf|Collection2]] 
 + 
 +===== Week #1: Replication Crisis ​ ===== 
 + 
 +Resources:​ 
 +  - Course reading: Book chapter: Replication Crisis in Psychology
  
 ===== Week #2: Morality ===== ===== Week #2: Morality =====
 +
 +  - Hindsight bias
 +    - Takeaways:
 +      - We think we knew the answer all along even when we didn'​t/​don'​t.
 +  - Why do people cheat?
 +    - Video: [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=ZuIa8z3ZX6M|Comfortable cheating]]
 +    - How we study cheating
 +      - Video: [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=nMBR261CAN8|The Matrix Experiment]]
 +      - Video: [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=2KyavuKmdNE|The Corruption Experiment]]
 +    - Takeaways:
 +      - You can study unethical behavior in the lab
 +      - There are some fascinating findings in behavioral ethics social psychology studies.
 +  - Who cheats more?
 +    - Video: [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=GSTizvMHfGY|Who Cheats More: Bankers or Politicians?​]]
 +      - Takeaways: ​
 +        - We all cheat
 +        - We all cheat about the same
 +  - Cheating behaviors (you versus average HKU student)
 +    - Video: [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=V1jVvQbvZLQ|The Fudge Factor]]
 +    - Takeaways:
 +      - We lie and yet still think of ourselves as good honest people
 +      - Justifying own unethical behavior
 +  - Experiment: Employee versus manager manipulation
 +    - Unethical judgments depend on context/​perspective and individual differences
 +    - You need to understand the social context
 +  - Morality in every day life
 +    - Takeaways:
 +      - Understanding morality is very important for everyday life, in everything we do
 +    - Fundamental attribution error bias
 +  - Morality of self-driving car
 +    - Takeaways:
 +      - Understanding morality is very important for everyday life, in everything we do
 +      - We make moral decisions all the time, even when not realizing it
 +      - A good example, is when faced with having to articulate decision for a machine, very uncomfortable and confusing
 +      - Website: [[http://​moralmachine.mit.edu/​|Moral machines project]]
 +
 +Resources:
 +  * [[https://​www.amazon.com/​Honest-Truth-About-Dishonesty-Everyone-Especially/​dp/​0062183613|Book:​ The honest truth about dishonesty]]
 +  * [[http://​www.imdb.com/​title/​tt2630898/​|Movie:​ Honesty, the truth about lies]]
 +  * Dan Ariely'​s TED talk: [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=nUdsTizSxSI|Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)]]
 +  * [[https://​www.youtube.com/​user/​danariely|Dan Ariely'​s youtube videos]]
  
 ===== Week #3: Judgment and Decision Making ===== ===== Week #3: Judgment and Decision Making =====
 +
 +  - Cognitive illusions
 +    - Akiyoshi Kitaoka
 +      - [[http://​www.ritsumei.ac.jp/​~akitaoka/​index-e.html|Website]]
 +      - [[https://​twitter.com/​akiyoshikitaoka?​lang=en|Twitter account]]
 +    - [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=G-lN8vWm3m0|The McGurk Effect]]
 +  - Judgment and decision making cognitive biases
 +    - Free money experiment
 +      - Bias: Escalation of commitment
 +      - Cooperation versus self-interest
 +    - Heuristics: Availability Heuristic ​
 +    - Heuristics: Representative Heuristic Bias
 +    - Bias: The decoy effect
 +    - Bias: Ease of Recall Bias
 +    - Bias: Retrievability Bias
 +    - Bias: Framing effects (Prospect Theory)
 +    - Bias: Anchoring effect
 +    - Bias: Action effect ​
 +    - Theory: Norm Theory (Kahneman & Miller, 1986) 
 +
 +Resources:
 +  - Course reading: Book chapter: Judgment and Decision Making
 +  - Book: [[https://​www.amazon.com/​Predictably-Irrational-Revised-Expanded-Decisions/​dp/​0061353248|Predictably irrational by Dan Ariely]]
 +  - Book: [[http://​www.nytimes.com/​2011/​11/​27/​books/​review/​thinking-fast-and-slow-by-daniel-kahneman-book-review.html|Thinking fast and slow by Daniel Kahneman]]
 +  - Book: [[https://​www.amazon.com/​Judgment-Managerial-Decision-Making-Bazerman/​dp/​1118065700|Judgment in managerial decision making by Max H. Bazerman]]
  
 ===== Week #4: Social cognition and attitudes ===== ===== Week #4: Social cognition and attitudes =====
 +
 +  - Stereotypes and consistency
 +    - Riddles experiment
 +      - [[http://​journals.sagepub.com/​doi/​abs/​10.1177/​1475725717752181|Riddle Me This]] (Skorinko, 2018, PLT)
 +      - [[http://​journal.sjdm.org/​17/​171117/​jdm171117.pdf|The case of stumpers]] (Bar-Hillel etal, 2018, JDM)
 +      - Takeaways:
 +        - We can study this in the lab using simple (fun) experiments.
 +        - We all have these biases.
 +    - Implicit association test
 +      - Website: [[https://​implicit.harvard.edu/​|Project implicit]]
 +      - Takeaways:
 +        - Difference between explicit and implicit jugdments.
 +        - There are tools to study either.
 +        - They don't always correlate, both not always strongly correlate to behavior.
 +    - Country face detection
 +      - Website: [[http://​alllooksame.com/​|Alllooksame]]
 +      - Website: [[http://​faceresearch.org/​|Face research]]
 +      - Takeaways:
 +        - Stereotypes don't always work and can lead to wrong judgments.
 +        - People generally randomly guess country of origin.
 +        - On average, the variations in appearance are very subtle, and all judged as attractive.
 +  - Lie detection
 +    - Takeaways:
 +      - There are some behaviors we associate with lying
 +      - We are generally very bad at detecting lies
 +      - If we are to make evaluations,​ we need to know the baseline (person) well and rely on objective quantifiable measures.
 +      - Bias: Truth bias, we are inclined to believing others and trusting.
 +  - Intuitions about life/​physics/​math
 +    - Takeaways:
 +      - Are often biased and wrong. Again, we need objective reliable trustworthy sources rather than our intuitions.
 +
 +Resources:
 +  - Course reading: Book chapter: Social cognition and attitudes
 +
  
 ===== Week #5: Persuasion and manipulation ===== ===== Week #5: Persuasion and manipulation =====
 +
 +  - Influence tactics
 +    - The 6 influence tactics by Robert Cialdini
 +    - Effects
 +      - Contrast Effect
 +      - Scarcity Principle - importance of loss aversion and competition
 +      - Consensus Principle - importance of similarity
 +      - Consistency Principle - importance of active and public commitment
 +      - Reciprocity Principle - importance of tailored, significant,​ and unexpected ​
 +  - Manipulation techniques
 +    - Foot-in-the-door [FITD] (Freedman & Fraser, 1966)
 +    - Door-in-the-face ​ [DITF] (Cialdini)
 +    - Low-balling [LB] (Cialdini)
 +    - That’s not all [TNL](Burger,​ 1986, 1999)
 +    - Creating similarity [CS]
 +  - Nudging
 +    - Defaults (Opt in opt out in organ donations)
 +    - Focusing attention (urinals)
 +    - Perception and context (plate size)
 +    - Social information (tax compliance)
 +    - [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=OaLGg1wYztk|Video from Richard Thaler]]
 +
 +Resources:
 +  - Course reading: Book chapter: Persuasion
 +  - Book: [[http://​www.nytimes.com/​2011/​11/​27/​books/​review/​thinking-fast-and-slow-by-daniel-kahneman-book-review.html|Thinking fast and slow by Daniel Kahneman]]
 +  - Book: [[https://​www.amazon.com/​Nudge-Improving-Decisions-Health-Happiness/​dp/​014311526X|Nudge by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein]]
  
 ===== Week #6: Cooperation ===== ===== Week #6: Cooperation =====
 +
 +  - Economic games
 +    - The homo-economicos hypothesis - actors are fully rational
 +    - Game theory games to study economics and show deviation from the neo-classic economics hypothesis
 +      - Dictator game
 +        - Dictator (giving) game (the classic)
 +        - Social change 1: Dictator (taking) game
 +        - Social change 2: Dictator (giving) game (the classic), but public
 +        - Social change 2: Dictator (taking) game, but public ​
 +      - Ultimatum game
 +        - Social change: Ultimatum game, but public
 +      - Trust game 
 +      - Prisoner'​s dilemma
 +        - Social change 1: Prisoner'​s dilemma, but with a judge
 +        - Social change 2: Multiple rounds (learning, adjusting)
 +    - Demos
 +      - [[http://​www.mtv.com/​news/​2218741/​psych-professor-trick-extra-credit-question/​|Psychology professor who did this in class]]
 +        - Example of one analysis, there are many others: [[https://​mindyourdecisions.com/​blog/​2015/​07/​14/​an-awesomely-evil-test-question-and-its-mathematical-answer-game-theory-tuesdays/​|An Awesomely Evil Test Question And Its Mathematical Answer – Game Theory Tuesdays]]
 +      - [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=DWrjc5IEvc8|Live demonstration in class]]
 +
 +Resources:
 +  - Course reading: Book chapter: Cooperation
 +
 +===== Class #7: Helping / Prosocial behavior =====
 +
 +  - Misalignment between what we expect from society/​others and ourselves
 +  - Misalignment between causes of deaths (people affected) and funding to address.
 +  - Differences in helping between countries - not what you thought
 +  - Ruining a 1000US$ suit to help a drowning child versus donating 1000US$ to save a girl from South America
 +    - The importance of relatability,​ statistics versus faces/​names/​people
 +  - Risking your life to help others
 +  - The bystander effect (Darley & Latané, 1968)
 +    - Hurdles to helping those in crisis
 +  - Biases
 +    - Identifiability
 +    - Compassion fade & psychic numbing (Slovic, 2007; Västfjäll,​ Slovic, Mayorga, & Peters, 2014); ​
 +    - Scope neglect (Desvousges,​ Johnson, Dunford, Boyle, Hudson, Wilson, 1992)
 +    - Proportion over number (Slovic et al., 2002)
 +    - Futility thinking (Fetherstonhaugh,​ Slovic, Johnson, & Friedrich, 1997)
 +  - Videos:
 +    - [[https://​www.youtube.com/​watch?​v=MpzpItB6rXw|Trump says he would have run unarmed into Florida school]]
 +
  
  • hku_psyc2020_in-class_experiments.1519573501.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2018/02/25 08:45
  • by filination