Arts and Culture
More from Google
Get the Android app
Get the iOS app
A show about the science of our opinions, where they come from, and how they change. Hosted by social psychologist, Andy Luttrell.
21 hours ago
#18: Health Communication with Allison Earl
Allison Earl studies the challenges of getting health information to people who need it. Her research looks at how people react defensively to information about their health and how to improve it. In this episode, she shares her research on people's tendency to avoid threatening health information and how simple meditation exercises can make people more open to these kinds of messages. *Some things that come up in this episode: * * Targeting health information to specific groups makes people feel judged (Derricks & Earl, 2019) * Rejecting information about stimatized health issues (Earl, Nisson, & Albarracín, 2015) * Race disparities in attention to HIV-prevention information (Earl et al., 2016) * Trigger warnings as a way to get people ready for emotional information (Gainsburg & Earl, 2018) * Meditation makes people more open to threatening health information (Takahashi & Earl, 2020) For a *transcript* of this show, visit the episode's webpage: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/health-communication-with-allison-earl Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
Aug 3, 2020
#17: How We Think About Animals with Kristof Dhont
Kristof Dhont studies the psychology behind humans’ complicated feelings about animals. In particular, his research looks at how the existence of “speciesism” can stem from the same psychological factors that also produce other social prejudices. In this episode, Kristof and I talk about how people avoid connecting meat to the animals it comes from, how a social dominance worldview gives rise to speciesism, and what psychology can (and can’t) tell us about effective advocacy. Check out Dr. Dhont’s new book: Why We Love and Exploit Animals: Bridging Insights from Academia and Advocacy And as I mention at the end of the episode, a few years ago, I wrote my own vegan cookbook: Vegan Spanish Cooking. *Some of the things that come up in this episode:* * How people disconnect “meat” from the animals it comes from (Kunst & Hohle, 2016) * Why people still eat meat even when they object to its production (“the meat-paradox”; Bastian & Loughnan, 2016) * Denying animals’ “minds” to justify meat-eating (Bastian, Loughnan, Haslamn, & Radke, 2011) * “Social dominance orientation” (see this helpful summary) * Connecting social dominance and speciesism (Dhont et al., 2014; 2016) * How dehumanization reflects treating animals as lesser beings (Costello & Hodson, 2010) For a *transcript* of this show, visit the episode's webpage: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/how-we-think-about-animals-with-kristof-dhont/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
Jul 27, 2020
#16: Implicit Bias with Mahzarin Banaji
Mahzarin Banaji is a professor of psychology at Harvard University. In the 90s, she and her colleagues pioneered the research in social psychology on implicit bias. They are perhaps best known for creating the Implicit Association Test (IAT), which purports to measure the preferences that people are unable or unwilling to say they have. Using this tool, psychologists have arrived at fascinating findings about bias, which have spawned a productive (and sometimes contentious) field of research. Together with Anthony Greenwald, Dr. Banaji wrote the popular book, Blindspot: Hidden Biases of Good People. I talked with Mahzarin about her early days studying psychology and what prompted her to study implicit bias. She also shared new research on how implicit biases have changed over time and what this means for how to achieve social progress. If you’re interested in the IAT—the test that researchers use to measure implicit bias—you can take one yourself at the official Project Implicit website. You can also check out one of Mahzarin’s recent projects: Outsmarting Human Minds. It’s a website devoted to bringing insights from social psychology to the public. Finally, I usually link to a bunch of primary articles that come up in the episode, but we covered a lot of ground in this one! However, we spent a lot of time on a recent paper led by Mahzarin’s graduate student, Tessa Charlesworth, on how implicit biases have changed over time (Charlesworth & Banaji, 2019). For an accessible summary of this research, check out their article in Harvard Business Review. For a *transcript* of this show, visit the episode's webpage: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/implicit-bias-with-mahzarin-banaji/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
1 hr 15 min
Jul 20, 2020
#15: Political Campaigning with Joe Fuld
Joe Fuld founded the political consulting firm, The Campaign Workshop, and he also co-hosts the podcast, "How to Win a Campaign." In this episode, he shares his background in political and advocacy campaigns and what you need to consider if you're thinking of running for office yourself. At the top of the show, I also talked to Pavan Parikh. He's currently running for Probate Court Judge in Hamilton County, Ohio. You can learn more about Pavan at https://www.pavanforjudge.com/ or follow his campaign on Facebook or Twitter. A few articles related to topics that Joe Fuld mentions: * The Tully Message Box * The Seven Cs of Campaign Messaging For a *transcript* of this show, visit the episode's webpage: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/political-campaigning-with-joe-fuld/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter. Additional music this week: Firefly by Podington Bear, licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 International License.
Jul 12, 2020
#14: Certainty with Zakary Tormala
Dr. Zakary Tormala is a professor of behavioral science and marketing at Stanford University’s business school. He studies how people can become certain of an opinion and what that means for their willingness to share their views. We talk about what certainty is, how it affects people's choices and resistance to change, and how the research about certainty can inform best practices in persuasion. *Some of the things that come up in this episode:* * Robert Burton's article, "The Certainty Epidemic" (also see his book, On Being Certain) * The difference between "clarity" and "correctness" (Petrocelli, Tormala, & Rucker, 2007) * The relationship between certainty and advocacy (Cheatham & Tormala, 2015; 2017) * How successfully resisting persuasion can boost certainty (Tormala & Petty, 2002) * How apparent social consensus increases certainty (Clarkson, Tormala, Rucker, & Dugan, 2013) * Why uncertainty can get people to pay attention (Karmarkar & Tormala, 2010) * For an overview of some of the ideas in this episode, check out Dr. Tormala's brief article in Current Opinion in Psychology: "The role of certainty (and uncertainty) in attitudes and persuasion" or his article in Harvard Business Review: "How certainty transforms persuasion." For a *transcript* of this show, visit the episode's webpage: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/certainty-with-zakary-tormala Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
Jul 5, 2020
#13: Fake News with Gordon Pennycook
*Dr. Gordon Pennycook* studies why people share misinformation. His research has used many techniques to understand people’s ability to judge the accuracy of information, their willingness to share that information, and what we can do to encourage people to only spread true information. *Some of the things that come up in this episode:* * There’s lots of coronavirus misinformation out there * Seeing fake news repeatedly makes it feel more true (Pennycook, Cannon, & Rand, 2018) * Believing fake news is more about not paying attention than partisanship (Pennycook & Rand, 2019) * Encouraging people to think about accuracy reduces sharing of false and misleading news (Pennycook et al., preprint) * Using Twitter bots to get people to think about accuracy * Interventions to stop the spread of COVID-19 misinformation (Pennycook et al., in press) * The problem with biased thinking or “motivated reasoning” (Tappin, Pennycook, & Rand, 2020; preprint) For a *transcript* of this show, visit the episode's webpage: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/fake-news-with-gordon-pennycook/ Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter. Additional music and sound effects obtained from https://www.zapsplat.com.
Jun 28, 2020
#12: Comedy + Science with Shannon Odell
*Shannon Odell* is a comedian and neuroscientist, and she uses comedy as a tool to teach people about science. She’s done this through hosting live shows, a YouTube series, a podcast, and other ways of getting the word out about how cool neuroscience is. In this episode, we talk about how she got into science, how she got into comedy, and how she thought to combine those two worlds. *Be sure to check out some of Shannon’s work:* * “Your Brain on Blank”: a YouTube series about how your brain processes different life experiences (drinking, meditating, listening to music) * The Science of Self-Care Podcast: a group of comedians take a deep dive into a self-care practice (e.g., acupuncture, yoga, aromatherapy) and explore the science behind it * Drunk Science: Live show (turned Zoom show) where comedians defend their “research” to scientists For a *transcript* of this show, visit the episode's webpage. Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
Jun 21, 2020
#11: Opinions Across Cultures with Sharon Shavitt
*Dr. Sharon Shavitt** *is a professor of marketing at the University of Illinois. Her research has looked at consumer behavior from lots of angles, and she has been a pioneer in thinking about the role of culture in the persuasion process. In this episode, we talk about how she started to consider how the success of an advertisement depends on the audience’s cultural values and other effects of culture. She also shares her experience connecting social psychology with the world of marketing, which wasn’t that common when she was in graduate school. *Links for more on some of what we talked about:* * Individualistic vs. collectivistic cultures (check out the great book, Clash!) * Dr. Shavitt’s research on culture and persuasion (Han & Shavitt, 1994) * The effect of political values on successful persuasion (Feinberg & Willer, 2016) * "Preferences don't have to be personal" (Riemer, Shavitt, Koo, & Markus, 2014) * Holistic vs. analytic thinking and price-quality judgments (Lalwani & Shavitt, 2013) For a *transcript* of this show, visit the episode's webpage. Learn more about *Opinion Science* at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter. Music in this episode by YOUNG BLOOOD (https://www.facebook.com/YOUNGBLOODMUSIK/). Young Blood YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwWoMQ7Y7rdXob2MQnIJe_g?sub_confirmation=1
Jun 14, 2020
#10: Policing, Race, and Advocacy with Deion Hawkins
Deion Hawkins is an assistant professor of Communication Studies at Emerson College. He uses in-depth interviews with members of a community to understand health communication and the effects of police brutality. In this episode, he shares his dissertation work about where members of Black community get information about police brutality and the psychological toll that information takes. We also talk more generally about the recent Black Lives Matter protests and the role of race in academic research. For a *transcript* of this show, visit the episode's webpage on http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ Learn more about *Opinion Science* at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter. *Music in this episode: *Stomps Claps & Beatbox by MusicToday80; Composed by: Anwar Amr Youtube Channel; Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0); Music provided by Free Vibes.
Jun 8, 2020
#9: Systemic Racism with Phia Salter
*Phia Salter* takes a cultural psychology approach to studying racism. She’s an associate professor of Psychology at Davidson College, and in this episode she draws a contrast between thinking of racism as an individual bias versus thinking of it as systemic. She talks about her research on the “Marley hypothesis” and the ways in which our environments’ discussion of racial issues shapes our own views. For more resources on understanding racism in the U.S., you can start by checking out Smithsonian magazine's Resources to Understand Racism in America. *Things we mention in this episode:* * Dr. Salter's summary of research related to systemic racism (Salter, Adams, & Perez, 2018) * The "Marley Hypothesis": Historical knowledge associated with recognizing contemporary racism (Nelson, Adams, & Salter, 2013) * Research on preferences for different Black History Month materials (Salter & Adams, 2016) * Writings of Derrick Bell on Critical Race Theory (For an overview of the movement, Dr. Salter recommends Delgado and Stefancic's introductory book) * George Lipsitz's "The Possessive Investment in Whiteness" Learn more about *Opinion Science* at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
Jun 1, 2020
#8: Opinions Online with William Brady
*William Brady* studies how messages spread online--especially on social media sites. By mixing psychology experiments with analyses of millions of messages on social media websites, he's learned what kinds of language cuts through the clutter. Specifically, he finds that moral emotional language plays a hefty role in online communication. In this episode, Billy talks about this research and his other work on moral outrage to give us an idea of how opinions spread online. *Things we mention in this episode:* * NYU’s Center for Social Media and Politics * Paul Rozin’s research on “the process of moralization” * Statistically analyzing patterns of words (check this out for a quick intro) * Moral emotional language captures attention and prompts retweets (Brady et al., 2017, 2020; also see this Scientific American article) * Moral outrage online (check out Molly Crockett’s article for The Globe and Mail) Learn more about *Opinion Science* at http://opinionsciencep…
May 25, 2020
#7: Neither Liberal nor Conservative with Nathan Kalmoe
Nathan Kalmoe is a political scientist at Louisiana State University. He studies public opinion and mass political behavior. In 2017 he co-authored the book, Neither Liberal nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American Public. In this episode, we talk about his research on how political ideology means different things to political leaders than to the general public, how lots of people tend to avoid describing themselves and liberal or conservative, but how they nevertheless seem perfectly comfortable identifying as Democrat or Republican. *Things we mention in this episode:* * Early research and writing by Phillip Converse and Walter Lippman * Nathan's recent article in Political Psychology: "Uses and Abuses of Ideology in Political Psychology" * Nathan's book with Donald Kinder: Neither Liberal nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American Public * His upcoming book: With Ballots and Bullets: Partisanship and Violence in the American Civil War Learn mor…
May 18, 2020
#6: Film Criticism with Alissa Wilkinson
Alissa Wilkinson is a film critic and culture reporter for Vox and an associate professor of English and Humanities and The King's College in New York City. We talk about how she translates her own thoughts and feelings about a film into a written piece of criticism and the role that criticism plays in society. She shares thoughts about the job of a film critic and the delicate art of rating, reviewing, and recommending movies. This episode also features snippets from a conversation with Cody Duckworth. If you're interested, you can hear our full conversation as a bonus episode on the Opinion Science website (here!). In this episode, we mention a few things Alissa has written about before, so for full context, check out these articles: * "The case for spoilers" (11/7/19) * "Rotten Tomatoes, explained" (7/14/18) * "Do not see The Emoji Movie" (7/29/17) * Alissa's review of "The Assistant" (4/28/20) * Alissa's review of "Bad Education" (4/24/20) Learn more about *Opinion Sc…
May 11, 2020
#5: Perceived Bias with Laura Wallace
Laura Wallace studies what happens when people perceive a communicator as biased. In this episode, we talk about why bias is different from trustworthiness, how perceived bias affects a person's ability to be persuasive, and how we think about biased communicators in general. *Things we mention in the episode:* * Gallup poll on Americans' perceptions of media bias * NPR's complaints that they have both pro-conservative and pro-liberal biases * Bias and trustworthiness are separate cues to credibility (Wallace, Wegener, & Petty, 2019) * Flip-flopping as a problem for persuasion (Wallace, Wegener, & Petty, 2020) Learn more about *Opinion Science* at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
May 4, 2020
#4: Climate Change Communication with Matt Goldberg
Matt Goldberg is a soon-to-be associate research scientist at the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. He uses established research from the psychology of persuasion to understand how the public thinks about climate change and how to convince people to adopt new beliefs and behaviors to stave off the threats of global warming. We talk about the differences between theoretical and applied research and what leaders can do to guide the world through this difficult time. *Things we mention in the episode:* * Global warming's "Six America's" * Using meta-cognition to understand hurricane evacuation behavior (Goldberg et al., 2020) * Perceived consensus about climate change attitudes (Goldberg et al., 2019a, 2019b) * The effects of discussing climate change with others (Goldberg et al., 2019c) Learn more about *Opinion Science* at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
Apr 27, 2020
#3: "Disgusted" with Yoel Inbar
Yoel Inbar is a social psychologist at University of Toronto. He studies the feeling of disgust and how it shapes people's moral judgments. We talk about how disgust is associated with certain opinions, and why moral emotions can make people hold onto negative beliefs about genetically modified crops (even when the science supports their safety and usefulness). Yoel is also co-host of another psychology podcast, *Two Psychologists, Four Beers*. *Things we mention in the episode:* * The relationship between “disgust sensitivity” and political beliefs (Inbar, Pizarro, & Bloom, 2008) * The “behavioral immune system” (see this article by Schaller) * Disgusting smells and attitudes toward gay men (Inbar, Pizarro, & Bloom, 2012) * Reasons to be skeptical that disgust amplifies moral judgments (Landy & Goodwin, 2015) * Facial expressions of disgust during moral judgments (Chapman et al., 2009) * Public opinions of genetically modified food (check out Scott, Inbar, et…
Apr 20, 2020
#2: Good vs. Bad with Jehan Sparks
Jehan Sparks studies how positive vs. negative information informs our opinions. One of the things she looks at is something called a "negativity bias" where negative events loom larger than positive events when we're forming a summary impression. We talk about the nature of good vs. bad, how the order in which we learn information matters, and how different people think about information differently. *Things we mention in the episode:* * How “good vs. bad” can be too simple (Sparks, 2020) * The “negativity bias” (Baumeister et al., 2001; Rozin & Royzman, 2001) * How opinions depend on the order in which you learn information (Sparks & Ledgerwood, 2017) * Negativity bias to explain risk-taking (Pietri, Fazio, & Shook, 2013) * The effects of age on the negativity bias (Sparks & Ledgerwood, 2018) Learn more about *Opinion Science* at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
Apr 13, 2020
#1: Word of Mouth with Jake Teeny
This week I talk to Jake Teeny about his research on word of mouth. When do people pass their opinions along to others? Jake tells me that businesses count word of mouth as a leading form of marketing, but it can be tricky to know exactly how to control it. We talk about when and why people share their opinions, according to the research in social psychology. (By the way, Jake and I co-author a blog for Psychology Today called "A Difference of Opinion.") *Things we mention in the episode:* * Arousal increases social transmission of information (Berger, 2011) * Certainty as a reason to persuade (Cheatham & Tormala, 2015) * Hypocrisy as a form of cognitive dissonance (Stone & Fernandez, 2008) * Atypical things are more popular (Berger & Packard, 2018) * Hit Makers by Derek Thompson (Amazon) Learn more about *Opinion Science* at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.
Apr 3, 2020
Introducing the Opinion Science Podcast.
Coming Soon: The Opinion Science Podcast Visit opinionsciencepodcast.com for more. I’m Andy Luttrell, and I’m excited to introduce the Opinion Science Podcast. It’s a show about the science of people’s opinions, where they come from, and how they change. I’m a social psychologist, and I’ll be talking to other social scientists who study public opinion and persuasion, but I’ll also talk to other experts in the business of understanding and shaping the world’s views. The ideas we’ll explore in this show will give you a glimpse into the psychology of political attitudes, consumer preferences, public health communication, and social activism, just to name a few. But I’m even interested in more mundane opinions…like why some people inexplicably prefer cake over pie. So subscribe now and tune in every other week for these conversations. I think you’ll like it…but form your own opinion.