the psychology of 2014: understanding protests, ice buckets, taylor swift and more

by：Changda     2020-06-14
From stupidity to seriousness, Troy Campbell of Duke University\'s advanced post-event analysis center discussed the five highlights of 2014 with the \"advanced post-event analysis\" of psychology.
1. The birth of modern charity has dominated Facebook for several weeks. -
From your high school girlfriend to your college roommate to your big family, everyone seems to be joining in.
The trend is sweeping across the country, but the question remains: why is the ALS ice bucket challenge so successful?
The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge shows that successful philanthropy is more than just altruism.
The pressure of social donations is very high, so is self-donation.
Service desires look smart, cool, and sometimes even sexy on social media.
This viral phenomenon vividly shows how most charities succeed: through altruistic, social pressure, and selfish cocktails.
Anonymous donors, donors caused by guilt, and donors who promised to highlight their names on the wall have always existed.
For those who tend to social media, some donors may want to donate or promote in order to post their faces on Facebook.
So, how should we deal with the success of the ice bucket challenge?
Praise or opposition?
The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge is not perfect, and that\'s for sure, because some people take the challenge because of the \"wrong reason\" and donate it out of proportion to a charity or just maybe
But many times we make perfection the enemy of good.
Especially in charity).
Moreover, as psychological research has always proved, when humans are far from perfect, we often expect charity activities to be perfect.
Despite the flaws of this phenomenon, no one interested in charity or human behavior can ignore the ice bucket challenge to teach us how to create a virus and powerful, though imperfect, the charity movement, when the donor is always selfless, part from the crowd
Part of followers and narcissism.
Happy Farrell\'s summer hit, Happy, is Spotify\'s number one song this year, and of course it seems that Americans are starting to care more and more about becoming happier.
Three widely disseminated and reported scientific findings this year helped us understand how to be as happy as Farrell\'s songs. I -Experiences.
The mantra of this year\'s happiness research is: if you want to be happy, you should not spend money on material and yourself, but instead, you should spend money on the experience and the people around you.
Amit Kumar and others have shown that experiential purchases provide us with more anticipated happiness, higher long-term happiness and better social connections than material purchases.
Lalin Anik also shows from our center that giving others can not only improve happiness, but also productivity.
As recent research has shown, giving is better than receiving. II -Meaning.
Modern research has gone beyond the feeling of being happy or enjoying it, exploring deeper issues such as finding the meaning of life, the sense of purpose and the values we hold.
Having children can be an incredible source of stress, for example, but it also shows that it makes more sense to make adult life.
Some of this year\'s scientific papers explore ways of getting happiness and meaning that sometimes require a slightly different path. III -Differences.
It\'s important to remember that things that make you happy don\'t always make others happy, and Ed O\'Brien, me and our colleagues have discovered something that people often don\'t realize this year.
This year the scientific community gave examples of differences between people.
Amit Bhattacharjee and Cassie Mogilner are a vivid example of what they find young and old people eager for different types of happiness.
Young people are eager for happy moments. e. g.
Meet favorite celebrities)
The elderly desire more daily happiness (e. g.
Relax with relatives.
I recently wrote how I learned this, and when my grandfather sweetly explained to me how chaotic he was with his wife, it made him happier than anything else.
Today, people want natural ingredients in all aspects of life.
People want to be on their food, their local products, and even on their favorite TV shows. Well-
Developed roles, defects, and so on are becoming trademarks of prime-time cable TV.
All we need to do is take a look at the amazing success of a drama like Louis CK\'s \"Louis\" and Lena Dunham\'s \"Girl\", \"destruction\" or a new era sitcom.
These show that there is a new real self-currency
An expression of your own defects and an honest statement.
From food to entertainment to beauty, reality is a huge driving force.
\"At the psychology conference, one can already see that authenticity is one of the next big topics in Consumer Science.
However, this will prove to be a complex problem.
For example, the new study looks at how the desire for \"authenticity\" leads to some bad results, such as excluding other results.
Today, many groups are becoming very hostile to people who are not \"real.
\"Some arguments about\" fake player girls \", such as gambling and arguments, show one of the dangers of pursuing authenticity in combination with ugly cultural prejudices.
When Taylor Swift removes her music from Spotify, the album you have to buy, and the world responds by collectively purchasing her new album 1989.
However, it\'s interesting to wonder if the people who actually bought her album end up liking or less than they just played?
The answer to psychological science is almost certainly \"yes.
When people buy things, they have different experiences with these products because of a process called \"hard reasons.
\"When people invest more energy or money, they prefer products and care more about them.
Taylor Swift also made her album A quasi-album.
The symbol of social status, because it becomes more difficult to obtain.
Having and being able to talk about such a culture-related album requires an actual purchase.
In this way, the owner of this album will feel more like a loyal fan or cultural talent, because no one can listen for free.
As the center\'s research has previously shown, this sense of exclusivity and mastery has changed (and improves)
Relationship with products.
For a long time, the role of science in society
Now, social scientists have proved that there is still a destructive systemic racial bias in the United States.
The protests that marked the end of 2014 showed the strength and limitations of the ability of social sciences to create positive social change.
Social science is powerful.
For example, with existing social science data, we can answer the question: \"Is there racial bias in people\'s hearts that supports the views of those in power to treat people of different races in different ways?
The clear answer to this question is \"yes.
\"So even in some of the fire kegs behind the protests about race, the role of race is ambiguous, and the larger data does support the need for systematic changes to address race issues.
But protests also show the limitations of social science.
Science alone rarely leads to social change.
Good science must also be combined with promotion, education and extensive dissemination.
In addition, it depends on social action and the attitude of the wider culture.
When results are inconvenient or cause \"solution aversion\", it is not always easy to convince people that science is not always easy.
This year\'s solution avoidance problem is full of \"solution aversion\" and my colleague Aaron Kay said that when one doesn\'t like the solution, I create an act of denying the problem.
This study has received extraordinary attention from the media, reaching the top of popular news aggregation sites such as Reddit, and we believe that because it cleverly and clearly summarizes the bias in politics, these prejudices have frustrated many of us these days.
In particular, we find that when the solution to the problem conflicts with people\'s political ideology, it is easier for people to deny the existence of the problem and the scientific basis behind the problem.
One example we use is climate change.
In our experiments, we found that the more people don\'t like the political solution to climate problems, the more likely they are to deny the existence of climate change problems.
These findings have also gained their lives through blogs.
Commenters use our political findings to highlight that in today\'s personal decision-making there is often a problem with aversion to solutions.
With regard to marital, health, and occupational problems, many have pointed out that negative solutions like treatment and diet can begin to distort perceptions of the actual existence of the problem.
I now have a page after page potential process for solution avoidance to inspire future research.
Doctors commented on their patient solution aversion, business professionals commented on the solution aversion for themselves and their employees, and politicians commented on the solution aversion for different groups.
Comments continue.
In such an era, you will remember that some parts of the Internet are really great.
If you have any thoughts about psychology in 2014 or future psychology in 2015, please let us know.
I believe in the commitment of the mass purchasing science enterprise and think about it if possible.
Happy new year, more rational, more mental health. --------------
Troy Campbell is a researcher at Duke University\'s advanced post-event Research Center.
Custom message
Chat Online 编辑模式下无法使用
Chat Online inputting...