Re: Fwd: Re: Ig Nobel Prizes

[Scott Lilienfeld]

Thanks much for the helpful reply, Robin.  To echo Stephen Black's point, I still think there's a widespread perception out there that Ig Nobels are awarded to the authors of research that is either silly or of patently poor quality, and that's certainly how I've seen them portrayed in the popular press (as Stephen notes, at least some of this perception probably derives from the name).  I wonder whether it might be best to stick with a "cleaner" definition for such awards (largely because most of the silly recipients frankly aren't terribly thought-provoking, only silly), although perhaps my view is a minority one......Scott Robin Abrahams wrote: Scott-- Yes, since I'm married to the organizer, I know exactly why the prizes are chosen! The criteria are simple: accomplishments that first make people LAUGH, and then make them THINK. The Dunning & Krueger piece very much has that effect, I think--anyone who's ever worked with a Dilbert-style "pointy-haired boss" can immediately empathize with D&K's findings. The Igs are NOT a prize for bad science. The Igs can go for achievements that are good, bad, or somewhere in between. The only thing they have to be is both funny and thought-provoking. A lot of the things that seem very silly--"An analysis of the forces required to drag sheep over various surfaces," or "Courtship behaviors of ostriches towards humans under farming conditions in Britain"--are in fact, well, silly, but also well-thought-out attempts to solve real problems in an industry. Robin Scott Lilienfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 10:32:43 -0400 From: Scott Lilienfeld To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences" Subject: Re: Ig Nobel Prizes Robin: Thanks very much for sending this along. Sounds like you've gotten some amusing winners this year. Out of curiosity, do you know why the Dunning and Kreuger JPSP paper (1999) was awarded the Ig Nobel? That choice always bewildered me given that the findings (although criticized by some as open to alternative explanations, e.g., regression effects) were provocative and the study by and large well designed. Perhaps I'm still a bit unclear on the criteria used for Ig Nobels, as some of the studies that receive the awards are manifestly silly and/or funny, whereas others aren't. Thanks very in advance...Scott Robin Abrahams wrote: TIPSters-- As some of you may know, my husband Marc Abrahams produces the Ig Nobel Prize ceremony every year. The Igs go to achievements that first make people laugh, and then make them think. We've had some excellent psychology-oriented winners in the past, including Gian Vittorio Caprara and Claudio Barbaranelli of the University of Rome, and Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University, for their discerning report "Politicians' Uniquely Simple Personalities." [PUBLISHED IN: Nature, vol. 385, February 1997, p. 493.] John Trinkaus, of the Zicklin School of Business, New York City, for meticulously collecting data and publishing more than 80 detailed academic reports about things that annoyed him, such as: What percentage of young people wear baseball caps with the peak facing to the rear rather than to the front; What percentage of pedestrians wear sport shoes that are white rather than some other color; What percentage of swimmers swim laps in the shallow end of a pool rather than the deep end; What percentage of automobile drivers almost, but not completely, come to a stop at one particular stop-sign; What percentage of commuters carry attach¨ cases; What percentage of shoppers exceed the number of items permitted in a supermarket's express checkout lane; and What percentage of students dislike the taste of Brussels sprouts. REFERENCE: 86 of Professor Trinkaus's publications are listed in "Trinkaus -- An Informal Look," Annals of Improbable Research, vol. 9, no. 3, May/Jun 2003. Lawrence W. Sherman of Miami University, Ohio, for his influential research report "An Ecological Study of Glee in Small Groups of Preschool Children." [PUBLISHED IN: Child Development, vol. 46, no. 1, March 1975, pp. 53-61.] Vicki L. Silvers of the University of Nevada-Reno and David S. Kreiner of Central Missouri State University, for their colorful report "The Effects of Pre-Existing Inappropriate Highlighting on Reading Comprehension." [ PUBLISHED IN: Reading Research and Instruction, vol. 36, no. 3, 1997, pp. 217-23.] David Dunning of Cornell University and Justin Kreuger of the University of Illinois, for their modest report, "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments." [Published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 77, no. 6, December 1999, pp. 1121-34.] This year's ceremony was last night, and I'm happily exhausted today. I thought I would share the list of winners with you all. Their achievements speak for themselves all too eloquently, but nevertheless might provide nice fodder for a class discussion: how do we know what is really important, in science or elsewhere? Why might something that sounds ridiculous not be? Is something, in fact, important simply because it was published in a major journal? How is scientific work in danger of being misinterpreted? MEDICINE Steven Stack of Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA and James Gundlach of Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, USA, for their published report "The Effect of Country Music on Suicide." PUBLISHED IN: Social Forces, vol. 71, no. 1, September 1992, pp. 211-8. PHYSICS Ramesh Balasubramaniam of the University of Ottowa, and Michael Turvey of the University of Connecticut and Yale University, for exploring and explaining the dynamics of hula-hooping. REFERENCE: "Coordination Modes in the Multisegmental Dynamics of Hula Hooping," Ramesh Balasubramaniam and Michael T. Turvey, Biological Cybernetics, vol. 90, no. 3, March 2004, pp. 176-90. PUBLIC HEALTH Jillian Clarke of the Chicago High School for Agricultural Sciences, and then Howard University, for investigating the scientific validity of the Five-Second Rule about whether it's safe to eat food that's been dropped on the floor. CHEMISTRY The Coca-Cola Company of Great Britain, for using advanced technology to convert liquid from the River Thames into Dasani, a transparent form of water, which for precautionary reasons has been made unavailable to consumers. ENGINEERING Donald J. Smith and his father, the late Frank J. Smith, of Orlando Florida, USA, for patenting the combover (U.S. Patent #4,022,227). LITERATURE The American Nudist Research Library of Kissimmee, Florida, USA, for preserving nudist history so that everyone can see it. PSYCHOLOGY Daniel Simons of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Christopher Chabris of Harvard University, for demonstrating that when people pay close attention to something, it's all too easy to overlook anything else -- even a man in a gorilla suit. REFERENCE: "Gorillas in Our Midst," Daniel J. Simons and Christopher F. Chabris, vol. 28, Perception, 1999, pages 1059-74. DEMO: ECONOMICS The Vatican, for outsourcing prayers to India. PEACE Daisuke Inoue of Hyogo, Japan, for inventing karaoke, thereby providing an entirely new way for people to learn to tolerate each other BIOLOGY Ben Wilson of the University of British Columbia, Lawrence Dill of Simon Fraser University [Canada], Robert Batty of the Scottish Association for Marine Science, Magnus Whalberg of the University of Aarhus [Denmark], and Hakan Westerberg of Sweden's National Board of Fisheries, for showing that herrings apparently communicate by farting. REFERENCE: "Sounds Produced by Herring (Clupea harengus) Bubble Release," Magnus Wahlberg and H¨kan Westerberg, Aquatic Living Resources, vol. 16, 2003, pp. 271-5. "Pacific and Atlantic Herring Produce Burst Pulse Sounds," Ben Wilson, Robert S. Batty and Lawrence M. Dill, Biology Letters, vol. 271, 2003, pp. S95-S97. Notices at the bottom of this e-mail do not reflect the opinions of the sender. I do not "yahoo" that I am aware of. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today! --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Psychology, Room 206 Emory University 532 N. Kilgo Circle Atlanta, Georgia 30322 (404) 727-1125 (phone) (404) 727-0372 (FAX) Home Page: http://www.emory.edu/PSYCH/Faculty/lilienfeld.html The Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice: www.srmhp.org The Master in the Art of Living makes little distinction between his work and his play, his labor and his leisure, his mind and his body, his education and his recreation, his love and his intellectual passions. He hardly knows which is which. He simply pursues his vision of excellence in whatever he does, leaving others to decide whether he is working or playing. To him – he is always doing both. - Zen Buddhist text (slightly modified) --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]