Tim - Yes, I thought Mlodinow overreached a bit, and I did not know enough about the wine tasting research to refute his points (but it helped me resolve cog dissonance since I read the book right after I switched to boxed wine). But he does talk about the placebo and expenctancy effects in wine tasting. There are references to most of his points in the back, but I read the book at the beach and just went with the flow of the book. I'd be curious to know yours and other's reaction to the book when finished.
There were alot of other points that fit with my world view - like overpaid CEO bonuses for presumably random ups in the market, the firing and hiring of coaches after up & down years and so forth. He also had a part on the perception of randomness that some earlier posts discussed, and how Apple (for the iPod I think) had to switch from truely random shuffling of songs to not-quite-random to prevent the same song from popping up 2 or 3 times in a row and having people say it was NOT random. You may be right about the individual differences in wine tasting. I wonder if there is a personality difference at work too. A few years back I read Barry Schwartz' difference between 'maximizers' and 'satisfiers' (book: The paradox of choice: why less is more) - maximizers try to make perfect choices based on as much input as possible, whereas the satisfiers make faster choices after they find something that is "good enough". Satisfiers like me go a little bonkers when faced with an entire wall of wine choices. In fact, he claims having too many choices makes people unhappy, because you always wonder if you made the "right" choice. Would be fun to do a TIPs wine tasting some day, since we have all these people expert at controlling extraneous variables. Did a few of these "can you tell the difference" experiments with Johnny Walker red & black & Cutty Shark & single malts, Friday nights in a tavern in grad school, blind, with slips of paper underneath identifying the brand, but after two rounds we always mixed up the slips of paper and it went downhill from there. Cheers -------------------------- John W. Kulig Professor of Psychology Plymouth State University Plymouth NH 03264 -------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Shearon" <[email protected]> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, August 7, 2009 1:40:14 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: RE: [tips] Was: NEW FEATURE John Kulig said: "Speaking of which, just read Leonard Mlodinow's The Drunkard's Walk: How randomness rules our lives, in which he cites repeated failures of people to distinguish different vodkas and wines in blind taste tests. So I buy wine in a box with less embarassment these days" John- I am also reading The Drunkard's Walk. Haven't quite gotten to that part of the book but I'm familiar with some of the "research" on vodka and wine comparison. I think most shows something a bit different than what Mlodinow seems to be saying but your point is well taken about the placebo effects (can one separate those placebo effects we normally think about from the ones caused by more direct manipulation and snobbery, for example). Either way, I admit being somewhat guilty of such snobbery in drink choices- but I also know there are tremendous individual differences in tasting ability (and that most of us are, of course, on the less than one SD above the mean or worse category so we'd never find those truly subtle differences!). But I enjoy playing the compare and contrast game with my own "stash" too much to give up "the good stuff". We playfully do blind tests sometimes, for example. Not scientific but we are reasonably careful about it. When I find I cannot differentiate or prefer the cheaper stuff that ends my loyalty to a brand. For example, I quit buying more expensive Scotchs when I clearly demonstrated a preference for MaCallan 12 year old over any other. My only "real message" in response to your comment is that I think you have truly hit the nail on the head- the whole point is *personal enjoyment*. So if box wine is good for you and the bottled placebo juice isn't any better that would certainly be folly to pay the extra. Even more difficult to understand to me, however, is the snobbery that I see in a couple of folks who have actually told me they can't tell the difference between the swill others drink and their own choices- clearly they are drinking what they do for appearance sake. I suspect without much data that this is a more prevailing trend than might be comfortable to admit. But it does get worse. I know a few such drinkers who have confided in me that they actually prefer and drink the cheap stuff in private but only drink the more expensive wine or spirits in public for "image" sake. I'm not exactly sure how this admission is supposed to impress, btw. It does puzzle though. :) Tim _______________________________ Timothy O. Shearon, PhD Professor and Chair Department of Psychology The College of Idaho Caldwell, ID 83605 email: [email protected] teaching: intro to neuropsychology; psychopharmacology; general; history and systems "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." Dorothy Parker ________________________________________ From: John Kulig [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 7:44 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: Re: [tips] PLEASE NOTE : NEW FEATURE Embarassing moment: first day of classes, first real job right after a 2 year post doc. Had syllabi run off and found the room, walked in, and discovered I had no idea what to say. A deer-in-the-headlights moment, the mind was totally blank. So I excused myself non-verbally, went to the bathroom, came back in 5 minutes, and things started to get better. I probably have more but they may be repressed and I need some time to retrieve them ... Oh, alcohol .. I used to be a fan of Stoli and also German QmP reisling wine. Since I am now paying my daughter;s tuition I have switched to Wella red wine in a box :~) Speaking of which, just read Leonard Mlodinow's The Drunkard's Walk: How randomness rules our lives, in which he cites repeated failures of people to distinguish different vodkas and wines in blind taste tests. So I buy wine in a box with less embarassment these days -------------------------- John W. Kulig Professor of Psychology Plymouth State University Plymouth NH 03264 -------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "DeVolder Carol L" <[email protected]> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2009 9:26:01 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: RE: [tips] PLEASE NOTE : NEW FEATURE My choices would be Stoli, Grey Goose, or Tanqueray... But that's not why I'm writing. While on the thought of "teachable moments" I wanted to ask a favor of Tipsters. I have been thinking for some time now about compiling a collection of "most embarassing teaching moments." It seems to me that when I hear about these I somehow feel more encouraged about my own stellar (or not so stellar) moments. I generally get the feeling that if someone can do THAT and walk away smiling, then I can handle my own goofs or gaffs. I admit I tend to be insecure (I'm sure there's a better term for it), but I thought it might be a useful collection for educators new to the classroom. To that end, would Tipsters be willing to share (privately or publicly) some of their own moments? I'd be happy to keep things confidential if so desired. I'd also appreciate any suggestions on such a compilation. Thanks, Carol Carol L. DeVolder, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Chair, Department of Psychology St. Ambrose University 518 West Locust Street Davenport, Iowa 52803 Phone: 563-333-6482 e-mail: [email protected] web: http://web.sau.edu/psychology/psychfaculty/cdevolder.htm The contents of this message are confidential and may not be shared with anyone without permission of the sender. -----Original Message----- From: Shearon, Tim [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thu 8/6/2009 1:00 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: RE: [tips] PLEASE NOTE : NEW FEATURE Harry Harlow's problems with the tiny molecule are well documented. Rum and Coca-cola - that's so graduate school- though I do admit that Bullfighters were my preference. :) I much prefer a single malt (18 year old Highland Park), a good bourbon (Woodford Reserve is a good starting point), or Tequila (Patron Respasado is fine with me!). With food, wine or beer depending on the fare. Only in moderation!! Hope you have a great Thursday!! Tim _______________________________ Timothy O. Shearon, PhD Professor and Chair Department of Psychology The College of Idaho Caldwell, ID 83605 email: [email protected] teaching: intro to neuropsychology; psychopharmacology; general; history and systems "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." Dorothy Parker ________________________________________ From: michael sylvester [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 11:31 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: [tips] PLEASE NOTE : NEW FEATURE Effective this Friday,I will be introducing a new feature for tipsters-"Teachable moment" Friday. All tipsters are encouraged to contribute.I will provide gin and tonic and the rum and coca-cola. Btw,while on this subject,I am curious as to the favorite libations of Skinner,Watson,Freud(smoked dope),G Stanley Hall,Christopher Green,Stephen Black , and Mary Carver Jones. Who was the alcoholic-Harlow or Mowrer? Did Obama get his "hope" idea from Mowrer? Michael Sylvester,PhD Daytona Beach,Florida --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
