Home Page link

PSYCHOLOGY: Cognitive Homeostasis

Home| Search | About
Login Password
Register Now! Lost Password?

Architecture and Design - Building design/construction and related topics. 

Bookmark this page:  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
PSYCHOLOGY: Cognitive Homeostasis Michael Bulatovich 11-02-2007
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Posted by Michael Bulatovich on November 2, 2007, 7:56 am
: quoted-printable

(Excerpted from "Editors' Choice: Highlights of the recent literature =
SCIENCE, Volume 318, Issue 5851 dated November 2 2007")
To hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time and still retain =
the ability to function has been hailed as the mark of first-rate =
intelligence--and would also be likely to elicit a state of cognitive =
dissonance, which arises when beliefs and behaviors collide. Alas, ample =
evidence indicates that most humans are able and willing to alter their =
attitudes so as to bring them into line with how they have behaved, and =
thus to reduce the discordance between the two. In fact, three equally =
valued items (A, B, and C) can be experimentally manipulated--by asking =
a subject to choose first between A and B, and then by asking the =
subject to make a second choice between C and the unchosen item from the =
first round-to yield a greater than 50% preference for C over A or B. =
The explanation of this outcome is that the unchosen item has lost value =
by virtue of not having been selected, and thus suffers in comparison to =
C.=20

Egan et al. have adopted this paradigm, using stickers featuring various =
animals and a spectrum of colored M&Ms, to investigate the existence and =
resolution of cognitive dissonance in 4-year-old children and capuchin =
monkeys. They find that both subject pools behave similarly; that is, =
item C IS indeed chosen significantly more of the time (60%) when =
subjects have been enticed into a state of cognitive dissonance via a =
first-round choice of A versus B, and C is not selected more often when =
the subjects are simply presented in the first round with A or B as the =
experimenter's choice.

------=_NextPart_000_008A_01C81D25.D23D3040
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.3199" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV>
<H3><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>(Excerpted from </FONT><FONT =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>"Editors' Choice: Highlights of the recent literature =
</FONT><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>SCIENCE, Volume 318, Issue 5851 dated November 2=20
2007"</FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>)</FONT></H3>
<P><VARDEF id=3DTEXT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>To hold two opposed =
ideas in the mind=20
at the same time and still retain the ability to function has been =
hailed as the=20
mark of first-rate intelligence--and would also be likely to elicit a =
state of=20
cognitive dissonance, which arises when beliefs and behaviors collide. =
Alas,=20
ample evidence indicates that most humans are able and willing to alter =
their=20
attitudes so as to bring them into line with how they have behaved, and =
thus to=20
reduce the discordance between the two. In fact, three equally valued =
items (A,=20
B, and C) can be experimentally manipulated--by asking a subject to =
choose first=20
between A and B, and then by asking the subject to make a second choice =
between=20
C and the unchosen item from the first round-to yield a greater than 50% =

preference for C over A or B. The explanation of this outcome is that =
the=20
unchosen item has lost value by virtue of not having been selected, and =
thus=20
suffers in comparison to C. </FONT>
<P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Egan et al. have adopted this paradigm, =
using=20
stickers featuring various animals and a spectrum of colored M&amp;Ms, =
to=20
investigate the existence and resolution of cognitive dissonance in =
4-year-old=20
children and capuchin monkeys. They find that both subject pools behave=20
similarly; that is, item C IS indeed chosen significantly more of the =
time (60%)=20
when subjects have been enticed into a state of cognitive dissonance via =
a=20
first-round choice of A versus B, and C is not selected more often when =
the=20
subjects are simply presented in the first round with A or B as the=20
experimenter's choice.</FONT></P></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=
Posted by 3D Peruna on November 2, 2007, 12:55 pm
Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>
> (Excerpted from "Editors' Choice: Highlights of the recent
> literature SCIENCE, Volume 318, Issue 5851 dated November 2 2007")
>
> To hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time and still retain
> the ability to function has been hailed as the mark of first-rate
> intelligence--and would also be likely to elicit a state of cognitive
> dissonance, which arises when beliefs and behaviors collide. Alas, ample
> evidence indicates that most humans are able and willing to alter their
> attitudes so as to bring them into line with how they have behaved, and
> thus to reduce the discordance between the two. In fact, three equally
> valued items (A, B, and C) can be experimentally manipulated--by asking
> a subject to choose first between A and B, and then by asking the
> subject to make a second choice between C and the unchosen item from the
> first round-to yield a greater than 50% preference for C over A or B.

I've had personal interaction with people who don't deal with it well.
There is something that seems to be amiss with them... It's hard to
describe, unless you regularly interact with people who can't reconcile
their own behavior with their own beliefs. "Off" is the best way to
describe it.

We have that experience with clients, too. They'll say we like this
style and these ideas, but fall apart when confronted with the
contradiction of their own desires. Often, we get accused of being
arrogant architects who just want to do it our way. It's hard to get
them to see that it's an impossibility to execute conflicting desires
(the most common one is highly detailed construction for little money).
Residential clients are the worst, business clients not so much of a
problem.


Posted by Michael Bulatovich on November 2, 2007, 1:35 pm

> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>>
>> (Excerpted from "Editors' Choice: Highlights of the recent
>> literature SCIENCE, Volume 318, Issue 5851 dated November 2 2007")
>>
>> To hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time and still retain
>> the ability to function has been hailed as the mark of first-rate
>> intelligence--and would also be likely to elicit a state of cognitive
>> dissonance, which arises when beliefs and behaviors collide. Alas, ample
>> evidence indicates that most humans are able and willing to alter their
>> attitudes so as to bring them into line with how they have behaved, and
>> thus to reduce the discordance between the two. In fact, three equally
>> valued items (A, B, and C) can be experimentally manipulated--by asking a
>> subject to choose first between A and B, and then by asking the subject
>> to make a second choice between C and the unchosen item from the first
>> round-to yield a greater than 50% preference for C over A or B.
>
> I've had personal interaction with people who don't deal with it well.
> There is something that seems to be amiss with them... It's hard to
> describe, unless you regularly interact with people who can't reconcile
> their own behavior with their own beliefs. "Off" is the best way to
> describe it.
>
> We have that experience with clients, too. They'll say we like this style
> and these ideas, but fall apart when confronted with the contradiction of
> their own desires. Often, we get accused of being arrogant architects who
> just want to do it our way. It's hard to get them to see that it's an
> impossibility to execute conflicting desires (the most common one is
> highly detailed construction for little money). Residential clients are
> the worst, business clients not so much of a problem.

Are you an architect too? ; )



Posted by Kris Krieger on November 3, 2007, 12:38 pm

> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>>
>> (Excerpted from "Editors' Choice: Highlights of the recent
>> literature SCIENCE, Volume 318, Issue 5851 dated November 2
>> 2007")
>>
>> To hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time and still
>> retain the ability to function has been hailed as the mark of
>> first-rate intelligence--and would also be likely to elicit a state
>> of cognitive dissonance, which arises when beliefs and behaviors
>> collide. Alas, ample evidence indicates that most humans are able and
>> willing to alter their attitudes so as to bring them into line with
>> how they have behaved, and thus to reduce the discordance between the
>> two. In fact, three equally valued items (A, B, and C) can be
>> experimentally manipulated--by asking a subject to choose first
>> between A and B, and then by asking the subject to make a second
>> choice between C and the unchosen item from the first round-to yield
>> a greater than 50% preference for C over A or B.
>
> I've had personal interaction with people who don't deal with it well.
> There is something that seems to be amiss with them... It's hard to
> describe, unless you regularly interact with people who can't
> reconcile their own behavior with their own beliefs. "Off" is the
> best way to describe it.
>
> We have that experience with clients, too. They'll say we like this
> style and these ideas, but fall apart when confronted with the
> contradiction of their own desires. Often, we get accused of being
> arrogant architects who just want to do it our way. It's hard to get
> them to see that it's an impossibility to execute conflicting desires
> (the most common one is highly detailed construction for little
> money).

THe last is just a matter of immaturity - it's similar to the toddler
who, when given a portion of candies, stuffs them all into his/her mouth
at once, and then cries because there are no more left.

It's not uncommon for "adults" to be immature in this manner, even well-
educated professionals. Some people just seem to be unable to get past
their arly-childhood belief in, or wish for, the fantasy that one really
*can* "have one's cake, and eat it, too". SOme think that it's merely a
matter of money, and seem unable to (?unwilling?) to look at the reality
of their own wishful thinking.


> Residential clients are the worst, business clients not so much of a
> problem.
>

Not surprising.




Posted by Troppo on November 4, 2007, 8:00 am
@corp.supernews.com:

>
>> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>>>
>>> (Excerpted from "Editors' Choice: Highlights of the recent
>>> literature SCIENCE, Volume 318, Issue 5851 dated November 2
>>> 2007")
>>>
>>> To hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time and still
>>> retain the ability to function has been hailed as the mark of
>>> first-rate intelligence--and would also be likely to elicit a state
>>> of cognitive dissonance, which arises when beliefs and behaviors
>>> collide.

Aaagh - don't get me started ... too late ... and Monday's coming up.
They have worked it out over the weekend and now they are coming into the
office to talk about it ....

>> I've had personal interaction with people who don't deal with it well.
>> There is something that seems to be amiss with them... It's hard to
>> describe, unless you regularly interact with people who can't
>> reconcile their own behavior with their own beliefs. "Off" is the
>> best way to describe it.

>> We have that experience with clients, too. They'll say we like this
>> style and these ideas, but fall apart when confronted with the
>> contradiction of their own desires. Often, we get accused of being
>> arrogant architects who just want to do it our way. It's hard to get
>> them to see that it's an impossibility to execute conflicting desires
>> (the most common one is highly detailed construction for little
>> money).


The triangular rule = money / size / specification. If any two are
determined, then the third is determined also.

> THe last is just a matter of immaturity - it's similar to the toddler
> who, when given a portion of candies, stuffs them all into his/her
> mouth at once, and then cries because there are no more left.
>
> It's not uncommon for "adults" to be immature in this manner, even
> well-educated professionals. Some people just seem to be unable to get
> past their early-childhood belief in, or wish for, the fantasy that one
> really *can* "have one's cake, and eat it, too".

Or is it the fault of all these motivational videos and empowerment
gurus?

The one I meet most often is the cake in the matchbox problem. Little
people stuff cakes in matchboxes and find that they don't fit, big mess,
ok we learnt something here. They forget this when they are adults. "The
house you want doesn't fit on the site you have chosen".

> Some think that it's merely a matter of money, and seem unable to (?
> unwilling?) to look at the reality of their own wishful thinking.

Ain't that the truth !!

"No - there really isn't 'some way round the problem' - It just can't be
done ... "

>> Residential clients are the worst, business clients not so much of a
>> problem.
>>
> Not surprising.

Often the same in my 38 years of experience.
Just the other day - "Yes you can get clients in and out (of the fast-
food premises) but the largest supply vehicle you can handle is a 1 tonne
van - and no customers arriving while you unload." In this case, no
'holding bay' either ...

A lot of this is to do with spatial reasoning ability, which is one of
those skills becoming less common in urbanised motorised society. You'd
think all this so-called 'virtual reality' would help but it doesn't seem
to.

I was discussing this problem at a CPTED conference a few years ago with
a lady from Virginia Tech - I think she was quite famous but her name
escapes me. She was lamenting the fact that she had students doing
Masters in Planning who had no spatial reasoning ability whatsoever. They
could get from A to B in a car, but on foot? No chance apparently.

Ever do that student exercise where you stop people in the town centre
and ask them to draw a map showing where they live, where they are now,
etc? You get some amazing results ....



Contact Us | Privacy Policy

XML SitemapXML Sitemap