Dr. Anna M. Borghi wrote an interesting commentary on our paper Weighty data: importance information influences estimated weight of digital information storage devices by Schneider, I. K., Parzuchowski, M., Wojciszke, B., Schwarz, N., and Koole, S. L. (2014). Front. Psychol. 5:1536. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01536.
“In three well-designed experiments, Schneider et al. (2014) demonstrate that the importance ascribed to the content influences weight perception of a USB or of a data-storage device. I will briefly discuss the theoretical implications of these results for the recent debate on “penetrability” of perception and then more generally for embodied and grounded views of cognition; finally I will argue that it is important to study weight”.
You can read the full commentary here and read the original paper here.
Frontiers in Psychology Cognition has accepted a new paper on the relationship between importance information and weight judgments. The paper conceptually replicates previous work and shows the robustness of the effect. Below is the abstract, the complete paper can be found here.
Weighty data: importance information influences estimated weight of digital information storage devices.
Iris K. Schneider, Michal Parzuchowski, Bogdan Wojciszke, Norbert Schwarz, & Sander L. Koole
Previous work suggests that perceived importance of an object influences estimates of its weight. Specifically, important books were estimated to be heavier than non-important books. However, the experimental set-up of these studies may have suffered from a potential confound and findings may be confined to books only. Addressing this, we investigate the effect of importance on weight estimates by examining whether the importance of information stored on a data storage device (USB-stick or portable hard drive) can alter weight estimates. Results show that people thinking a USB-stick holds important tax information (vs. expired tax information vs. no information) estimate it to be heavier (Experiment 1) compared to people who do not. Similarly, people who are told a portable hard-drive holds personally relevant information (vs. irrelevant), also estimate the drive to be heavier (Experiment 2a and 2b).
Recently, a paper in collaboration with Dr. Frenk van Harreveld and others has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Experimental Psychology : General.
Read the abstract below:
van Harreveld, F., Rutjens, B.T., Schneider, I.K., Nohlen, H. & Keskinis, K. (accepted for publication). In doubt and disorderly: Ambivalence promotes compensatory perceptions of order. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
Ambivalence is a presumably unpleasant experience and coming to terms with it is an intricate part of human existence. It is argued that ambivalent attitude holders cope with their ambivalence through compensatory perceptions of order. We will first show that ambivalence leads to an increase in (visual) perceptions of order (Study 1). In Study 2 we conceptually replicate this finding by showing that ambivalence also increases belief in conspiracy theories, a cognitive form of order perception. Furthermore, this effect is mediated by the negative emotions that are elicited by ambivalence. In Study 3 we show that increased need for order is driving these effects: affirmations of order cancel out the effect of ambivalence on perceptions of order. Theoretical as well as societal implications are discussed.
Some cool news! At September 3rd at 10:00 AM I will be presenting my work in a seminar at the Behavioral Science Institute (BSI) of Singapore Management University (SMU). Really looking forward to meeting the people there!
“We are the Ambivalents, unable not to see both sides of the argument, frozen in the no-man’s land between armies of true believers. We cannot speak our name, because there is no respectable way to confess that you believe two opposing propositions, no ballot that allows you to vote for competing candidates, no questionnaire in which you can tick the box, “I agree withboth of these conflicting views.” So the Ambivalents avoid the question, or check “I don’t know,” or grit their teeth and pick a side. Consequently, our ambivalence doesn’t leave a trace. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. “
PS: There is a small error in the piece. To induce ambivalent feelings I did not use an unstable board, but had participants move from side to side by themselves. Possibly the error is due to the use of the conference poster as a resource. If you want to know more about this research, please find the paper here.
Last April, Daniël Lakens, Nils Jostmann, and myself organised an event to show people how valuable social psychological research is. Twelve speakers gave inspiring and most of all, concise talks to a broad audience. A Dutch psychology magazine, De Psycholoog, wrote a very nice article on our event, which can be found <a href="http://irisschneider.nl/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/96279480-ASPO-Blits-de-Psycholoog online apotheken cialis.pdf” target=”_blank”>here (Dutch only).Watch Full Movie Online Streaming Online and Download
So far, research exploring the relationship between evaluations and body movements has focused on one-sided evaluations. People regularly encounter objects or situations, however, about which they simultaneously hold both positive and negative evaluations, resulting in the experience of ambivalence. In language, these experiences are often expressed in a physical manner, such as being “torn” or “wavering” between two sides of an issue. Building on this, we explored the relationship between the experience of ambivalence and side-to-side movement (or, wavering) in two studies. In Study 1 we used a WIITM Balance Board to measure movement and show that when people experience ambivalence they move from side to side more than people who do not experience ambivalence. In Study 2 we induced body movement in order explore the reverse relationship and reveal that when people are made to move from side to side, experiences of ambivalence are enhanced.
Keywords: ambivalence, attitudes, body movement, WIITM Balance Board