Có hay không?

Chuyện đó có thật hay không?
  • 7 video
  • 155 lượt xem

Thể loại: Khoa học, Kiến thức

Kênh: Brain stuff

Thời gian tạo: 10 tháng trước

Cập nhật lần cuối: 10 tháng trước

Chia sẻ

Viet sub 03:20

Những kẻ ngốc thường tự tin hơn?

Brain stuff

  • 84 lượt xem
  • 10 tháng trước
We've all heard about the supposed relationship between confidence and
knowledge - but is it true? Two researchers think they've found the
answer. Learn more at HowStuffWorks.com:
Share on Facebook: http://goo.gl/SBM7wy Share on Twitter:
http://goo.gl/tz0IoH Subscribe: http://goo.gl/ZYI7Gt Visit our site:
http://www.brainstuffshow.com Hey, BrainStuff, it’s me, Ben. If you’re
like most people, you think you’re very good at some things, and are
able to admit you’re less good at others. You probably think you’re
superbly talented in one or two areas - and hey, you might be right. You
try to be honest with yourself about your strong points and your weak
ones. You likely shake your head in pity at people you see as, well,
stupid. “Why do they keep dumbing everywhere?” you ask yourself, “Why
don’t they understand that they’re bad at doing stuff? There is an
answer, but you might not like it. And this answer doesn’t just apply to
people you think of as “dumb”. It applies to everyone on Earth…
including you and me. It’s not a matter of intelligence, necessarily– a
difficult thing to measure– but it is related to “competence”, the
ability to do something well. In 1999 a psychologist named David
Dunning and his grad assistant Justin Kruger tested a group of students
in several categories: “the ability to think logically, to write
grammatically, and to spot funny jokes”. They also asked the students to
rate their skills in these categories. That’s when they noticed
something weird. The people scoring below average on these tests
weren’t just incompetent in these categories – they also didn’t know
they were incompetent. And here’s the kicker: the less competent they
were, the MORE competent they ranked themselves. This is a phenomenon
called “illusory superiority” (which sounds like the name of a Radiohead
B-Side, but isn’t, as far as we know). Instead, this is a cognitive bias
wherein people tend to rate their own abilities as above-average. You
know, like how everyone’s thinks they’re a good driver or believes they
have a great sense of humor. Multiple studies have proven this effect in
everything from firearms to college debates and med students’ opinions
of their interviewing skills. It doesn’t seem to matter what specific
skill we’re talking about – the less a person knows about it, the more
likely they are to overestimate their knowledge. While Dunning and
Kruger popularized this effect in modern society, they weren’t the first
people to notice the relationship between confidence, modesty and skill.
Philosophers throughout the ages have contemplated this idea, like
Bertrand Russell, who famously wrote “The trouble with the world is that
the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” And
here’s another weird thing. People with actual competency are likely to
actually underestimate their abilities. Researchers believe this modesty
comes because competent people are more aware of how much they don’t
actually know, as well as their field in general. They also consistently
overestimate the performance ability of others. It all goes back to
one primary thing – metacognition. Metacognition is the ability to be
aware of and understand your own thought process. In other words, the
ability to think about how you think. People tend to evaluate
themselves through what Dunning and Kruger call a “top-down” approach.
Instead of objectively measuring their performance, people start with
their preconceived notions of their skill and use that belief to
evaluate their performance. SOURCES:
http://petapixel.com/2014/10/13/dunning-kruger-peak-photography/ http://www.psych.nyu.edu/jost/Zuckerman%20&%20Jost%20(2001)%20What%20Makes%20You%20Think%20You're%20So%20Popular1.pdf


Viet sub 03:17

Quần áo chỉn chu có thật sự mang lại tự tin ?

Brain stuff

  • 90 lượt xem
  • 10 tháng trước
Dressing up to feel powerful may have been a fashion fad of the 1980s,
but do we still think differently if we wear formal clothes? Learn more
at HowStuffWorks.com: http://money.howstuffworks.com/busine... Share on
Facebook: https://goo.gl/fkNE01 Share on Twitter: https://goo.gl/f012Ql
Subscribe: http://goo.gl/ZYI7Gt Visit our site:
http://www.brainstuffshow.com Well hello there BrainStuff. I’m Cristen
Conger and I’ve got a question for you. Do I look powerful? 'Cause I
feel powerful! Some people even think that what you wear (especially
feminist sweatshirts) can produce this kind of confidence. So what is
this so-called “power dressing?” And does it actually work? To answer
that question we have to take a trip to the smooth 1970s, when a guy
named John Molloy came out with a series of books about “dressing for
success.” For men, Molloy recommended conservative business attire that
was high-quality and fit well. Essentially, a business suit in a dark
hue, with a modest white shirt and tie. Think Don Draper. For women,
he adapted this uniform to include a skirted suit, and a soft blouse
with floppy or bowed neck piece. Think Margaret Thatcher. In order to
achieve the kind of authority of The Iron Lady, Molloy recommended women
do two things. Don’t look like a secretary, and don’t look too sexy.
Because of course women should protect themselves from their own sexual
objectification! You couldn’t wear waistcoats or contoured jackets,
according to Molloy, because they drew attention to the bust. Scarves
were popular because they drew attention to the face and away from the
breasts. It's all about distraction, you see! And floral prints and
feminine colors like salmon pink were out. But you didn’t want to look
too masculine either, hence the skirts instead of trousers. This was
the birth of “power dressing.” And by the 1980s, it became the way
“enterprising” women learned to manage or limit the potential sexuality
of their bodies and leave all that gross girl stuff like cooties at
home. But as they entered the corporate workforce in ever-greater
numbers, some women wanted to modify this uniform while maintaining
their professional appearance. One alternative model for breaking out
of these fashion limitations was Princess Diana, with her more glamorous
outfits. Others were on TV, in shows like “Dynasty,” “Designing Women”
and “Moonlighting.” Enter broad shoulder pads, wide lapels and a wider
range of textures, colors and accessories. Cut to present day! Most of
these fashion fads have come and gone, but you can still see their
influence on politicians, for example. Take Hillary Clinton. Or Donald
Trump. Many of the tenets of power dressing are still in play today, we
just don’t call it that anymore. But a 2015 study re-examined the
principles behind power dressing. It found that putting on formal
clothing does indeed make us feel powerful and even makes us think
differently. The authors of this study tested student participants in
a series of experiments by rating their outfits and taking cognitive
tests. When the students switched out of sweatpants and into the kind of
clothing they thought they should wear to a job interview, the tests
showed their cognitive processing became more abstract, broader and
holistic. The authors also say that how often you actually wear formal
clothes doesn’t matter. Regardless of when you wear it, these uniforms
have become a symbol of power. SOURCES: Schaefer, J. O. (2015). Power
dressing. Salem Press Encyclopedia
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/... Joanne Entwistle, The Fashioned
Body. 2015 http://www.theguardian.com/culture/20...