QuoteReplyTopic: Yah gonna stop using crack metaphors Posted: Apr 15 2014 at 4:32pm
Yes, We Do Know What You're Thinking
by Tania Lombrozo
In tweeting that you need a hit of chocolate,
are you inadvertently communicating something about your socioeconomic
status? Or your gender?
I sometimes hesitate to tell people I'm a psychologist because it
can put them on guard. I've heard all of the following reactions:
"Oh no! You'll be able to tell how crazy I am!"
"Can you tell what I'm thinking?"
"Are you analyzing me now?"
I quickly clarify that I'm not that type of psychologist. I'm a cognitive psychologist who studies basic reasoning, not a clinical psychologist or a therapist.
the idea that a total stranger could instantly "read" you, however
unlikely, is sufficiently credible that we're willing to entertain
characters like Gregory House on House, Cal Lightman on Lie to Me and, of course, Sherlock Holmes in contemporary manifestations, such as Sherlock and Elementary.
These masterminds can tell, after casual inspection, how your love life
is going, the state of your finances and what you had for breakfast.
Are these inferences a violation of privacy?
the face of it, the answer is "no." Such inferences, however uncanny,
are based on information you've made public in the way you present
yourself. They're nothing like the violations of privacy that we worry
about with NSA snooping, social network settings or the that's got us all worried.
And yet ... they go well beyond what you intended to disclose.
about how we learn about others, and what we inadvertently reveal about
ourselves, have been on my mind after reading about a neat new paper by
Dan Jurafsky and colleagues, published last week in the journal First Monday.
data-mining techniques, the researchers studied 900,000 online
restaurant reviews and discovered some interesting relationships between
the reviews and their writers. As the headline on a Stanford News boldly summarized: "Online Food Reviews Reveal The Inner Self."
Quoting the Stanford News report, here were some of the main findings:
reviews of expensive restaurants tended to use metaphors of sex and
sensual pleasure, such as 'orgasmic pastry' or 'seductively seared foie
"Positive reviews of cheap restaurants and foods often
employed metaphors of drugs or addiction — 'these cupcakes are like
"Women were more likely than men to use drug metaphors to describe their attitudes toward food."
"The foods most likely to be described using drug metaphors were pizza, burgers, sweets and sushi."
tweeting that you need a hit of chocolate, are you inadvertently
communicating something about your socioeconomic status? Or your gender?
mention this study as a lighthearted illustration of a much more
general point: that with the rise of big data and powerful methods for
data analysis, those with access and know-how will increasingly be able
to identify subtle associations between public bits of information and
their individual human producers. And that, in turn, can support
reliable inferences about those individuals from public information.
— if at all — do such efforts cross the line from merely socially
inappropriate and embarrassing, in a Dr. House or "Holmesy" sort of way,
to worrisome violations of privacy? Or do they just feel that way? And
if so, why?
As a psychologist, I don't know what
you're thinking. But it's quite possible that some of the folks with
access to loads of data and processing power have an inkling.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum