Test 2 Flashcards
What is social constructionism?
What is considered knowledge is seen as constructed via language and social interaction processes that often reflect society’s norms
Difference in talk between men and women
Women talk more. Women talk to relate, men to get things done.
Mark Liberman’s challenge to The Female Brain
whatever the average female versus average male difference turns out to be, it will be small compared with the variation among women and among men
fashion over time: female and male
1900-1950s corsets everywhere
1960s-2000s Androgynous and boyish
1900s-1960s Began to lose muscles because they were not doing hard labour, adverts to not be the skinny guy
1970s onwards longer hair and more female styles
‘Intersex’ people
Intersex- genitalia that are ambiguous, range of sex/genetic variations
Issues for intersex people
Harsh social effects of not fitting gender norm Health services issues Well-being Issues with gender reassignment surgery Importance of support
What does “non-binary” gender mean
Having no gender (e.g., gender neutral)
Incorporating aspects of both man and woman or being somewhere between those ( mixed gender, androgynous)
Being to some extent, but not completely, one gender (e.g., demi-man/boy/woman/girl, femme man)
Responses to non-binary people
reclassify them so no longer anomalous
eradicate them
avoid contact if at all possible
categorize them as dangerous to normal people
incorporate them into myth and story as ways to access other levels of existence
Too fast for a woman’: The case of Caster Semenya
Performance questioned on basis of gender
supposedly gender tested by officials -> ridiculous
Judith Butler on gender
gender is not something we have (identity) but something that is performed (enacted) and performative (i.e through repetitions of acts that are constructed to mean feminine or masculine we come to think of ourselves as a particular gender)
a phenomenon being produced and reproduced all the time
Five main forms - code for sex
Sustinance Sport Animals War/violence Transportation/mechanics
Construction of Sexuality through the male sex drive
Biological male sex drive: sex as almost overwhelming hormonal driven male need that must be satiated
Man is the desiring one and the woman is the object i.e. women activate the interest and need
Sexuality on a spectrum: the Kinsey Scale
First published by sexologist Alfred Kinsey in 1948 in an attempt to encompass a range of human sexual behaviours
Applied both in terms of sexual attraction and actual sexual activity
Problems with the Kinsey Scale
The base value “0” is heterosexual, presented as the norm (reinforces the pathologisation of non-heterosexual behaviours)
No axes for spectrum of asexuality
Nonbinary/intersex relationships to sexual orientation unclear
Judgments are shaped by biases & heuristics
Biases – systematic shift from objective data
Heuristics - shorthand rule of thumb
Decisions: Framing
• Framing: 2 alternative framings of a choice
logically the same,
but people favour one option
Solution: opt out system
Decisions: Nudges
Thaler & Sunstein 2008
Nudge: ‘any aspect of a choice that alters people’s behavior predictably’
Without changing economic incentives
e.g. School café - put healthy foods at eye level
Also rebrand veges with catchy names
Decisions:
Sunk cost fallacy
Businesses often invest more money in a losing enterprise
Company has spent $50 million on a project
Forecasts of future returns are poor
To give the project a chance, need $60 million more
An alternative new project costs the same and looks likely to have higher returns
Most companies stay with the initial project
Decisions:
losses & gains differ
Losses loom larger than gains: Changes in price
when prices drop - customers buy more. when prices rise - customers buy less
the effect of price rises [losses] is stronger
Endowment effect - When we sell stuff, we ask more than we’d pay for the same good
Heuristics: 1 Availability
Tversky and Kahneman
People’s judgments – reflect available data
Ann & Sue short-listed for manager job, Both internal, but Sue is newer to the company, Decide to appoint Ann, Sue gets job in competing company and does better than Ann
Heuristics: 2: Representativeness
How similar is a person to a stereotype, Affects judgments of probability
E.g., Moneyball [Michael Lewis]
People have stereotype of a good employee, Base decisions on this, not performance
Heuristics:
3 Anchoring
Prior knowledge about a value shapes judgments
Unrealistic optimism (Weinstein)
People think things won’t go wrong [to them]
Upside - helps motivation & implementation
Downside - Take more risks
A related bias
- hindsight
When an unpredicted outcome occurs, we adjust our view of the world to accommodate the surprise, e.g. election results
We even say [and think] we predicted it
What’s the problem with this? We don’t learn the lessons about where we were wrong and why
How can we counter
overconfidence?
Gary Klein - have a premortem.
Four strands affect voluntary action
Perception of the risk
Overcoming fatalism
From intentions to action
Motivation
Biases in risk perception:
Dimensions of risk [Slovic]
Voluntary vs non voluntary, we tolerate voluntary risks more when we have control
Catastrophic potential / dread, kills lots as a time vs a steady trickle
Known vs Unknown
Biases: 1. low frequency hazards [Slovic, ’82]
People casual about low frequency & long term, People prepare less, We see low frequency events as never happening, or at least, not in our lifetime
Biases 2: Denial
With earthquake risk – quake won’t happen, With climate change, deny the science and risk, Reduces anxiety, so it’s tricky to change,
Denial: How counter it? [Lehman & Taylor, 89]
Less denial where we control outcomes
Less denial where we reduce vulnerability
Counter false arguments
Biases 3:
Unrealistic optimism:(Weinstein)
Optimism about own future relative to others
Motorcyclists - (Rutter ‘98)
Thought they were less at risk than others
We think someone else will get cancer
Entrepreneurs - overconfident go bankrupt more
Demonstrated with e’quakes in Wellington
What is the effect of experiencing a disaster?
• Two opposite effects: Helweg Larsen ’99
- If effects are severe, optimism disappears – effect of nuclear meltdown in Japan - Germany
- If no effects, optimism stays or gets worse - e.g. Lots of minor quakes in Wgton
What’s Fatalism?
The belief there’s
no point in preparing
We think: What can we do? Our efforts are puny
We confound a hazard and its effects
How counter fatalism - 1.
1a. Focus on specific actions [Turner et al. 1986]
1b. Small actions can make a big difference
Countering fatalism:
[2] Causal models
Disasters reflect many causes, Experts’ causal models reflect this, Citizens’ models omit key links
Countering fatalism:
[3] Distinctive damage
News media - universal damage
Present distinctive damage [newsworthy]
Countering fatalism:
[4] Focus on causal mechanisms
When we explain events, we look for ‘mechanisms’ & attribute effects to these
For earthquakes, causal mechanisms = building design
Countering fatalism:[5a] Media portrayals:
Initial Kobe reports fatalistic: On the outskirts of Kobe new buildings as well as old were damaged
Anniversary reports: less fatalistic: Western-style houses fared very well. Western-style commercial buildings also generally fared better than traditional commercial buildings.
What is ‘preparation’
Survival & mitigation
Many schemes focus on survival kit etc, Target actions that mitigate damage [Russell ‘99]
Collapse (Diamond, 2004)
Why some societies collapsed while others thrived.
One key predictor - over-exploiting finite resources
Two opposing trends around climate change
1. Increasing emissions Developing nations, More technologies Increasing population 2. New technology & efficiency A race between these.
Countering fatalism
Which messages work best?
Anxiety messages often counterproductive, Lead to reduced action, denial
Effective messages, Target remedial actions, not just the risk, Target specific actions
Motivation:
Costs & benefits - Actual & perceived
People assume sustainable option [always] costs more, May cost more in the short term, but not medium/long term
Social dilemmas & fatalism
[Hardin ’68]
Individual interests conflict with the common good, If each country maximises own gain, all lose
How overcome commons dilemma?
Communicate benefits of cooperation
Communicate benefits of moving first
Enhance payoffs for cooperation
Risk perception and climate change Two processes (Slovic 2000)
- Gut/visceral reaction, emotion [Affect],
- Analytical processing, stats [cognitive]
The two often disagree
Gut reactions override analytical. If we feel cold….
Information often has little effect
How respond? Translate data into visceral [gut] images
Intergroup processes: How to make enemies & influence people?
Importance of sharing common goals
A majority of the world’s people have a religion
Dawkins (2006), etc. Science & religion are enemies
Others trying to harness religion:
Academic freedom, in relation to an institution, means
freedom of academic staff and students, within the law, to question and test received wisdom, to put forward new ideas and to state controversial or unpopular opinions
