5 ms·

This is not terribly surprising, but it’s nice to see some experimental confirmation. Here’s my question: Many will use this data to make themselves feel bett

by nlh 9y ago

This is not terribly surprising, but it’s nice to see some experimental confirmation. Here’s my question: Many will use this data to make themselves feel better (“See, I told you they were all idiots.”) How can this data be used to actually help the problem? Are there techniques that can be applied to help folks who lack high cognitive abilities to see and understand that they’re being manipulated?

SmirkingRevenge 9y ago
> This is not terribly surprising, but it’s nice to see some experimental confirmation. Not really being serious here, but this made me chuckle a bit, on an article about fake news, etc. The sentence above literally reads like confirmation bias happening in real time, the way you phrased it. I'm not saying you are guilty of it here, the phrasing just jumped out at me - and is a good example of the kind of thought, that when we have it, ought to trigger our inner skeptic :P
Null-Set 9y ago
The article reccomends a PSA teaching the metacognitive skill of asking yourself why you believe something and if you know any reason it isn't true. It reminds me of the legendary Canadian House Hippo PSA. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TijcoS8qHIE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TijcoS8qHIE
- trentmb 9y ago
  "That doesn't sound right, but I don't know enough about stars to dispute it." Is usually my issue.
Chathamization 9y ago
> Are there techniques that can be applied to help folks who lack high cognitive abilities to see and understand that they’re being manipulated? Or to help ourselves see that? I think it would be a mistake if everyone who read this assumed it was simply a problem with the other side (“See, I told you they were all idiots”). Nate Silver has made a good case that the media's focus on the Comey letter non-story was one of the main factors for Clinton's loss, and it's hard to not see a connection between their refusal to look at their own reporting and their sudden focus on "fake news." Just this week I ran into an NPR fact checker claiming "It’s true that an immigrant can sponsor extended family members for visas"[1] (in context, talking about immigration visas), when that seems to not be the case at all[2]. It's true that shoddy journalism is different from intentional manipulation, but the line between the two is often blurred. You also have the same issue with both - even when people are presented by the facts, they won't reconsider their positions. I've run into this issue in the past - when you present the original source and show how it contradicts a news report, it's not uncommon to get the reply "that can't be true, or else the media would have said so." [1] https://www.npr.org/2018/01/30/580378279/trumps-state-of-the-union-address-annotated https://www.npr.org/2018/01/30/580378279/trumps-state-of-the... [2] https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-us-citizens https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-us-citizens
- boomboomsubban 9y ago
  >Just this week I ran into an NPR fact checker claiming "It’s true that an immigrant can sponsor extended family members for visas"[1] (in context, talking about immigration visas), when that seems to not be the case at all[2]. How do you figure? The USCIS page talks about the program mentioned by NPR, where a limited number of visas are available for extended family of US citizens.
  - Chathamization 9y ago
    Here[1]: > A U.S. citizen can file a petition for the following relatives: • Husband or wife; • Children, married or unmarried A U.S. citizen who is at least 21 years or older may also petition for the following relatives: • Parents; • Brothers or sisters. From my understanding (and from everything I can find on the USCIS site and all other immigration sites), a U.S. citizen can sponsor immediate family members. They can not sponsor extended family members (cousins, uncles, in-laws, etc.). [1] https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Resources/A1en.pdf https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Resources/A1...
    - boomboomsubban 9y ago
      The USCIS refers to "immediate family" as parents, spouses and children, as seen on your first link, so "extended family" would involve siblings. One of those situations where a term can have a legal meaning that's different from how it is commonly used. The NPR part also links to another article that explains who can be sponsored right away.
      - ozzmotik 9y ago
        good explanation but I can't help but wonder, wouldn't your immediate family's immediate family by extension also be your immediate family? at least within the same generations that your immediate family cover (aka your siblings are the immediate family of your parents and they are the same generation as you so wouldn't it make logical sense to refer to them as immediate?) not trying to cast shade on any arguments made already or anything im just legitimately curious about it from a logical perspective
tinymollusk 9y ago
I'm reading Annie Duke's brand new (and excellent!) book called "Thinking in Bets". She suggests that placing monetary bets is a good way to force yourself (and possibly others) to reason about how they know what they know, consider what the other person knows that they don't, etc. In prospect theory, I think this is akin to triggering the Type II system (the "slow" thinking).

by nlh 9y ago

SmirkingRevenge 9y ago

> This is not terribly surprising, but it’s nice to see some experimental confirmation. Not really being serious here, but this made me chuckle a bit, on an article about fake news, etc. The sentence above literally reads like confirmation bias happening in real time, the way you phrased it. I'm not saying you are guilty of it here, the phrasing just jumped out at me - and is a good example of the kind of thought, that when we have it, ought to trigger our inner skeptic :P

Null-Set 9y ago

The article reccomends a PSA teaching the metacognitive skill of asking yourself why you believe something and if you know any reason it isn't true. It reminds me of the legendary Canadian House Hippo PSA. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TijcoS8qHIE https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TijcoS8qHIE

trentmb 9y ago
"That doesn't sound right, but I don't know enough about stars to dispute it." Is usually my issue.

Chathamization 9y ago

> Are there techniques that can be applied to help folks who lack high cognitive abilities to see and understand that they’re being manipulated? Or to help ourselves see that? I think it would be a mistake if everyone who read this assumed it was simply a problem with the other side (“See, I told you they were all idiots”). Nate Silver has made a good case that the media's focus on the Comey letter non-story was one of the main factors for Clinton's loss, and it's hard to not see a connection between their refusal to look at their own reporting and their sudden focus on "fake news." Just this week I ran into an NPR fact checker claiming "It’s true that an immigrant can sponsor extended family members for visas"[1] (in context, talking about immigration visas), when that seems to not be the case at all[2]. It's true that shoddy journalism is different from intentional manipulation, but the line between the two is often blurred. You also have the same issue with both - even when people are presented by the facts, they won't reconsider their positions. I've run into this issue in the past - when you present the original source and show how it contradicts a news report, it's not uncommon to get the reply "that can't be true, or else the media would have said so." [1] https://www.npr.org/2018/01/30/580378279/trumps-state-of-the-union-address-annotated https://www.npr.org/2018/01/30/580378279/trumps-state-of-the... [2] https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-us-citizens https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-us-citizens

boomboomsubban 9y ago
>Just this week I ran into an NPR fact checker claiming "It’s true that an immigrant can sponsor extended family members for visas"[1] (in context, talking about immigration visas), when that seems to not be the case at all[2]. How do you figure? The USCIS page talks about the program mentioned by NPR, where a limited number of visas are available for extended family of US citizens.
- Chathamization 9y ago
  Here[1]: > A U.S. citizen can file a petition for the following relatives: • Husband or wife; • Children, married or unmarried A U.S. citizen who is at least 21 years or older may also petition for the following relatives: • Parents; • Brothers or sisters. From my understanding (and from everything I can find on the USCIS site and all other immigration sites), a U.S. citizen can sponsor immediate family members. They can not sponsor extended family members (cousins, uncles, in-laws, etc.). [1] https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Resources/A1en.pdf https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Resources/A1...
  - boomboomsubban 9y ago
    The USCIS refers to "immediate family" as parents, spouses and children, as seen on your first link, so "extended family" would involve siblings. One of those situations where a term can have a legal meaning that's different from how it is commonly used. The NPR part also links to another article that explains who can be sponsored right away.
    - ozzmotik 9y ago
      good explanation but I can't help but wonder, wouldn't your immediate family's immediate family by extension also be your immediate family? at least within the same generations that your immediate family cover (aka your siblings are the immediate family of your parents and they are the same generation as you so wouldn't it make logical sense to refer to them as immediate?) not trying to cast shade on any arguments made already or anything im just legitimately curious about it from a logical perspective

tinymollusk 9y ago

I'm reading Annie Duke's brand new (and excellent!) book called "Thinking in Bets". She suggests that placing monetary bets is a good way to force yourself (and possibly others) to reason about how they know what they know, consider what the other person knows that they don't, etc. In prospect theory, I think this is akin to triggering the Type II system (the "slow" thinking).