3 ms·

>Is video actually easier to sensationalize than other media? It has nothing to do with video (although the fidelity of recording likely has an impact). It's n

>Is video actually easier to sensationalize than other media? It has nothing to do with video (although the fidelity of recording likely has an impact). It's now know as the Hawthorne effect [1] but even before it was given a name, anthropologists who came to openly study remote tribes often reported markedly different cultural behaviors from more clandestine anthropologists and the locals whose contact with the remote tribes brought them to the attention of academics. Just knowing that something is being closely observed and even recorded for posterity seems to significantly alter behavior. Basically like a possum playing dead, except with far more complex social interactions. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawthorne_effect

thaumasiotes 6y ago
> It's now known as the Hawthorne effect [1] The citation doesn't seem to support much of anything: > Descriptions of the well-known and remarkable effect, which was discovered in the context of research conducted at the Hawthorne Western Electric plant, turned out to be fictional. > The original research involved workers who made electrical relays at the Hawthorne Works, a Western Electric plant in Cicero, Illinois. Between 1924 and 1927 the famous lighting study was conducted. Workers experienced a series of lighting changes in which productivity was said to increase with almost any change in the lighting. This turned out not to be true. > Later interpretations such as Landsberger's suggested that the novelty of being research subjects and the increased attention from such could lead to temporary increases in workers' productivity. This interpretation was dubbed "the Hawthorne effect," although the data does not support that view. > Other researchers have attempted to explain the effects with various interpretations. J. G. Adair warned of gross factual inaccuracy in most secondary publications on the Hawthorne effect and that many studies failed to find it.
- tboughen 6y ago
  Last time I heard the Hawthorne effect discussed (on BBC radio 4), two psychologists explained that the lighting changes were enacted on a Monday, and lasted for the week. The increase in productivity detected on the Monday was then attributed to the change in lighting from the previous Friday. Despite this seeming like a classic case of conflating correlation with causation, and the workers simply being more productive due to being more rested. The psychologists then concluded that although this wasn’t evidence for the Hawthorne effect, the effect was still real. I turned off the radio.
- watwut 6y ago
  Personally, I act differently when stranger is in the room and when I an alone and when it is only me and friends. I personally observed family dinner being different when rare visitor came in, kids acting differently when they thought I an not watching and meetings being different when our off team people are present.

thaumasiotes 6y ago

> It's now known as the Hawthorne effect [1] The citation doesn't seem to support much of anything: > Descriptions of the well-known and remarkable effect, which was discovered in the context of research conducted at the Hawthorne Western Electric plant, turned out to be fictional. > The original research involved workers who made electrical relays at the Hawthorne Works, a Western Electric plant in Cicero, Illinois. Between 1924 and 1927 the famous lighting study was conducted. Workers experienced a series of lighting changes in which productivity was said to increase with almost any change in the lighting. This turned out not to be true. > Later interpretations such as Landsberger's suggested that the novelty of being research subjects and the increased attention from such could lead to temporary increases in workers' productivity. This interpretation was dubbed "the Hawthorne effect," although the data does not support that view. > Other researchers have attempted to explain the effects with various interpretations. J. G. Adair warned of gross factual inaccuracy in most secondary publications on the Hawthorne effect and that many studies failed to find it.

tboughen 6y ago
Last time I heard the Hawthorne effect discussed (on BBC radio 4), two psychologists explained that the lighting changes were enacted on a Monday, and lasted for the week. The increase in productivity detected on the Monday was then attributed to the change in lighting from the previous Friday. Despite this seeming like a classic case of conflating correlation with causation, and the workers simply being more productive due to being more rested. The psychologists then concluded that although this wasn’t evidence for the Hawthorne effect, the effect was still real. I turned off the radio.
watwut 6y ago
Personally, I act differently when stranger is in the room and when I an alone and when it is only me and friends. I personally observed family dinner being different when rare visitor came in, kids acting differently when they thought I an not watching and meetings being different when our off team people are present.