In this episode, David McRaney sits down with psychologist Michele Gelfand and discuss her new book: Rule Makers, Rule Breakers: How Tight and Loose Cultures Wire Our World. In the book, Gelfand presents her research into norms and a fascinating new idea. It isn’t norms themselves that predict how cultures will react, evolve, innovate, and clash -- but how different cultures value those and sanction people who violate them. She categorizes all human cultures into two kinds -- tight and loose -- and argues that all human behavior depends on whether a person lives in a tight culture or a loose one.
All the data in the world will not lead to business growth if you can not mine it successfully for insights. What that takes is smart data analysis — and the right approach and tools to carry it off. To succeed in today’s challenging and competitive environment, marketers must break down the silos across departments, teams, and channels to consolidate data and see a unified view of the audience. By bringing data together, businesses are better able to understand and respond to their audience needs — and that leads to growth.
Algorithms are all around us, using stores of data and complex analytics to make decisions with often significant impacts on humans – from choosing the content people see on social media to judging whether a person is a good credit risk or job candidate. Here are some of the key findings from recent research by the Pew Research Center.
How people think about their data and privacy has fundamentally changed. Forward-thinking marketers understand that online privacy concerns are real, and they have been preparing all along. These marketers strive for growth, but not at the cost of consumer trust. Instead, they invest in ways to protect and strengthen their relationships with customers, ultimately creating brands that will endure. These marketers realize that responsible marketing is more important than ever because the expectations for privacy are higher than ever.
In psychology, they call it naive realism, the tendency to believe that the other side is wrong because they are misinformed, that if they knew what you knew, they would change their minds to match yours. What we don't think, however, is maybe WE are the ones who are wrong. We never go into the debate hoping to be enlightened, only to crush our opponents. Listen in this episode as legendary psychologist Lee Ross explains how to identify, avoid, and combat this most pernicious of cognitive mistakes.
If you could compare the person you were before you became sleep deprived to the person after, you’d find you’ve definitely become...lesser than. In this episode, David McRaney sits down with two researchers whose latest work suggests sleep deprivation also affects how you see other people. In tests of implicit bias, negative associations with certain religious and cultural categories emerged after people started falling behind on rest.
“Raise your words, not your voice. It is rain that grows flowers, not thunder.” - Rumi
In this divisive and polarized era how do you bridge the political divide between left and right? How do you persuade the people on the other side to see things your way? New research by sociologist Robb Willer and psychologist Matthew Feinberg suggests that the answer is in learning how to cross something they call the empathy gap.
In this episode, Tali Sharot, a cognitive neuroscientist and psychologist at University College London, explains our' innate optimism bias. When the brain estimates the outcome of future events, it tends to reduce the probability of negative outcomes for itself, but not so much for other people. Sharot explains why and details how we can use our knowledge of this mental quirk to our advantage both personally and institutionally.
In this episode of the YANSS Podcast, David McRaney sits down with legendary science historian James Burke. In Connections, he offered an “alternate view of history” in which great insights took place because of anomalies and mistakes, because people were pursuing one thing, but it lead somewhere surprising or was combined with some other object or idea they could never have imagined by themselves. Innovation took place in the spaces between disciplines, when people outside of intellectual and professional silos, unrestrained by categorical and linear views, synthesized the work of people still trapped in those institutions, who, because of those institutions, had no idea what each other was up to and therefore couldn’t predict the trajectory of even their own disciplines, much less history itself.