I can see it in my mind... A Debate

Mental images are abstract things. They are supposedly images that can be seen but are formed in the mind. They tend to be visual reconstructions of events and/or objects to aid in memory recall.

Have you ever tried to remember something and went along the lines of... "Let me picture it... yes, there's this, that and the other"? You were most likely creating a mental image. But how does this occur? Here are some points on the debate:

Pylyshyn argues that mental images imply a fallacy that there is another being in the mind which can receive and interpret images created in the mind.

However, neuroimaging studies has shown that the visual association cortex was the most active in generating mental images.

Although they provide evidence that a part of the brain is involved, it still doesn't provide evidence on HOW they are generated.

Kosslyn argues that mental images are a combination of depictive and propositional images - depictive allows for a point-for-point characteristic of the image, whereas propositional contains specific facts about the image in a hierarchy.

Ambiguity of images cannot be changes

Maybe they can... with certain contexts

You can even rotate the images...

What do you think?

Termly breaks

Sorry for the lack of posts once again. I haven't neglected the blog, I just have been doing a fair bit during the terms of University. I have now broken up from Uni for a little while so will add more posts.

Sorry once again!

From Birmingham? You're better off quiet.

Are you from Birmingham? Or, more importantly, have you got a Brummie accent? If so, research suggests that you should stay quiet, as the accent is perceived as not intelligent. A recent study by Smith & Workman (2008), which was presented in this year's Annual Conference of the British Psychological Society (BPS) confirmed this finding. Participants looked at different photos of women whilst listening to female voices speaking in different accents. They were then asked to rate each photo in terms of intelligence (how intelligent they think the person is). The control group had no speaker, just silence and the photo. The findings confirm this idea, as the Brummie accent was rated as less intelligent by the participants than just silence! 

However, there may be hope ahead for those living in the midlands. This research stands out above others, as it was the first time received pronunciation (RP) was beaten as the most intelligent accent. In fact, this was beaten by the Yorkshire accent, which topped the list. Perhaps things are changing... who knows? The Brummies may beat someone for once!

Smith, H-J. & Workman, L. (2008). The effect of accent on perceived intelligence and attractiveness Paper presented to the Annual Conference of the British Psychological Society

Facebook Group & Subscriptions

Don't forget to join the facebook group here or to subscribe to the RSS feeds by clicking here and copying and pasting the URL in your application (Mail, Windows Live Mail etc.) for up to date posts.

Women are from Venus, and Men are from Mars

Well, there is some truth in this statement. OK, maybe not literally... but there is evidence that suggest men and women communicate differently. 

Lakoff (1973) proposed a theory called: "Women's Language" which suggested that the spoken language used by women used devices that are inferior and powerless in comparison to men. But oh boy was she wrong.

Although there was some truth in stating that there is a difference between the spoken language of men and women, much of the empirical support points the inferiority in the opposite direction. Holmes (1985) conducted a series of research that looked at two devices which Lakoff suggested women used that made their language inferior in comparison. These were hedges ("I think") and tag questions ("don't you?"). Holmes found that, lo and behold, most women used these devices to indicate certainty and to facilitate conversation. In contrast, most of the men used these devices with opposite intentions, suggesting that it is actually the "Man's Language" that is inferior. 

Women also think that men don't listen, and men think that women are controlling. True? Well, perhaps it's due to communication conflict. Women nod along more frequently to show that they understand the conversation, whereas men feel the need to do this less. This can then be incorrectly interpreted, and thus... leading both sexes thinking the opposite is a bad communicator. 

So remember... communication is one of the keys in a successful relationship - just don't interpret it the wrong way!

Back for Good

Just a big warm welcome back to all the readers, and an apology to the 2 month break. I was in a little accident, which can be read about by clicking here. Posting will resume, as my exam week disintegrates.

The New Facebook Rebellion '08

A new version of facebook has just been released, and there have been many who oppose the new look. But what is the real reason behind this rebellion? I investigate...

Facebook has become a worldwide craze, overtaking MySpace and Bebo, becoming the world's number one social networking site. However, they have begun to lose a vast number of their customer's satisfaction through the changes they have brought in recently. With things in the world going wrong all the time (e.g. recent depression in stock markets, banks going broke, war, shootings etc.), it's hard to find a positive aspect of life, and just when you thought you found facebook and became familiar & comfortable with it - there they go and change, putting YOU in an uncomfortable place again.

People like comfort, and hate change. Most change is hard to get used to, especially if you have customised all that you had, become accustomed to what you were given, and it gets moved all over the place. 

So it's probably not the content or the changes themselves that has resulted in a major dislike towards the new facebook - it's probably just them messing around with what you have created. 

Of course, there's always conformity as well. Facebook groups aid in the idea behind conformity, and as soon as you see a facebook group against the new facebook growing far quicker than the facebook group for the new facebook, you're more inclined to join the one against the new facebook to "fit in with the crowd" and thus feel like you're part of something "everyone else is". After this, your mentality can also change so that you actually "believe" that you dislike the new facebook even if at heart you don't.

Besides, the new facebook isn't all bad - at least it's become easier to post wall comments etc...

Top Story Today!

OK, so not much - but I have been incredibly busy at work so excuse the missing posts!

However, if you do like to read up on things that I write, here's a blog I have as an alternative (not so Psychology related mind you)

The Diary of Robert Kodama is a general blog that veered me off to Wordpress! So, if you're browsing, click the link and take time to have a read :D Blogger is still fantastic for this blog.

More updates soon...

The Game

The Game by Neil Strauss is a theory that potentially improves men's social skills, especially with the opposite sex. His book entitled "The Game" tells us many success stories of his encounter with women, and celebrities, and his follow-up: "Rules of the Game" tells you how you could do the same in 30 days.

A lot of it is to do with self improvement. In the book, each of the 30 days set out has specific aims and goals, looking at self-examining yourself and having a goal to reach and achieve by the end of the day. The goals look at a wide range of someone's personality (e.g. body language, mannerisms, anxiety etc.). By being the harshest critic - i.e. yourself, the idea is that if you can spot the mistake, you can change it. The result is that if you are able to do so, you will be able to gain more confidence in yourself, and thus in your social skills - but more importantly in Strauss' case, seduction technique. If you are able to be consistent in achieving your goals set out in the book, it suggests that it becomes part of your core personality traits - something that neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) suggests.

Strauss' theory, and NLP are both relatively new, and so lack in much empirical evidence. This can lead to one thinking that these ideas are just lucky for some and not for others - or perhaps as there's no scientific basis, it doesn't really work. However, Strauss stresses his high success rates and some of my mates even swear seeing it work. Is it luck, coincidence, or a scientific theory yet to be proven?

You can buy the following books on Amazon.co.uk

• The Game
• The Rules of the Game

Neil Strauss MySpace page

Mine's Better Than Yours!

There may be an underlying psychological mechanism behind the title. Have you ever thought that your item was better than someone else's, even though it was pretty much identical to others? Perhaps your new 3G iPhone is better than your friend's? Maybe your spag bol tasted better than someone else's? Or was it the new dress you just bought for a special occasion - looking better than hers???

Sound familiar?

This is called The Endowment Effect. An individual possesses a higher value or quality to an item now that it has come into their possession. "It is mine and it is better than yours!" First theorised by Richard Thaler, a lot of research has been carried out on this idea, but have usually thought it to be a human quality.

However, now a fair number of research suggests otherwise. A recent experiment involving chimpanzees (Jones & Brosnan, 2008) has shown that in fact, it supports an idea that this quality is evident in other species as well, more so in close primates. 

A criticism mind you of this experiment is the size of the sample - 33 chimps are hardly representative of the chimpanzee population, and as also as they are close primate relatives, it doesn't really show us that it's very evident in other species. 

Still, research such as these gives us an insight to the possibility of finding surprises under the tree, and opens up further research.

Jones, O.D., Brosnan, S.F. (2008). Law, Biology, and Property: A New Theory of the Endowment Effect. William & Mary Law Review, 49