THINKER'S ALMANAC - February 23

Why is one of the keys to a successful Ted Talk not just the content of the talk but also the talk’s time limit?

Subject:  Attention - TED Talk Time Limit

Event:  TED Founded, 1984

In 2005, Time magazine reported that research conducted by Microsoft Corporation concluded that the attention span of the average individual dropped from 12 seconds in 2000 to 8 seconds in 2005. Time also noted that the attention span of a goldfish is 9 seconds(1).

A bit more optimistic view of the human attention span can be found at TED conferences, where the rule is no presentation may exceed 18-minutes.  It’s hard to argue with the success of TED Talks; they are streamed more than 2 million times per day.

TED (Technology, Entertainment, and Design) was created by Richard Saul Wurman, who hosted the first TED conference in Monterey, California, on this day, Thursday, February 23, 1984.  Attendees paid $475 to watch a variety of 18-minute presentations.  In 2009, TED began to depart from its once a year model by granting licenses to third parties for community-level TEDx events.  The TED.com website was launched in 2006, and today there are TED events in more than 130 countries.

As TED curator Chris Anderson explains, the time limit is no accident; instead, it is a purposeful standard that helps both the speaker communicate clearly and the audience learn more efficiently:

It is long enough to be serious and short enough to hold people’s attention. It turns out that this length also works incredibly well online. It’s the length of a coffee break. So, you watch a great talk, and forward the link to two or three people. It can go viral, very easily. The 18-minute length also works much like the way Twitter forces people to be disciplined in what they write. By forcing speakers who are used to going on for 45 minutes to bring it down to 18, you get them to really think about what they want to say. What is the key point they want to communicate? It has a clarifying effect. It brings discipline. 

Communication coach Carmine Gallo explains the logic of the 18-minute time rule based on the physiology of the brain:

The 18-minute rule also works because the brain is an energy hog. The average adult human brain only weighs about three pounds, but it consumes an inordinate amount of glucose, oxygen, and blood flow. As the brain takes in new information and is forced to process it, millions of neurons are firing at once, burning energy and leading to fatigue and exhaustion. (2)

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What is the rationale behind the 18-minute time limit for TED Talks?

Challenge - Under 18 But Not Minor:  Some of the most effective and memorable speeches in history come in under the 18-minute rule.  For example, Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, which he gave at the March on Washington on August 28, 1963, was 17 minutes long.  Speaking at a normal pace, the average 18-minute speech would be approximately 2,500 words.  Do some research on great speeches, and find one that you like that is under 2,500 words.  Explain the rhetorical context of the speech and, besides the fact that it is less than 18-minutes long, explain why you feel it is effective.

ALSO ON THIS DAY:

February 23, 2011:  On this day an important study on language was published. More specifically, the study revealed the power of metaphors to persuade.  In the study, participants were shown two different metaphors describing the same situation:

Crime is a beast ravaging the city.

Crime is a virus ravaging the city.

People who read the “beast” metaphor were more likely to suggest law enforcement-based solutions, such as more police or longer jail sentences.  In contrast, people who read the “virus” metaphor were more likely to suggest education initiatives or economic policy changes. Clearly metaphors subtly influence our thinking, bringing to mind different associations.  When we think of a “beast,” for example, images related to brute force and cages come to mind.  In contrast, when we think of a “virus,” images related to antidotes and prevention come to mind. (3).

Sources:

1-McSpadden, Kevin. “You Now Have a Shorter Attention Span Than a Goldfish” Time.com 14 May 2015.  

2-Gallo, Carmine. “The Science Behind TED's 18-Minute Rule.”  Linkedin.com 13 March, 2014.

3-Thibodeau, Paul H. and Lera Boroditsky. “Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning.” Feb. 2011. PLoS ONE 6(2): e16782.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - January 27

What one word will go with each of the following words to form a compound word: “flower,”  “friend,” “scout”?

Subject: Creativity - Remote Associates Test

Event:  Birthday of Sarnoff Andrei Mednick, 1928

 

Look at these three words:  DREAM, BREAK, LIGHT.

Does a fourth word come to your mind automatically, a word that is associated with each of the other three?

Psychologist Sarnoff A. Mednick, who was born on this day in 1928, sought to better understand creative thinking.  After interviewing scientists, architects, and mathematicians to identify their creative process, he noted that one key element of creativity is associations from memory. Being creative means being able to make associations and to connect ideas, especially ideas that aren't immediately obvious.

                                                                                     Image by Pexels from Pixabay 

Based on what he learned about creativity, Mednick created the Remote Associates Test (RAT) in the 1960s as a method of assessing creative thinking.  The test is made up of word puzzles where the solver must examine three words -- such as DREAM, BREAK, LIGHT -- and identify the single word that links all three: DAY -- as in “daydream,” “daybreak,” and “daylight.”

Some psychologists argue that the RAT is more a test of linguistic ability or problem solving than creativity; nevertheless, Mednick’s invention remains a popular instrument.  The RAT not only helps us ponder the relationship between memory and imagination, but it also meets the criteria of Albert Einstein’s definition of creativity:  “Creativity is intelligence having fun” (1).

Try the following examples, which range from very easy to very hard:

1. dew, comb, bee 

2. preserve, ranger, tropical 

3. sense, courtesy, place 

4. flower, friend, scout 

5. sticker, maker, point 

6. right, cat, carbon 

7. home, sea, bed 

8. fence, card, master 

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What is the RAT, and what insights does it give us about creativity? 

 

Challenge - Mother Tongue Lashing:  What one word fits between the words ‘Jelly’ and ‘Bag’ to form two separate compound words? Jelly __________ Bag  The answer is the word “bean” as in jelly bean and beanbag.  This is a variation of the RAT called Mother Tongue Lashing. It takes advantage of the wealth of compound words and expressions in English. For each pair of words below, name a word that can follow the first word and precede the second one to complete a compound word or a familiar two-word phrase.

1. Life __________ Travel

2. Punk __________ Candy

3. Green _________ Space

4. Rest __________ Work

5. Word  __________ Book

6. Rock __________ Dust

7. Spelling __________ Sting

8. Night __________ House

Sources:  

1-Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011.

Answers to the RAT:  1 honey, 2 forest, 3 common, 4 girl, 5 match, 6 copy, 7 sick, 8 post

Answers to Mother Tongue Lashing:  Answers:  1 time, 2 rock, 3 back, 4 home, 5 play, 6 star, 7 bee, 8 light

THINKER'S ALMANAC - January 22

How did an encounter with a chicken lead to the death of the man who coined the phrase “Knowledge is power”?

Subject:  Induction - Knowledge is Power

Event: Birthday of Francis Bacon, 1561

 

Read not to contradict and confute; nor to believe and take for granted; nor to find talk and discourse; but to weigh and consider. -Francis Bacon

Today is the birthday of English philosopher, statesman, and scientist, Francis Bacon (1561-1626), known for the famous pronouncement, “Knowledge is power.”  In science, Bacon challenged the established deductive method of thinking, which was based on the classical writings of Aristotle and Plato.  Unlike deduction, which is based on the syllogism, Bacon’s inductive method is based on empirical evidence.  In Bacon’s method, the five senses become the basis of how we make sense of our world, by observation, data gathering, analysis, and experimentation.

                                                                    Image by Pexels from Pixabay 

In 1620, Bacon published The New Instrument (Novum Organum Scientiarum), where he made his famous claim “knowledge is power.”  As historian Yuval Noah Harari explains in his book Sapiens, Bacon’s genius was his pioneering work in connecting science with technology.  Today we take this connection for granted, but in the 17th century, there was a divide between scientific theory and technology.  Bacon argued that the true test of knowledge wasn’t just whether or not it was true; instead, the true test was its utility.  Bacon envisioned a future where science and technology would be forged to empower humankind (1).

While Bacon is known today for the development of the scientific method, his devotion to that method might have also led to his own demise.  The story goes that one snowy day in 1626 Bacon was traveling with a friend in his carriage.  The two men began arguing about Bacon’s recent hypothesis that fresh meat could be preserved if frozen.  Seeing an opportunity to do some on-the-spot experimentation, Bacon stopped his carriage and purchased a chicken from a peasant woman. After having the woman gut the chicken, Bacon proceeded to pack snow into the chicken’s carcass. He then put the chicken in a bag, packed more snow around the outside of its body, and buried it.  Unfortunately, in the process of gathering his empirical evidence, Bacon caught a severe chill, which led to his death by pneumonia on April 9, 1626.

In addition to his important work in science, Bacon is also known today for his writing, principally the English essay. Influenced by Montaigne, the French writer who pioneered the essay, Bacon adopted and popularized the form in English as a method for exploring ideas in writing.

Bacon wrote on a wide range of topics but preceded his essays’ titles with the preposition “of,” as in  Of Truth, Of Death, Of Revenge, Of Love, Of Boldness, Of Ambition.  His essays are eminently quotable, for Bacon crafted his sentences carefully, making each one a profound package of pithiness — you might go so far as to call them “Bacon bits.”  As Bacon explained in his own words, aphorisms, those concise statements of general truth, were essential to his thinking:

Aphorisms, except they should be ridiculous, cannot be made but of the pith and heart of sciences; for discourse of illustration is cut off; recitals of examples are cut off; discourse of connection and order is cut off; descriptions of practice are cut off. So there remaineth nothing to fill the aphorisms but some good quantity of observation; and therefore no man can suffice, nor in reason will attempt, to write aphorisms, but he that is sound and grounded (2).

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason:  What were Bacon’s contributions to both the world of science and of writing?

Challenge - Everything is Better with Bacon:  Just one of Bacon’s aphorisms is like an essay in itself.  For example, here’s what he said about rhetoric:  “The duty and office of rhetoric is to apply reason to imagination for the better moving of the will.”  Research some of Bacon’s aphorisms.  Select one that you find interesting.  Quote it, and write an explanation of why it intrigues you.

 

Sources:  

1-Harari, Yuval N. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. New York: Harper, 2015.

2-Bacon, Francis.  The Advancement of Learning. 1605. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5500/5500-h/5500-h.htm

THINKER'S ALMANAC - December 30

Subject:  Questions - Kipling’s Six Honest Serving Men

Event:  Birthday of British writer Rudyard Kipling (1865)

 

A question that sometimes drives me hazy: am I or are the others crazy? -Albert Einstein

Today is the birthday of Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936), England’s master storyteller and poet.  Kipling was British, but he lived for many years in India where he was born.  Known especially for his short stories and his popular work of fiction The Jungle Book (1894), Kipling was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1907 when he was just 42 years old.  He was the first English language writer to win the prize, and he was also the youngest ever to win the prize.

In a poem that accompanied one of his stories -- “The Elephant’s Child” -- Kipling includes a poem that personifies the six key interrogative pronouns, the words we use to begin questions:

I keep six honest serving-men

(They taught me all I knew);

Their names are What and Why and When

And How and Where and Who. (1)

Making Kipling’s “six honest serving-men” a part of your learning team is one of the best metacognitive strategies there is.  Metacognition is the ability to critically analyze and monitor your own thinking, and one excellent way to do this is to ask questions as you read or listen to a lecture.

In a 1991 study, ninth-grade students listened to a lecture.  A quarter of the students reviewed their notes on the lecture by themselves.  Another quarter of the students discussed the content of the lectures in small groups.  The final two quarters of students were taught self-questioning strategies, and then were asked to generate and answer questions individually during and after the lecture, or they were asked to generate and answer questions and then discuss their questions and answers with a small group.   All subjects in the study were tested immediately after the lecture and then tested again ten days later. 

Based on the study’s results, the students who employed self-questioning as a part of their study scored significantly higher than students who merely reviewed notes or discussed the contents of the lecture (2).

Challenge:  Six Starts for Self-Questioning:  Do some research on strategies for self-questioning.  Then, write a short public service announcement aimed at students, explaining what self-questioning is, how it can be done, and why it is an effective method of learning.

Sources: 

1-Poetry Foundation.  “Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936).

2-King, Alison. “Improving lecture comprehension: Effects of a metacognitive strategy.” Applied Cognitive Psychology July/August 1991, Volume 5, Issue 4.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - December 27

Subject: Creativity - Pasteur’s “Prepared Mind”

Event:  Birthday of French scientist Louis Pasteur, 1822

 

Science knows no country, because knowledge belongs to humanity, and is the torch which illuminates the world. -Louis Pasteur

More than probably any person who ever lived, the French scientist Louis Pasteur - who was born on this day in 1822 - revealed the power of science as a tool for mastering nature.

Today we take for granted that germs attack the human body from outside.  It was Pasteur who opened the world’s mind to seeing how microorganisms or “germs” can lead to disease.  He also did pioneering work in vaccines, being the first to use weakened viruses to develop cures for anthrax and rabies.  Part of his motivation for studying infections and vaccinations was the fact that three of his five children died of typhoid.  He also invented the process that bears his name - pasteurization, where liquids are heated to kill harmful germs (1).

In an 1854 lecture, Pasteur made a remark that has inspired generations of scientists who have followed in his footsteps:   “In the fields of observation chance favors only the prepared mind.”  Certainly imagination and creativity have an important role to play in invention and discovery.  As Einstein said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge.”  However, we might say based on Pasteur’s remark that this is a false dichotomy because unless there is a healthy balance between imagination and knowledge, the “prepared mind” will have little chance of capitalizing on serendipity.

As examples of prepared minds capitalizing on chance, read the following three anecdotes of chemists who were ready when serendipity smiled on them:

1. One evening the Russian chemist Constantin Fahlburg was working late in his lab on derivatives of coal tar.  Typical of a scientist immersed in his work, Fahlburg almost forgot about his supper.  Leaving the lab in a rush without washing his hands, he sat down to eat.  Breaking a piece of bread and putting it to his lips, he tasted something sweet. He soon realized that by chance he had discovered something as sweet as sugar and luckily it did not contain any poisonous substances.  He later marketed the world’s first artificial sweetener: Saccharin.

2. In 1827, an English chemist named John Walker was mixing a pot of antimony sulfide and potassium chlorate.  When he noticed a dried lump of the mixture on his mixing stick, he attempted to scrape it off; at that point the mixture ignited.  By chance, Walker had just created the world’s first strikeable match.

3. One day in 1903 when he was working in his lab, French chemist and artist Edouard Benedictus dropped a glass flask.  Although the glass shattered, Benedictus noticed that the glass shards held together.  Inquiring further, he realized that the glass had previously been filled with cellulose nitrate, a liquid plastic that Benedictus used in his art deco projects.  Apparently, when the liquid evaporated, it left a thin film of plastic on the glass that kept the shards of glass from falling apart. As an additional stroke of luck, Benedictus had recently read a newspaper article about the dangers of broken glass in automobile accidents.  Next, Benedictus went to work to produce what would become what we know today as shatterproof, safety glass.

Challenge - Serendipity Strikes:  Research other inventions that have resulted from the combination of chance events and prepared minds.  What is one example that you find particularly interesting?

Sources:

1-Alexander Hammond. Louis Pasteur: "The Father of Microbiology" Who Pioneered Vaccine Science. Foundation for Economic Education 2 June 2019.

2-Ward, Alvin. “24 Unintended Scientific Discoveries.” Mental Floss 2 May 2015.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - December 23

Subject: Default Effect - Organ Donation

Event: First organ transplant, 1954

If you want to encourage some activity, make it easy. -Richard Thaler

On this day in 1954, the first successful organ transplant operation was performed; it was a kidney transplant.  Today advances in medical technology have made transplant operations routine, including transplants of the heart, the liver, and the lungs.  Unfortunately, the supply of healthy organs for donation is much lower than the demand, and many people die each year before they can acquire a needed organ.

One possible solution to the problem can be found by examining how states acquire consent from potential donors.  Most people are familiar with checking a box to become an organ donor.  This is usually offered to people when they renew their driver’s license.  This method of signing up donors is called “explicit consent”: in order to become a donor, a person must take a specific action.  The problem here is that although roughly 97% of people support organ donation, only 43% take the explicit step of checking the box to sign up.  

An alternative method for signing up donors is called “presumed consent”: all citizens would be automatically signed up as organ donors; however, each would have the choice of opting out by checking a box when renewing their driver’s license.

Based on research by Eric Johnson and Dan Goldstein in 2003, participants were offered the opportunity to become organ donors in both the explicit consent condition and the presumed consent condition. Under the explicit consent condition, only 42% opted in.  In contrast, under the presumed consent condition, where participants had to opt out, 82% agreed to become donors.

More than just an issue related to organ donation, explicit and presumed consent have something to teach us about the default effect, our human tendency to accept default options.  We are basically indecisive individuals, and most often select the easiest option.  For example, many people own an iPhone, but few take the time and effort to customize their phone’s settings; it’s much easier to just stay with the default options.

Economist Richard Thaler and law professor Cass Sunstein wrote a book analyzing how governments can use the default effect to guide the choices of citizens while at the same time not restricting their freedom.  The term they use is “nudge,” which also happens to be the title of their book.  An example of the difference a nudge can make comes from two European countries: Germany and Austria.  In Germany, organ donation is an opt-in program that requires explicit consent; as a result, only 12% of citizens sign up.  In Austria, however, citizens must opt out because their program is based on presumed consent; in Austria, 99% of citizens are organ donors.

Of course, we should not always assume that governments will nudge their citizens towards the most benevolent options.  Therefore, we should be more alert when we are making decisions.  Consider not just what the default option is, but also why it might be the default option.  It’s more cognitive taxing to examine options besides just the default, but often it allows us to expand our perspective and to take advantage of opportunities we wouldn’t have considered otherwise.

 

Challenge - Wink, Wink, Nudge, Nudge:  The example of how Australia nudges its citizens to become organ donors is just one example of how a government might influence its citizens towards positive action.  Do some research on nudges.  Write a paragraph defining the term for a reader who is unfamiliar with it and give a concrete example to illustrate it.

Sources:

1-Thaler, Richard H. and Cass R. Sunstein.  Nudge:  Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New York:  Penguin Books, 2008.

THINKER'S ALMANAC - November 23

How can an Ivy League football game played in 1951 help us to see the world more clearly?

Subject: Motivated Perception and Reasoning - Ivy League Football

Event:  Dartmouth and Princeton Football Game, 1951

We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are. -Anaïs Nin

On this day in 1951, two Ivy League teams, Princeton and Dartmouth, played a football game in Princeton, New Jersey.  The game was roughly played; Princeton’s star tailback left the game in the second quarter with a broken nose, and at the end of the third quarter, a Dartmouth player broke his leg.  Princeton prevailed.

                                                                Image by David Mark from Pixabay 

If not for two psychologists, one from Princeton -- Hadley Cantril, and another from Dartmouth -- Albert Hastorf, the game might have been just another forgotten football game.  What made it memorable, however, was a follow-up study published by the two psychologists.  

About one week after the game, Hastorf and Cantril asked students from both schools to give their assessment of the game.  Their responses depended on their school:  Princeton students overwhelmingly blamed Dartmouth for the rough play while Dartmouth students blamed Princeton.

Hastorf and Cantril then had all students watch a film of the game and keep track of infractions by players on both teams as if they were a referee.  The results showed both groups of students were unable to see the game dispassionately or objectively; the Princeton students still blamed Dartmouth and the Dartmouth students still blamed Princeton.  Although both groups of students watched the same film, both groups seemed to be watching an entirely different game.  

Hastorf and Cantril published their case study entitled “They Saw a Game” in 1954.  It established the concept of motivated perception; in short, we don’t always see reality; instead, we see what we want to see.  This concept is similar to motivated reasoning, where instead of coming to conclusions based on evidence, we interpret the evidence in a way that fits our preconceived beliefs.  In other words, we don’t always believe the truth; instead, we believe what we want to believe (1).

In her 2021 book The Scout Mindset, Julia Galef warns against the dangers of self-deception and of motivated reasoning. Like the college students in 1951, we sometimes employ emotionally-biased reasoning to produce the verdict we want to be true in favor of the actual truth. We cherry-pick evidence that supports our side, and we rationalize to make a case sound better than it actually is.  Galef calls motivated reasoning the soldier mindset and argues that it is an unconscious cognitive bias that needs to be exposed and rooted out.  Galef also prescribes a more sound, reasonable approach called the scout mindset.  Instead of seeing what we want to see or being defensive, we need to seek first to understand.  We should be skeptical of our own conclusions and value the pursuit of truth over our fears of being right or wrong.  The pursuit of the scout mindset means testing your own claims and understanding that changing your mind is not a sign of weakness (2).

One powerful way to understand motivated reasoning is to see it through the eyes of a sports fan.  Imagine you are watching a basketball game, a game where your favorite team is competing for a championship against a longtime rival.  Imagine your reaction when your team is charged with a foul that results in points being taken off the scoreboard.  What would be your honest reaction?  Would your emotions motivate you to find immediate fault with the referee's call and begin to construct rationalizations for why the call was wrong?  Or would you calmly accept the call and defer to the referee’s indifferent judgment?  Most honest fans -- short for “fanatics” -- will admit that their emotional 

investment in their team prejudices them and blinds them to objective judgment.  In addition, they are rarely even consciously aware of their own bias. To further understand the impact of motivated reasoning, compare the reaction you have when your team is called for a foul versus when your team’s opponent is called for a foul?  In the latter case, do you spend any time or emotional energy scrutinizing the fairness or justice of such a decision?

Recall, Retrieve, Recite, Ruminate, Reflect, Reason: What is the difference between the soldier mindset and the scout mindset, and which mindset was more prominent in the 1951 football study?

Challenge -  Scouts and Soldiers:  Write a public service announcement that explains the thinking behind the scout mindset versus the soldier mindset.  Try to persuade your audience that the scout mindset is preferable and a possible solution to the political polarization that is plaguing our country.

Sources:

1-Resnick, Brian. “How desire can warp our view of the world.” Vox.com 8 Aug. 2019.

2-Galef, Julia.  The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don’t.  New York:  Portfolio/Penguin, 2021.