Placeholder Image

Subtitles section Play video

  • The following content is provided under a Creative

  • Commons license.

  • Your support will help MIT OpenCourseWare continue to

  • offer high quality educational resources for free.

  • To make a donation or view additional materials from

  • hundreds of MIT courses, visit MIT OpenCourseWare at

  • ocw.mit.edu.

  • PROFESSOR: Good afternoon.

  • Congratulations for braving it through what's now become a

  • weekly snow disaster.

  • This week's maybe three of them or something.

  • My name's John Gabrieli.

  • This is Introductory to Psychology, 9.00.

  • This is a course about you.

  • The entire course is what do we understand in a scientific

  • way about human nature--

  • how people's minds work, how people's brains work that

  • supports their mind.

  • This entire course is about what's a scientific way to

  • understanding how people feel, think, and act in the world.

  • And so we're trying to say that we constantly think you

  • must in your everyday life think about why do you have

  • your preferences, your desires?

  • What's easy for you?

  • What's hard for you?

  • What's delightful for you?

  • Why do other people behave the way they do?

  • How do they think?

  • How do they feel?

  • And so there's a lot of realms of this that are tough to get

  • to by science.

  • But what we're going to focus on this semester is where the

  • scientific approach has shed light in the way that we used

  • to think about experiments and evidence,

  • about how humans tick.

  • And as we go through this semester, we'll talk about the

  • brain, we'll talk a fair bit about chapters from this book,

  • The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat, from Oliver Sacks.

  • It was a bestseller even when it wasn't [? a ScienceWare ?]

  • course.

  • It's a great book.

  • You'll enjoy it.

  • Short, really fun chapters.

  • We'll talk about how we perceive the world; how we

  • see; especially, a little bit, how we hear; how we think; how

  • we feel; personality; how we differ from one to the other;

  • and what we're sort of like; and how we behave in the

  • world; development from childhood and infancy through

  • adolescence, through young adulthood, where you are

  • mostly, through getting older, where I am; social

  • interaction, how we behave in groups and think about other

  • people; and variation in the mental health or

  • psychopathology.

  • And increasingly, we understand that there's a huge

  • number of people who, at some moment in their life or

  • another, struggle with some aspect of mental health.

  • And then we'll focus a lot on, not only the psychological

  • aspects of what we study in terms of behavior, but also

  • the brain basis of that, and think a little bit about to

  • what extent the mind is what the brain does, to what extent

  • the mind is what the brain does.

  • And so for every dimension of being a human being that we'll

  • talk about, we'll also talk about what we understand

  • currently from the neurological and

  • neuroscientific literature about how the human brain

  • supports and contributes to different

  • aspects of being a person.

  • OK.

  • So everybody who works in a certain field thinks that

  • their field is really, really, really special, right?

  • So here's why psychology is really,

  • really, really special.

  • So it's really, really special, I think, most of all,

  • because every endeavor that we undertake at a university or

  • in society as a whole--

  • it's about people, right, except for when we think about

  • the rest of nature.

  • But people study biology, chemistry, and physics.

  • And they think, right, that the sun orbits the earth for

  • some period of time.

  • And then they think it's the other way

  • around currently, right?

  • OK, so people come up with these conclusions.

  • Even though we're trying to understand nature, it's people

  • who make certain investments in economics or behave in a

  • certain way or vote in a certain way.

  • It's people who make music and appreciate music, make art and

  • appreciate art, read and write literature, right?

  • So in all these dimensions, there's something very

  • fundamental about what it is about the human mind that

  • gives birth to these areas of inquiry and how those areas,

  • domains of human experience, are enacted.

  • So my only goal today is to try to convince you in a

  • number of different ways that we're not simple video camera

  • in our minds between our ears, recording the world in some

  • objective, simple way, that even the simplest, most

  • obvious things are interpretations of the world

  • around us at many different levels of thought and feeling

  • and perception.

  • And then our minds, the way our minds are constructed,

  • determines the world that we experience, that we see, that

  • we act upon.

  • And even very simple things that we think are pretty

  • objective and simple, right in front of our eyes, are

  • determined by inferences and deductions that our mind

  • makes, weighing sources of evidence in the world and

  • coming to conclusions about what's around us, what we

  • hear, what we see, and how we think.

  • So let's start with seeing.

  • If your vision is reasonable, we say we see something, we

  • believe it, right?

  • So let's start with something very simple--

  • these lines.

  • So one of the tough things about psychology is ever since

  • the Internet came into existence, people know every

  • cool thing there is to know, right?

  • OK.

  • I can tell you when I began teaching, people said, oh my

  • gosh, I've never seen such a thing.

  • It's unbelievable!

  • And then now, it's like two thirds of the class is like,

  • yeah, I've got that on my computer at home.

  • We did that in third grade or whatever.

  • So all I'm saying is enjoy the ones you haven't seen before,

  • don't ruin it for your neighbors today, because it's

  • harder and harder to surprise the world

  • in a nice way, right?

  • OK, but let's look at these lines for a moment here.

  • And perhaps you'll have the sense, and maybe-- is it

  • glaring up there, sir?

  • Let's see.

  • OK, is that better?

  • OK.

  • Maybe not.

  • So you might have the sense that this line is a different

  • length than this line.

  • And this might be somewhere intermediate, right?

  • Now you know, because of psychology, it's all a trick.

  • But what's simpler than the length of a line?

  • What's more objective in some sense than

  • the length of a line?

  • But if we look at the actual lengths, they're

  • all literally identical.

  • But that center part looks different.

  • So what does it mean for it to look different?

  • It means our minds are determining as simple a thing

  • as how long a line is depending on the other

  • information surrounding it.

  • It's an interpretation in context.

  • If we're simply looking, the lines will look the same.

  • Let's try another one.

  • It's remarkable that those two lines are identical in length.

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: OK, all right.

  • It's OK to test the limits of the credibility of the

  • audience, right?

  • All right.

  • Yeah.

  • Of course, if our visual system were ludicrously off,

  • we'd be constantly walking into walls and falling out

  • windows and things like that, right, if we were

  • misestimating at that length.

  • So the idea where we have visual illusions-- and I'll

  • show you some more that I think you'll be impressed by--

  • it's not that our visual system is messed up or that

  • psychologists think it's hilarious to trick us.

  • It's that lots of things our visual system is a brilliant

  • at, but it's brilliant by having certain laws or

  • principles that it follows.

  • And we can show this following those principles by seeing

  • that when we mess with the typical circumstances, those

  • principles calculate the wrong answer.

  • So here's another one.

  • So, to most people, which line looks bigger, the one in the

  • middle or the one on the side?

  • I know you know it's all a trick, right?

  • OK.

  • What could be more obvious than that this is longer?

  • It's just a simple line, but if we draw red lines on top of

  • it then move them over here, they're dead identical.

  • The central circle--

  • does one of them, the middle circle, look

  • larger than the other?

  • Now you already know, intellectually, that it will

  • turn out those two circles in the middle will be the same.

  • But you have to convince yourself that it still looks

  • like they're different.

  • Here there in red.

  • Here they are next to each other.

  • They're identical.

  • Again, this is evidence that, even for a simple thing like

  • the size of a circle, your mind is making inferences.

  • And there are principles and laws that it's following that

  • determine what it is you think that you see.

  • Here is two monsters chasing each other.

  • But in fact, they're identical in size.

  • The perspective cues make the more distant

  • one look much bigger.

  • This is from Ted Adelson.

  • This is a beautiful demonstration of an illusion.

  • Ted Adelson's in the psychology department.

  • There's a letter A here.

  • And believe it or not, there's a letter B there.

  • Let's see if this looks any better when it goes like this.

  • It doesn't.

  • All right.

  • So one of the important things about illusions,

  • demonstrations in this class-- and you will learn this as we

  • go along-- is occasionally they fail, and we come back

  • and discover what the lesson of that is.

  • So I'm just telling you it's showing you on my

  • monitor much brighter.

  • It always has before.

  • We'll adjust that.

  • So I'm going to skip this, but I'll show you another time,

  • because it's so good.

  • And I'm going to feel bad about this.

  • OK.

  • Now, let's see.

  • This'll work.

  • All the same shade of grey, right?

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: Did that work reasonably from where you sat?

  • We'll try a few more.

  • Maybe.

  • For some reason, my connection's

  • always like this, sorry.

  • Does that one look lighter than that one that way?

  • Yeah.

  • Now they look radically different, right?

  • It's the same grey constantly.

  • But again, the context is hugely determining how to

  • bright you see that grey.

  • There it is.

  • Two boxes equal grey.

  • So things as simple as how bright something is or how

  • long something is depend on interpretation.

  • Here's an illusion from Roger Shepard.

  • It's kind of great.

  • So here's two kind of different

  • looking tables, right?

  • But they're not that different.

  • And watch.

  • There goes one tabletop.

  • You're not impressed that those are identical tables?

  • OK.

  • Want me to do it again?

  • That's the identical tabletop.

  • To me, the one on the left looks pretty rectangular and

  • the one on the right looks pretty square-ish.

  • You're not easy to impress, are you?

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: You see that those two bars are moving together

  • at the same time.

  • Does it look like they're little steps?

  • It'll show you.

  • All right, fine.

  • It's just like that, but now you add those bars.

  • Does it look like little steps?

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: One more of this kind.

  • This is kind of fun.

  • You see the way that the mask is turning?

  • It always looks like it's towards you, even though I'm--

  • one of the rotations-- it's because of the way you're

  • interpreting the light is influencing how you

  • interpreting what's--

  • OK.

  • So that's simply a consequence, as far as people

  • understand that, that the source of the illumination is

  • not where you're used to, so you're misinterpreting where

  • the illumination is coming from for the depth of the

  • face, what's front and what's back, whether the nose is

  • sticking in or sticking out.

  • OK.

  • So again, the point in these illusions is, even for very

  • simple things our, minds make certain assumptions about how

  • we interpret the world.

  • And that drives everything that we see and how we act

  • upon what we see.

  • So at a slightly higher or more conceptual

  • level, I need your help.

  • Now, there's lots of these things we'll do this semester

  • where you get to participate.

  • The fun thing about--

  • I said this course was about you-- when you could have

  • thought that was a bit rhetorical, it's not.

  • It's truly about you.

  • So you get to be your own laboratory.

  • We get to share a laboratory sitting here.

  • And what I'm going to do is ask for you to participate.

  • You don't have to do any of these things sitting at your

  • seat, but I think it's usually fun to do them.

  • So what's going to happen is I'm going

  • to show you a drawing.

  • If the people to my left--

  • so about in the middle, but you can decide for yourself--

  • about this way, let's have you be Group A if you're willing

  • to be that way.

  • All right.

  • Because of that, I can't call you--

  • I was going to call you guys Group B, but I already see

  • that's getting me in trouble.

  • So we'll call it Group B, but that really means equals A.

  • But I'll just call it B, OK?

  • So A and B, OK?

  • So what I need is Group B--

  • B for best, A for awesome, OK.

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: --Group B to close your eyes for a moment.

  • Group B, if you want to have fun with this, close your eyes

  • for a moment.

  • Group A, you're gonna see some instructions, and read them

  • silently to yourself.

  • And then I'll ask you a question about the picture.

  • OK, Group A, you're now reading.

  • Group B has your eyes closed.

  • So read the instructions silently to yourself.

  • OK?

  • Now Group A, close your eyes.

  • Everybody has their eyes closed for a moment.

  • Everybody has their eyes closed.

  • Now Group B, look at your instructions.

  • So A has their eyes closed, B is reading instructions.

  • OK?

  • Everybody's eyes are open now.

  • Everybody's eyes are open.

  • Here's your picture.

  • Take it in and I'm going to ask you a few

  • questions about it.

  • Look at it for a moment and inspect it.

  • OK, here we go, ready?

  • So just out loud--

  • was there an automobile in the picture?

  • AUDIENCE: No.

  • PROFESSOR: OK.

  • See, this is a smart class.

  • We're gonna have a--

  • Was there a man in the picture?

  • AUDIENCE: Yes.

  • PROFESSOR: Was there a woman in the picture?

  • AUDIENCE: Yes.

  • AUDIENCE: No.

  • PROFESSOR: OK.

  • This side again, woman in the picture?

  • AUDIENCE: No.

  • PROFESSOR: All right, all right.

  • OK, a child?

  • AUDIENCE: No.

  • PROFESSOR: An animal?

  • AUDIENCE: No.

  • AUDIENCE: Yes.

  • PROFESSOR: Ah.

  • OK.

  • And now it gets a little wild.

  • OK?

  • A whip?

  • AUDIENCE: Yes.

  • PROFESSOR: OK.

  • A sword?

  • AUDIENCE: Yes.

  • PROFESSOR: All right, a man's hat?

  • AUDIENCE: Yes.

  • PROFESSOR: A ball?

  • AUDIENCE: Yes.

  • AUDIENCE: No.

  • PROFESSOR: A fish?

  • AUDIENCE: Yes.

  • PROFESSOR: All right, so there's disagreement.

  • And that's--

  • we're a democracy, right?

  • So all these things are big setups, right?

  • So here's what happened.

  • Group A was told they were gonna look at a picture of a

  • trained seal act.

  • And Group B got the identical instructions, but they were

  • told you're gonna look at a costume ball.

  • So you had an expectation of what you were going to see.

  • That expectation drives your interpretation of the very

  • thing you see next, which is this picture.

  • OK?

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • [CHATTER]

  • PROFESSOR: OK, is that all right?

  • All right.

  • And this is just for fun, right?

  • It's a set up.

  • You're participating nicely.

  • But in the world, when groups that are arguing with each

  • other about things like peace settlements, read a document,

  • or make a statement, how much do you think the perspective

  • they start with guides the interpretation of what they

  • read or what they hear?

  • Because you didn't have big stakes in this.

  • You weren't going, I believe in fish and if I don't see a

  • fish, I know things aren't just and my group will be not

  • treated fairly.

  • You're not emotionally invested in, probably, whether

  • there was a fish present.

  • So your interpretation, your beliefs guide tremendously

  • what you think you see and how you interpret the situation--

  • for complicated things or even easy things

  • like lines or squares.

  • And here's another kind of an example where you would

  • interpret that as a B for "baker" or

  • 13 if it's in numbers.

  • Again, the context is driving a lot of the interpretation.

  • OK.

  • Now this is one of those examples that, again, when--

  • some number of years ago, it was a huge hit.

  • And now, mostly people say, can't you come up with

  • something better that we haven't

  • all seen on the internet?

  • So if you know this, don't ruin it for the other

  • individuals.

  • But what I need is a few volunteers--

  • you'll be facing me this way-- who are

  • willing to count something.

  • And it's MIT, we're pretty good at counting.

  • So what's the message of that?

  • The message is--

  • we've talked about what we perceive, what we see by

  • expectations in context.

  • But it's also we have very limited what psychologists

  • call attentional resources.

  • We can pay attention to a limited number

  • of things at a time.

  • And even when those things can be right in front of us, if

  • our attention is focused or occupied by something else,

  • like counting the passes in a difficult scene--

  • it wouldn't work if there was one or two passes only,

  • because you would notice it.

  • But when your mind is focused on identifying all the passes

  • among the players-- and the white shirts are moving,

  • they're weaving with the other players and so on--

  • then your attention is absorbed by that, and some of

  • it is not left over to notice what's right in front of you.

  • And we'll talk more about that.

  • But it's a huge thing with humans that we can pay

  • attention pretty well, on average, to a thing at a time

  • under many circumstances.

  • And the other things escape us completely, even if they're

  • obviously present if we were looking at them or paying

  • attention to them.

  • So here's another example of how our minds make our world--

  • what we see and what we don't see, what we pay attention to

  • and what we don't pay attention to.

  • And that's something to do with how we hear.

  • OK, so I'm going to replay this.

  • So listen to what the guy is saying.

  • Take a look, and just tell he--

  • he's saying some letters, OK, just not a word.

  • What is it?

  • OK, most people think he's saying "da." "Da da, da da, da

  • da." Now let's try that again.

  • I'm going to turn off the sound and I'm going to

  • run the same film.

  • What does his mouth look like it's saying?

  • "Ga ga." OK?

  • But now we'll do one more thing, which is turn the sound

  • back on, have you close your eyes, and listen

  • to what he's saying.

  • What's he saying?

  • AUDIENCE: "Ba."

  • PROFESSOR: Yeah.

  • So it doesn't work for everybody every time.

  • But the basic idea is most people think they hear the

  • word "da" coming from the speaker.

  • And in fact, in their mind they do because that's how

  • they interpret what they're hearing.

  • But in reality, the film clip is a film clip of the person

  • saying "ba ba ba." And then an audio recording of the person

  • saying "ga ga ga." Your mind intertwines across modalities

  • what you hear and what you see, integrates them in some

  • way below your level of consciousness.

  • You're not thinking about it.

  • And you come up with a different interpretation of

  • what you hear.

  • Right?

  • So what you see would be this one thing.

  • What you hear is another thing.

  • When your eyes are open and your ears are open, they meld

  • together and produce something--

  • a third thing that's entirely different.

  • Again, your mind interpreted what you hear, not your ear

  • interpreting what you hear, in a simple sense.

  • OK.

  • How about things that we know?

  • So let's think about this.

  • If somebody were to ask you which is farther east, closer

  • to the Atlantic--

  • San Diego, California, or Reno, Nevada?

  • Who likes San Diego as being farther east?

  • A few hands.

  • Who likes Reno as being farther east?

  • OK.

  • So, here's the mental map most people have-- the mental map--

  • which is we know California's right next to the ocean with

  • Arnold Schwarzenegger protecting us on that side of

  • the country, right?

  • And then Nevada's a little bit more towards Boston, right?

  • OK.

  • That's a mental map that most people have.

  • And that's how the hands went up.

  • This is the actual map.

  • And the only actual map you've ever seen, ever-- on a globe,

  • on a map, anything.

  • Because California takes a big turn on the south, San Diego's

  • further east than Reno.

  • Why do we imagine, and most people do, that Reno is

  • further east, when you've never seen a map or globe

  • that's shown you that?

  • Never ever, ever.

  • Yeah.

  • PROFESSOR: Because it's farther from the ocean,

  • because in our mind we go, California's way out there.

  • There's nothing--

  • Hawaii is the only one out there further west, right?

  • So our mind makes this answer despite that.

  • And that's what we think we might know.

  • Now, we might not be totally certain.

  • We might not bet the farm on that.

  • Which is farther north--

  • Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, or Rome, Italy?

  • So start to think-- how would you think about that?

  • It's not something you know.

  • Nobody memorizes it, right?

  • But how would you begin to think which is

  • probably more northern?

  • What's your first gut?

  • How many people like Philadelphia being more north?

  • How many people like Rome being more north?

  • There's kind of a mixture of hands.

  • The answer is that Rome is north of Philadelphia.

  • Mostly people will answer that Philadelphia is north.

  • Why they do that is they think the US and Europe, they're

  • both sort of above the equator, below Antarctica,

  • kind of a aligned, even historically, culturally.

  • So they think, well, Rome is pretty south in Europe.

  • And it is.

  • It's in Italy.

  • Philadelphia's reasonably north in the US.

  • It gets winters and all that kinds of stuff.

  • So a northern city in the US has got to be north of a

  • southern city in Europe.

  • But in fact, Europe is-- the whole continent is shifted up

  • compared to the US.

  • So you won't-- wait until get your mind around this.

  • Which is further north, Atlanta or Chicago?

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: All right, all right.

  • Sorry.

  • It's sort of a joke.

  • Because sometimes when you do this, people go like, wait a

  • minute, all my assumptions are off.

  • Like, where am I?

  • What's reality?

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: OK.

  • Here's one more-- two more.

  • Which is further north, Portland or Toronto?

  • Now you are already learning the lesson go opposite.

  • Whatever I thought, go opposite, right?

  • But why do you think most people will answer that

  • Toronto is further north?

  • Canada is up there, US is below it, but in fact--

  • that's the mental map in the colors.

  • But in fact, Portland in Oregon is

  • actually north of Toronto.

  • We'll do one last one.

  • Which is further west?

  • Which is further west, Miami, Florida-- which that's all the

  • way towards the Atlantic Ocean--

  • or Santiago, Chili-- which is towards the Pacific Ocean.

  • Further west.

  • So most people have a mental map that North America and

  • South America are kind of lined up like that.

  • And so you say well, Miami is further east and Santiago's

  • farther west.

  • But in fact, South America is fairly shifted compared to

  • North America.

  • And Santiago is actually more eastern or Miami is more

  • western, one relative to the other.

  • Because in our head, we kind of think, North and South

  • America-- they're kind of lined up even though we never

  • saw a global map like that.

  • So again, some of our knowledge guides how we think

  • about the world and what we believe we know.

  • So what's the point of this?

  • It's what used to be called telephone, right?

  • Their story keeps changing.

  • And it's hard to remember details in a story.

  • People remember a nugget, or what we call a gist in

  • psychology, a little point.

  • And second, what you take as a point is how you then tell the

  • next person, the way you interpret the story,

  • something like that.

  • Thanks very much, that was good.

  • [APPLAUSE]

  • PROFESSOR: Again, two things-- our memory for precise details

  • is surprisingly modest.

  • And how we interpret things matter changes things a lot.

  • So now, you had four brave students demonstrating some of

  • the limits and properties of memory.

  • So now, here's an exercise you can do in your own seat.

  • OK, you're just knowing yourself how you

  • did, but here we go.

  • I'm going to read you some words.

  • And then just give you-- don't have to write anything down.

  • If you write it down, it's no good.

  • And then I'm going to ask you on a recognition test, whether

  • you heard a word or not.

  • Ready?

  • So here's the list.

  • So just listen and then I'll test your memory

  • for it right after.

  • Here's the list.

  • Sour, candy, sugar, bitter, good, taste, tooth, nice,

  • honey, soda, chocolate, heart, cake, tart, pie.

  • OK?

  • All right, how many people heard the

  • word "sour?" All right.

  • Yeah, excellent, thank you.

  • "Chair." "Candy." Hey.

  • "Honey." "Building." "Sweet." Every hand up there, you have

  • a false memory.

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: Now, it's a set up OK?

  • Because here's the way they make these lists, it's a set

  • up, but there's a huge lesson.

  • And in fact, you may hear debates about what are real

  • memories, what are false memories, in court cases, in

  • clinical cases.

  • This is a laboratory experiment that's been the

  • testing ground for lots of ideas about how we make real

  • memories and how we end up with false memories.

  • So here's the way they made the list.

  • They took the word "sour." And they took a lot of students

  • basically like you and said, what's the first word you

  • think of that goes with sour?

  • And people came up with this kind of a list.

  • Candy, sugar, bitter, good, taste, tooth, nice, honey,

  • soda, chocolate, heart, cake, tart, pie.

  • But they left out one word that people

  • came up with a lot.

  • The word "sweet." OK?

  • So your mind interpreted the list.

  • You said, hey, this is all about things that are related

  • to sweet things in one way or another-- sweet sugar, sweet

  • candy, sweet and sour, honey is sweet, chocolate is sweet.

  • So your mind imagined it heard the word "sweet." And the

  • majority of you put your hand up that you actually heard the

  • word "sweet." Your mind imagined it was there because

  • that was generally what was going on.

  • That was the gist of the experience, OK?

  • So this idea is it's very easy, because of the way

  • memory works, we remember the gist of things because that's

  • what's the important part.

  • It's hard to remember the details.

  • But that gist is an interpreted gist.

  • The gist was it's sweet things.

  • So the word "sweet" feels like it was part of the memory.

  • And we'll come back to that later on in the course.

  • So one of the themes we'll talk about a lot in the course

  • is both an amazing power of the human mind and an amazing

  • peril of the human mind.

  • And it's what psychologists call automaticity.

  • It's that our mind, in order to be efficient and quick,

  • does things automatically without thought, without

  • consciousness.

  • It lets us walk without thinking a lot about

  • where our feet are.

  • It lets us speak quickly without thinking about the

  • syntax and the vocabulary, right?

  • It lets us do a lot of things.

  • So that's the power of it.

  • The peril is when something becomes automatic, we lose

  • control of it within ourselves.

  • So I need somebody at their seat who's willing to read

  • aloud something as fast as they can when they see it on

  • the computer monitor.

  • If I can get a volunteer at your seat.

  • OK, all the way back there, OK.

  • And then I'll come to you for the second one.

  • Ready?

  • Here it comes.

  • As fast as you can, go.

  • AUDIENCE: One way not do enter.

  • PROFESSOR: OK, then, you got it.

  • I couldn't trick you.

  • OK.

  • But you might imagine a person might mistake that, right?

  • Was there another one?

  • Was it you?

  • OK, ready?

  • Here we go.

  • Go.

  • AUDIENCE: Paris in spring.

  • PROFESSOR: Ah.

  • I got you on that.

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: Because your mind is automatically reading.

  • We have lots of evidence in psychology that you're barely

  • looking at words like "the." You're

  • assuming over those things.

  • They're almost invisible to you there even though they're

  • physically present, because your mind is looking for the

  • big content, right?

  • Who cares about the word "the?" Your mind is going for

  • the essential information, and it becomes literally blind to

  • what's in front of you, because it knows what it's

  • looking for.

  • Here's a fun one.

  • You've seen things like this before, but it's

  • always fun to try.

  • It's the same principle.

  • How many letter F's do you find in this display?

  • Can I get some numbers?

  • AUDIENCE: 6.

  • AUDIENCE: 4.

  • AUDIENCE: 5.

  • PROFESSOR: 4, 5, 6.

  • Those are all good.

  • We're not an exact science.

  • [CLAMORING]

  • PROFESSOR: Some of you may have missed one or two F's.

  • Again, it's because your mind is automatically--

  • typical readers read at spectacular speeds.

  • And the way you read at a spectacular speed is you don't

  • look for little details.

  • You get the big words and the big ideas and you zoom through

  • for the big meaning.

  • And you're leaving behind what you consider to be details.

  • Yeah.

  • AUDIENCE: So if you ask this question to a society that

  • pronounces "of" just like "off,"

  • would that change anything?

  • PROFESSOR: The question was if we asked a society that didn't

  • pronounce F's or something like that.

  • AUDIENCE: That didn't pronounce F's as F's.

  • In America, we pronounce it "of."

  • PROFESSOR: "Of," you mean like a "v" sound or

  • something like that.

  • Does that matter for this?

  • Yes.

  • It also matters a lot that words like "of" are little

  • preposition words that we don't think much about.

  • So this is a set up.

  • Like "finish," most people get.

  • Or the beginning of a word you're more likely to get.

  • I think the pronunciation probably matters.

  • I don't know that for sure.

  • That's a very good thought.

  • And certainly, hiding it in words that seem low in content

  • for interpreting a sentence is about the best way we did it.

  • That's why the second "the" disappeared too.

  • It's sort of a low content word for

  • processing a sentence.

  • OK.

  • This is an example that you know, but it's a nice example

  • and we can come back to it a couple times.

  • So let me think about this for one second.

  • Maybe we'll do it this way-- that we'll ask somebody at

  • their seat who has typical color vision.

  • If you're color blind, this one is not a good one for you.

  • Some percentage are.

  • Is somebody willing at their seat to read aloud stuff they

  • see on a monitor?

  • OK, thank you.

  • Here we go.

  • So you're gonna see words that are printed

  • in different colors.

  • Your job is to name aloud the color of the ink that it's

  • printed in.

  • Does that make sense?

  • So like on this F, you would say it's red on

  • that F. Is that OK?

  • Here we go.

  • So start here and just go.

  • AUDIENCE: Red, orange.

  • PROFESSOR: As fast as you can, just keep going.

  • AUDIENCE: Green, brown, pink, green, blue, yellow, red.

  • PROFESSOR: Great, excellent.

  • Same thing.

  • Read the color of the ink exactly like you were doing.

  • Go.

  • AUDIENCE: Green, blue, red, blue, red, yellow, red.

  • PROFESSOR: Ah, you're pretty good.

  • OK.

  • It's supposed to slow you down when you get the ink in the

  • wrong colors.

  • And it usually does.

  • But you were very good.

  • All right.

  • Again, if you know this from courses and the internet,

  • don't ruin it for others, but think about it for yourself.

  • So now we're gonna turn to thought.

  • There's 30 people in a room.

  • Just imagine you sat-- there' just groups of 30 here.

  • You get the month and date of each person's birthday.

  • So it's not the year they were born, but it could be December

  • 1 or February 5 or something like that.

  • What is the approximate probability that two people

  • will have the exact same birthday?

  • I can tell you the vast majority of people under

  • slightly less suspicious circumstances of this will

  • answer about 10%.

  • That's the vast majority.

  • The correct answer is--

  • OK?

  • Why do you think--

  • this is work from Kahneman and Tversky.

  • We'll come back to this.

  • Why do you think people tend to answer 10%, some 30%?

  • Very few people give you the mathematically

  • correct answer of 70%.

  • Why do they do that?

  • Because they tend to think, how often have I met somebody

  • who has my exact birthday?

  • And you go, not that often.

  • It's not like every 30 people I meet, somebody says, you

  • were born on March 3.

  • I was born in March 3.

  • And then you go have lunch and you go, hey, I was

  • born on March 3.

  • And you go have dinner with another group and they go, I

  • was born on March 3.

  • It's not something that happens a lot, right?

  • So you go, well, in real life it doesn't seem

  • to happen very often.

  • That's what we call a heuristic-- a simple way to

  • think about it.

  • Because your experience is kind of like that.

  • But why is that incorrect

  • mathematically for this question?

  • Because the math depends on not that's exactly your

  • birthday, but any pair of birthdays among the 30 people.

  • And then it goes way up.

  • In fact, it goes to 70%.

  • And if it's 24 people, it's 50%.

  • If you're a group of 36 people, there's a 90% chance,

  • just mathematically, that two people will

  • share the same birthday.

  • Because when we face things that are hard to think about,

  • because there's no easy answer, humans tend to take

  • shortcuts and say, what's the gist of my experience, and

  • that's what I think the answer is.

  • Even when a calculable answer is available.

  • It's human nature to make a shortcut based on your sense

  • of your experience.

  • So there's a very interesting line of work--

  • Dan Gilbert of Harvard is a leading figure--

  • about this idea of thinking about your future.

  • Now, thinking about our future is a big thing, right?

  • We're thinking about what's it like in this course, what's it

  • like in college, what's our friendship like, relations

  • with parents, what's our future career paths, what kind

  • of life will we lead, right?

  • Our future is something that's hugely on our mind, I think,

  • very powerfully when you're a college student

  • or a graduate student.

  • What's my future?

  • And a big question that people have is what will make me

  • happy in a deep sense?

  • What will make me happy in a deep sense?

  • Because that's the life I want to lead--

  • the values I want to have, the kind of career choices and

  • personal choices I want to make, where I will devote my

  • time on this earth.

  • So most people, first of all, tend to think about good

  • things, positive things.

  • Actually, I can tell you what comes later in the course.

  • It's good to think that lots of

  • positive things are happening.

  • It's kind of a nice place to be in terms of

  • being a happy person.

  • But it turns out that people have done studies like this.

  • So now this is particularly sensitive for a faculty

  • member, but it could work for any sports team you've tried

  • out or anything you've tried out for in your life.

  • So what happens when we get reviewed for tenure?

  • And you hear a bit about that.

  • This was an easy study for a psychologist to do.

  • What they did is they called up people in the fall who were

  • being reviewed for tenure.

  • And you get tenure or you don't.

  • And it's a bit of a sad process if you don't, right,

  • because you don't get tenure, and then you don't feel happy

  • about that.

  • And you have to call your parents and say, I didn't get

  • tenure, and your parents go, come on, if you just slept

  • better, you would've gotten tenure.

  • [LAUGHTER]

  • PROFESSOR: Remember the piano lessons you didn't take.

  • So it's a bit of a nuisance, right?

  • On top of that--

  • because weirdly, in academics, we tend to be super

  • specialized-- you have to move out of town.

  • You don't have to, but typically, a person who

  • doesn't get tenure will get a job somewhere else.

  • There's plenty of stories of people who don't get tenure at

  • awesome places who were geniuses in history.

  • The tenure decisions are often wrong.

  • But still, you'd rather get it than not.

  • You'd rather get into the medical school than not.

  • You'd rather make a sports team you want

  • to be on than not.

  • So here's what they found out.

  • If they asked them what happens if you don't get

  • tenure, everybody says, oh, it's gonna be awful.

  • It's gonna be miserable.

  • I'm gonna be such an unhappy person.

  • Two years later, the average happiness of people who didn't

  • get tenure was equal to the average happiness of people

  • who did get tenure.

  • So you can say, well, tenure-- only

  • professors care about tenure.

  • Well, how about winning the lottery?

  • What if I won hundreds of thousands of dollars?

  • There' been a lot of psychology on this, actually.

  • In about a year to two, the average happiness of a lottery

  • winner who won a substantial amount of money is rated the

  • same by him or her as it was the population as a whole.

  • Yeah?

  • AUDIENCE: How did they go about

  • measuring average happiness?

  • PROFESSOR: Yeah, so we'll come back to this,

  • but I'll tell you.

  • You can like this or not like this.

  • In some parts of psychology, we measure things like

  • reaction time to the millisecond.

  • That's good data, right?

  • Our brain activation, that's good data.

  • When you ask a person how happy they are, the only thing

  • we can do is have you basically fill a scale from

  • one to seven.

  • How happy are you?

  • And you could go, well I'm a little worried about that,

  • because sometimes people say, I hope that it makes you happy

  • or something.

  • So you could say, how much can we trust

  • subjective reports of happiness?

  • And that's a very good question.

  • On the other hand, it's hard to know what would

  • be better than that.

  • If we measure your pulse, is that a

  • better measure of happiness?

  • Your pulse could be racing because you're sad or happy,

  • scared or enthusiastic.

  • So we don't have a better one that we can think of.

  • But psychologists do worry that sometimes people will

  • just say what they're supposed to say.

  • Or they'll pretend they're happy or things like that.

  • We have to worry about those things.

  • So you could worry deep down, but a year or two later,

  • people who win huge amounts of money don't report themselves

  • as any happier than people around them.

  • And kind of amazingly--

  • but I think it's deep about life--

  • accidents leading to quadriplegia or paraplegia,

  • accidents that, before you had such an accident you would

  • imagine that it would be something extremely difficult.

  • And it can be in many ways.

  • But by self report, ratings of happiness return to typical

  • average populations of the same age

  • in about three months.

  • So what's a huge lesson here in happiness research--

  • a huge surprise.

  • It's two things.

  • We're kind of bad at predicting what will make us

  • happy or sad, which is kind of weird, right?

  • We're kind of bad at predicting it.

  • Here's all these things where we think they would make us

  • happy or make us not so happy.

  • It turns out we're wrong when this is studied at all

  • scientifically.

  • So we'll come back to that later on, because it's a very

  • deep thing about being a human--

  • what makes you happy and your wrong guesses

  • sometimes about what does.

  • So let me end with a last experiment.

  • So we've really haven't done experiments until right now.

  • And this is now a sensitive and difficult issue, which is

  • problems we have in dealing with racism.

  • And here's a study that did the following.

  • It said, well, in North America, certainly, Canada,

  • the US-- a study was done in Canada--

  • racism is widely condemned, as I think most of us

  • believe it should be.

  • But examples of blatant racism still occurred.

  • One recent poll said that about a third of white

  • individuals reported hearing anti-black slurs in the

  • workplace in the last couple years--

  • to pick one thing.

  • So how does this happen in a society that speaks so much

  • about not being racist, about treating everybody equally and

  • fairly and kindly?

  • How does it happen that we still struggle.

  • And it's such a very deep, difficult question about human

  • nature and the world we live in.

  • But here's something again that's a hint about why it's

  • hard to get society to change some of its behaviors.

  • So here's the experiment--

  • so it's an actual experiment.

  • So they took two groups of college undergraduates and

  • randomly assigned one to be in the forecaster group.

  • That's a group that tells you how they think they would feel

  • and how they think they would act under certain

  • circumstances.

  • And then an experiencer group--

  • that's a group who actually undergoes an experience, and

  • I'll tell you what that is now.

  • So in the experiencer group, pretend you were their

  • research participant.

  • You walk into a room, and you see in that room a black male

  • and a white male.

  • Now those two are what psychologists, for some

  • reason, have called confederates.

  • Those are role players.

  • They know what they're doing.

  • They have a plan of what they're going to do.

  • They're going to put on a little show for you.

  • But you don't know that.

  • And the black male stands up and leaves the room to get his

  • cell phone, and he gently bumps the white male's knee.

  • This is all set up.

  • You're just sitting there and you see that little bump.

  • And now, there's three different groups.

  • One group, that's it.

  • Nothing else happens--

  • A small bump, and the person leaves.

  • A second group--

  • as you sit there, the black individual leaves the room and

  • the white individual says, quote, "Typical, I hate it

  • when black people do that." It's meant to be obviously

  • provocative and racist.

  • And then what they consider an extreme slur--

  • the white person in the room playing this role uses the

  • derogatory word that's meant to be an extreme slur.

  • So there's one more thing you need to know.

  • Now, you're sitting there, and you're either in the control

  • group where there's been the slight bump, or there's been a

  • moderate slur, or an extreme slur in their words.

  • The black male returns.

  • Don't forget, he's in on it, and so is that white male.

  • But you're not in on it.

  • You just think there was a bump, and something else may

  • have happened, depending on which condition you're in.

  • And the experimenter then gives you a survey about how

  • you feel right now.

  • Sort of like the happiness, but it's not that.

  • It's like, how do you feel right now?

  • And then asks you to pick between those two people a

  • partner for an anagram experiment that

  • you're about to do.

  • So they're going to ask you--

  • this is sort of this question you have.

  • What's the difference or similarity between what you

  • say you're feeling is and what you really do?

  • Both things are important, but do they line up, do

  • they not line up?

  • So here's the results.

  • Here's a graph.

  • And here's how this works.

  • Negative emotional distress the higher the bar, the more

  • you say, I feel really bad about what's just happened.

  • I just heard this comment or no comment.

  • So let's take a look, the higher the bar.

  • If you heard no comment, here's how you begin.

  • So let's start with the forecasters.

  • All of you are forecasters, because you're pretending

  • you're in the situation but you're not in it.

  • So here is there was no comments.

  • That's sort of average or something.

  • And then you said if you heard a racial slur

  • you would feel terrible.

  • You would feel terrible.

  • But look at the other students who are randomly picked.

  • So we don't think it's a difference among students.

  • Look at these grey bars.

  • They're pretty flat.

  • The person on the spot is somehow not processing this.

  • And they're filling out, I feel average.

  • You see the split--

  • the split between the values that the person thinks they

  • would have, and the values that are responded to on the

  • spot in the moment.

  • And what we'll talk about later on in social psychology

  • is there's a tough gap, often, between the values we espouse

  • and how we act when there's especially unexpected,

  • difficult things.

  • And very often--

  • if you've had any experience like this-- afterwards, you

  • go, oh, what I should have done is this.

  • Or I wish I would've said that.

  • But that moment is not happening at that moment,

  • probably because you're kind of weirded out

  • by the whole thing.

  • What's going on?

  • Why would the person say this?

  • Something doesn't seem right.

  • I can't sort it out.

  • And so people tend to shrink in terms of making a strong

  • conclusion of what's going on if something seems unusually

  • provocative.

  • And you could say, well, OK, that's their attitudes.

  • But how about their action?

  • Who do they pick to be their partner?

  • And again, the people forecasting said, if I was in

  • this situation, I would never pick that racist white person

  • to be my partner, because that person stinks--

  • if I was in that situation.

  • But if the people are in the situation--

  • look at the grey bars--

  • pretty flat.

  • It's a if on the spot, in the moment, they can't quite

  • process the values they feel and the action

  • they're going to take.

  • And we'll talk about that.

  • And it's very hard, often, in part, to be brave

  • and stand up to things.

  • It turns out there's a lot of evidence for this.

  • It's a human nature thing.

  • It's very hard to be brave and stand up to things when things

  • are kind of weird, because almost everybody at first

  • thinks, I don't want to make a fool of myself.

  • I don't want make trouble.

  • Maybe I'm not getting the whole picture on this.

  • And we shrink back from acting in a way that aligns with the

  • values that are clearly shown here.

  • So this, again, is something about human

  • nature that's very weird.

  • And it's powerful to come into social psychology.

  • And that's why it's very hard to stand up to things like

  • oppression and bias.

  • It's very hard to do, because we tend to not act on our

  • values when we're in complicated

  • situations on the spot.

  • And there's a tremendous amount of evidence for that.

  • So again, how we interpret the situation--

  • very different in our mind when we imagine we're there,

  • and when we actually sit there.

  • And so what these researchers say is this is partly why it's

  • been hard to eradicate some vestiges of stereotypes and

  • racism, because people have a hard time clamping down on it

  • in the moment.

  • So that's a tough topic, but we know we want to deal both

  • with things that are less controversial but also things

  • that touch people's lives in the real world

  • that we live in.

  • So we talked about a scientific study

  • of the human nature--

  • mind and behavior--

  • how what we see and hear is determined so much but how our

  • mind interprets the world around us; how we remember

  • things like word lists or stories, that's hugely

  • influenced by what we expect to see, like in the picture;

  • how we think we know things like where Reno is compared to

  • San Francisco; how we think about things like the

  • probability that somebody else will have the same birthday,

  • that somebody else will in a group; and the relationship

  • between how we feel and how we act.

  • The very feelings we have are often disconnected for actions

  • in the moment.

  • And sometimes that has a sort of a difficult consequence.

  • And so we'll explore all these things through the semester,

  • all the different facets that we could possibly get through

  • in one semester of what it is to be human, and where science

  • has showed us something about human nature, the

  • mind, and the brain.

The following content is provided under a Creative

Subtitles and vocabulary

Click the word to look it up Click the word to find further inforamtion about it