The 'Daily Show' effect

The problem with pre-meal pitching; and why men do worse in economics

(Wesley Bedrosian for the Boston Globe)

The 'Daily Show' effect

A PROMINENT CRITICISM of the fake-news program "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" is that it is substituting for real news and promoting political apathy, especially among younger viewers. Not so, according to a recent analysis of polling data during the 2004 presidential primary season. Exposure to late-night comedy shows was associated with increased attention to the campaign in traditional television news, both at the beginning of the campaign and as the campaign heated up. Moreover, compared with "Leno" and "Letterman," "Daily Show" viewers' "increase in attention is more protracted and less subject to the influence of campaign events" and "more resistant to decline toward the end of the primaries."

Feldman, L. & Young, D., "Late-Night Comedy as a Gateway to Traditional News: An Analysis of Time Trends in News Attention Among Late-Night Comedy Viewers During the 2004 Presidential Primaries," Political Communication (October 2008).

Why men do worse in economics

LARRY SUMMERS, WHO will be director of the National Economic Council for Barack Obama, has taken heat for speculating about women's capacity to excel in technical careers. His own field, though, is also pretty technical and presents some of the same issues for women's achievement. A study of students at Colgate University reveals one possible source of the shortage of women in economics: grade sensitivity. The analysis looked at data from the college transcripts of students from the graduating classes of 1989-2004. Especially in introductory courses, poorer grades were more likely to discourage women from taking further classes in economics. Ironically, this meant that most of the weaker students in the higher-level courses were men, and that women who ended up majoring in economics had a higher overall GPA than the men.

Rask, K. & Tiefenthaler, J., "The Role of Grade Sensitivity in Explaining the Gender Imbalance in Undergraduate Economics," Economics of Education Review (December 2008).

The problem with pre-meal pitching

YOU'VE JUST COME home from a long and stressful day at work, and you get a call from a charity soliciting donations. If you think you'd be likely to pass in that situation, you're probably right. In several experiments, people were less willing to help others after spending time focusing attention on a challenging mental task. However, this effect was eliminated if people were given a sugar drink - which supplied energy to depleted brain cells - or if people were asked to help a family member, for whom the response is more automatic. So, the lesson for charities: solicit people after lunch or dinner, but not before.

DeWall, N. et al., "Depletion Makes the Heart Grow Less Helpful: Helping as a Function of Self-Regulatory Energy and Genetic Relatedness," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (December 2008).

The secret language of fidgeting

INVOLUNTARY FACIAL EXPRESSIONS and body language can tell you a lot about a person, if you know what to look for. A new study lends support to this idea by showing how people can unconsciously reveal their class background. Psychologists asked strangers to sit across from each other and get acquainted. Video of the conversations was recorded by a concealed camera. Subjects from families with more income or education were more likely to appear disengaged, doing things like self-grooming, fidgeting with objects, or doodling, and less likely to look at the other person, laugh, nod their heads, or raise their eyebrows. In addition, third-party strangers who watched the video of the conversation were able to do a pretty good job of guessing the family background of the people in the conversation.

Kraus, M. & Keltner, D., "Signs of Socioeconomic Status: A Thin-Slicing Approach," Psychological Science (forthcoming).

It's hard to know what you want

AS THE SAYING goes, "the genius is in the details" - but it may also be in the objectives. Classical theories of economics and management assume that decision-makers know what they want and act decisively to get it. Yet the reality is usually a lot messier. Management researchers asked MBA students to list the objectives that were relevant to their choice of business schools or internships. Next, the students were shown a more comprehensive list of possible objectives and asked to note any that they had missed before, and then rank the importance of all the objectives considered relevant. A significant fraction of the final list included objectives the students had not listed on their own. This pattern repeated itself in several different contexts, including a real-world business setting. The authors conclude that "specifying a reasonably complete set of objectives is a formidable task for an unaided individual" because they are "mired in an overly narrow mental representation."

Bond, S. et al., "Generating Objectives: Can Decision Makers Articulate What They Want?," Management Science (January 2008).

Kevin Lewis is an Ideas columnist. He can be reached at kevin.lewis.ideas@gmail.com.