t is often assumed that online discussions escalate because people become less socially concerned when they are anonymous, or because online messages are unclear and easily misunderstood. In her PhD-dissertation, which she defended on September 22, Carla Roos reveals that the opposite is often the case: online communication is sometimes so clear that it can make people appear antisocial.
Many of us no longer perceive science as extraordinary. Institutionalized, commodified, within a couple of clicks distance, one could argue that science is just another industry. Thrilling through its failures more often than through its successes, science is revealed as an enterprise prone to bias and fraud, often governed by personal interests and embedded in […]
How should we test whether speech is understood, so we have an accurate picture of the processes that support comprehension? The answer turns out to be rather simple: besides looking at how accurate the responses are, measure how fast they are given.
People often enjoy casual chats, especially about others. Although these conversations may seem harmless, they facilitate escalation of conflict between groups. Hedy Greijdanus’ dissertation research investigated the possibility to de-escalate conflict by influencing both what people talk about and how they talk. Tomorrow, June 25th at 14.30, she will defend her thesis in the Academy Building.
Auditory stimuli, such as voices or sound logos in radio advertisements, can have persuasive effects. In addition, technological advancements create possibilities for using auditory forms of communication, also in the domain of health. This post discusses the differential effects of listening instead of reading on persuasion.