What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Maybe The Best Tech Deal EVER--Give Computers To Whole Family view!
bestbuy.com - Geek Squad(r) installation, HP desktop, monitor, laptop & netbook, wireless router--all for $1,199.99!
10 Comments
- jdb252, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5+Digg to fix this:
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen
Good story, thanks for submitting. - lukas88, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They should have had my psych professor to realize this earlier. He would have told them 100 times every day "CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION"
- pbarnes7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As someone who majored in political science and then went to work in the computer field a generation ago, I thought this was really interesting. While I don't really care about studying the subject anymore, I like that they're actually applying some science to the field, which always seemed before more like studying tea leaves.
- peritonlogon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm sorry buy I'm still sticking with conventional wisdom on the negative add thing.
I know this was just a report on a study and not the study itself, but as someone who is mid twenties, very left leaning and very anti-partisan I must say, negative adds discourage me from voting (which I do anyway) because they're almost all sophistical, misleading or just *****. They sensationalize and distort those issues that require thought and study to understand, in short, issues where there are verifiably better policies while rarely mentioning the sensational issues (they leave those for their 527s). Their accompanying music is overly dramatic making them just obvious attempts to close people's minds. Yeah, the choir likes to hear bad things about the opponent and the opponent's supporters don't really care because they know they already disagree, but the vast majority of people in this country don't feel they have much at stake when the watch the negative adds, they just see more crap and feel like nothing ever changes and see the political world as this ridiculous yet insurmountable object in the way of the public will and they feel hopeless about the political system in general.
They can't just spout positive ***** about their own positions because their opponent will constantly say things like "you said in your add tax cuts for the rich will help the poor, on what planet are you living, could you just please stop ***** your constituents you shameful sophist?" Or "Why on earth did you say that teacher tenure was essential to improve education? Because less accountability is a good thing? Why don't we give contractors tenure, and doctors too while we're at it?"
Instead they just say my opponent opposes tax cuts or is against teachers. Which makes me not want to vote for either. And makes a lot of rational people feel disaffected.
So, it's great that they're using brain scans and such, but, not everyone is a partisan, so it sounds like they're just adding new conventional wisdom as unsupported suppositions. Again, I know I didn't get to actually read the study, and this could just be a small, distorted tid bit. - onwardknave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Voles would be even more fascinating if they voted.
Actually, given the questionable returns in recent elections... Naaaaah. Could they? Hell, dead people vote all the time. - turricanz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Cool, now politicians can learn more tricks how to "persuade" us to vote for them....
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0#1 Terror Seeding
- MAdaXe42, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4Anyone else read that as 'studying the vole'? I think burrowing rodent studies are fascinating!
- ajimmykid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0he's a real genius.
researchers know that correlation does not imply causation. they're always cautious and say 'associated with" rather than "causes". the article doesn't say researchers imcompetently assumed causation. they know that when they begin the study. the reason they conduct those surveys is experiments are often harder to control; to be able to control and record all factors is very hard when dealing with complex independent variables like negative ads and the response. Surveys also take much less time for both the researchers and participants. - MAdaXe42, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Did anyone else read that as studying the vole?
Doesn't really matter - both smell of rat.
Need more time to edit these things.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is