Thanks Ryan, this video was really eye opening and scary at the same time! I watched the rest of the programs. Mr. Rushkoff has a few other programs I plan to watch—all seem interesting.
I shared some of the information with my teenager and we had a nice conversation. The new generation is being raised with a weak set of values making them very vulnerable to the marketing by people who don’t care about their well being. The more aware we are of the tricks being played, the more capable we are of resisting and giving them the tools they need at a young age not to be vulnerable to this kind of marketing.
Thanks again for sharing such thought provoking topics.
The insights of cultural/media theorist Douglas Rushkoff are always contemporary and often prescient. He was deciphering the social codes of the virtual psyche, lifestyle, and marketplace before such concepts were formally identified by the so-called “machine.” TheMerchants Of Cool is a brilliant analysis of the incorporation of youth pop-culture that Ruskhoff created while working as a correspondent for PBS Frontline. This is a very entertaining documentary. You’ll learn a lot too. Let me know what you think in the comments section.
Among the many news feeds crossing my desktop, one really stood out–how to make myself smarter! I’m definitely going to read that paper.In a nutshell, Oscar Ybarra of the University of Michigan and his colleagues suggest that human beings are such social animals, that we actually improve our cognitive function after only ten minutes of social interaction [1].Students were randomly assigned to dyads and given the task of discussing a social issue, protection of privacy, for ten minutes. Other participants took a short reading comprehension task, did a crossword puzzle, and completed a figure rotation task. These tasks were designed to give the participants something intellectually stimulating to do that was not particularly social, as the tasks were completed by individuals working alone. Control participants watched a 10-minute sequence of Seinfeld by themselves. Subsequently, all participants completed a speed of processing task (are these dots the same or different?) and a working memory task (object recognition).Based on previous research, it was not surprising to see the participants doing the intellectual activities (figure rotation et al.) showed higher levels of cognitive functioning in the post-tests compared to the TV-watching control group. I have always thought that most TV makes us somewhat brain-dead, and much prefer to see children using any indoors time playing interactive videogames than watching TV. Okay, Stargate and football are obvious exceptions at our house. (more…)
Thanks to auntyevil for permission to use this Photo.
One concept that’s particularly influential in contemporary culture is that of social currency, an abstract exchange value that we’re all unconsciously aware of and have perhaps unknowingly utilized as a tool to gain interactive access to others on a social level. Content is essentially seen as a medium for interaction, not an end in itself, but more importantly a basis for human interaction. A new study was recently published on the “psychology of social networks” and the researchers do an admirable job of piecing together the social puzzle without drawing too many predetermined conclusions. In other words, within an Internet-oriented context, they accept that the network model of human communication can not be studied from a static perspective. The behavior of humans in an online environment does not parallel that of monkeys in a cage, perhaps less due to the complexity of humans than the fact that the virtual cage is always unlocked, permitting us to come and go as we please—as long as we’re never alone of course. Check out this interesting study and please share your perspectives with the Ashworth student community.
Thanks to Boris Anthony for permission to use this Photo.
Marshall McLuhan’s groundbreaking theories on media communications and the psycho-social impact of technological development made him both a very respected and controversial figure beginning in the 1950’s. Seen by many as a prophet of our contemporary media filtered age, McLuhan’s famous “the medium is the message” theory, in which the communications medium itself (microphone, television, computer, letter) is more directly related to the meaning and ultimate impact of a given message than the actual “content” (intellectual/rational meaning) continues to gain depth as the decades pass.
I recently discovered an excellent audio-video archive of McLuhan’s work on the CBC web site. This is a great primer for our psychology students unfamiliar with his work and I strongly encourage you to check this archive out by clicking here. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on McLuhan, a thinker who still truly remains ahead of his time.
Ryan Rode
Interactive Services Manager
Ashworth University Psychology Program
Mind-myth 6: Everyone has heard the idea that our left-brains are logical, verbal, rational and scientific while our right brains are spatial, emotional, intuitive and creative. Like some of the mind-myths covered in this series, there’s a solid grain of truth here but its extent has been wildly exaggerated.
Left side language
The biggest grain of truth is that our verbal powers are concentrated in the left side of our brains. It was Nobel Prize winner Roger W. Sperry who, in the 1960s, first showed that the left hemisphere is specialised for language (Corballis, 2007). He was studying patients suffering from crippling epileptic fits who had decided to undergo surgery to try and relieve their symptoms.
The surgery cut the bundle of white matter - the corpus callosum - that connects the two hemispheres of the brain. Along with successfully treating their epilepsy, these ’split-brain’ patients exhibited some strange new symptoms.
Sperry found that after the surgery patients were unable to name objects with the, now disconnected, right side of their brains. Their left-brains, however, seemed to have retained this ability. This lead him to propose that the left hemisphere is specialised for language.
But this specialisation didn’t mean the right hemisphere had no language powers at all. Further experiments suggested the right hemisphere could indeed still process language, just to a lesser degree. For example, patients were able to point to the written names of objects which were presented to their right-brain, although they found themselves unable to say the word. Click here to read the rest of this entry…
Thanks to ora_mia for permission to use this Photo.
The NMC/EDUCAUSE 2008 Horizon Report (.pdf) is a great resource. Educators and administrators will do well to consider its contents in their planning. I have a small concern. Something about the notion of collective intelligence doesn’t sit well with me. I can’t quite put my finger on it. I can (and have) used the term myself to explain the combined efforts of “the many” in achieving an outcome, solving a problem, or determining the value of a resources (such as voting/rating systems in Amazon and Digg). As a term, it resonates with people - the value of being part of a larger community and sharing and creating information together is valuable, if not necessary today. I’m not comfortable with collective intelligence - I prefer the notion of connective intelligence.
Derrick de Kerckhove explored this concept in 1997, well before we had the distributed collaboration tools we’re using today. James Surowiecki explored a similar concept in Wisdom of the Crowds. Surowiecki’s book is often misunderstood. He makes the point that people do not think together in coming to certain conclusions, but rather than people think on their own and the value of the collaborative comes in the connection and combination of ideas. Each person retains their own identity and ideas, but they are shaped and influenced by the work of others. (more…)
Subscribe to Feed
