Miriam Goldstein recently brought up a very important question in comments:
I would love to see you or Chris tackle this question – is media coverage where the science is inaccurate better than no media coverage? I fear that inflated claims like the ones in the NYT article may cause the public to discount the whole issue, once they find out that some of the facts are exaggerated or false.
The short answer is, of course, it depends. More science coverage is critically necessary if we’re to foster broader public understanding, acceptance, and appreciation of science, BUT hyperbole and inaccurate stories frequently undermine good intentions.
Before diving in, I’d like to hear from readers… Is inaccurate media coverage of science better than no coverage at all?
Okay…
Melissa’s got the details:
Breaking news! Men become less intelligent when they’re trying to impress women they’d like to sleep with! A new study in the Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology found that “men who spend even a few minutes in the company of an attractive woman perform less well in tests designed to measure brain function” than men who talked to women they didn’t want to, er, mate with.
According to The Telegraph:
Researchers who carried out the study…think the reason may be that men use up so much of their brain function or “cognitive resources” trying to impress beautiful women, they have little left for other tasks.
The findings have implications for the performance of men who flirt with women in the workplace, or even exam results in mixed-sex schools.
Women, however, were not affected by chatting to a handsome man.
Sure, it sounds intriguing HOWEVER… Well I’m not going to weigh in with my thoughts before reading the study–except to say there are so many potentially influential factors involved, I can’t help but once again, wonder about these kind of stories. What do readers think?
Cool news from space I’ve been meaning to post…
WASP-17, a newly discovered planet about 1,000 light-years away, orbits in the reverse direction as the star it revolves around! This is BIG news in science because every other world we’ve observed does the opposite. Most likely, a near collision with another planet early on led to its strange orbit. The discovery was made by graduate students David Anderson at Keele University and Amaury Triaud of the Geneva Observatory with the UK’s Wide Area Search for Planets (WASP) project. WASP-17 is also estimated to be two times the size–but half the mass–of Jupiter meaning this becomes the largest known planet in the universe.
An artist’s impression of a transiting exoplanet. Credit:NASA/Hubble
I’m going through my inbox and very impressed with how many readers are sending emails related to The Science of Kissing since I announced the title last week.
Thanks to ‘Dan G.‘ for the Zits comic from today’s paper:
And ‘Annie‘ for this ridiculous story in the news:
PORTLAND, Maine – A Maine high school senior says he was denied his diploma because he bowed during graduation and blew a kiss to his mother.
At least a half dozen emails arrived related to the kissing article in the latest issue of SciAm Mind. (Looks like a reprint from an old issue). Terrific work so far! I really appreciate the help and I have a hunch some of the material will find it’s way into the book. So thanks to everyone who sent articles, links, comics, scanned newspaper clippings, and more!
And finally this suggestion from ‘Hal‘ who’s already thinking about a book ‘soundtrack‘:
(more…)
We got our copies early, but look for Unscientific America coming soon to a store near you!
Update: Thanks to all who have participated in the kissing survey. The polls are now closed, but my associated cognitive neuroscience experiment begins next week. You can follow the research live on Twitter @TheKissingBook.
My next book deals with a subject I’ve written extensively about on and off the blog. I even helped to facilitate a popular symposium at last years AAAS meeting on topic…
The Science of Kissing will be an interdisciplinary look at why and how we kiss, drawing on neuroscience, classical history, evolutionary biology, anthropology, and popular culture. Without giving away too much detail, I’ll say that it’s been extremely interesting to compose so far and more fascinating than I ever imagined. And then I got to thinking…
Why merely report on the science when there are obvious next steps in research? So I did what anyone in my position would. I called up a neuroscientist. The wonderful Dr. David Poeppel has kindly agreed to help me conduct a a cognitive neuroscience experiment next month and now I need you to help us plan the methodology. Results will be featured in the book!
Here’s what to do: Below the fold you’ll see a 15 photos (labeled A-O) of couples kissing. We need you to help us categorize them into three groups:
1) erotic – passionate/sexually-charged kiss
2) friendship – kiss between friends
3) relationship – affectionate kiss implying commitment
I’m turning off comments on this post so responses won’t be biased.
To participate, email me (srkirshenbaum@yahoo.com) with the list of letters (A-O) and corresponding rank (1, 2, or 3) based on how you perceive each image.
Names and contact information will not be shared or published. Thanks to all for participating and please do encourage friends to take our survey as well!
(photos removed when survey ended)
In a few weeks I’m headed several hundred miles north to collaborate with neuroscientist David Poeppel on research that will be featured in my next book.
Watch the blog because on Monday I’ll share a little more about the subject matter and invite readers to participate in designing methodology.
So who’s up for a little experimentation?
While I’m on the way to NYC to meet up with Chris as we get ready to kick off the NYAS Two Cultures conference, let’s turn the blog back to exploring LOST…
Last time, we considered time travel, and whether the position of where you arrive through such travel might be predictable. A series of thought-provoking responses ensued, covering everything from the notion of fixed points in space to matters of the competency of your pilot.
Now for round two…
Readers who’ve been following LOST know that if the island’s resident physicist, Daniel Faraday, was right, then variables (a.k.a., time travelers) can alter the future. [Paging Marty McFly]. So let’s reexamine the possibility of the space-time continuum by imagining that you are that variable. Say you’ve made the journey back in time, but yout memories and experiences from the 21st century suggest to you that you have already had this role in the past. (Still following me on this?)
Hence, are you doomed to fail on a mission to change the ‘present‘ you left? Or might free will* result in your making different choices this time–decisions that may yet result in new and alternative realities?
* Yes, many neuroscientists don’t believe in ‘free will’, but that’s another post entirely. For now, let’s stick with theoretical science fiction for fun…
I head west for a couple days and Chris up and creates a commotion… Of course he’s absolutely correct to do so. Coyne is entitled to his perspective, but in no way does he speak for science. But since we’re on the topic of Jerry Coyne, it’s good reason to bring up another idea of his that hit my radar recently. Readers know I’m exploring science and sexuality for my next book, and earlier this month I received several emails alerting me when Coyne shared his theory about the adaptive significance of semen flavor.
It is the conventional wisdom in human sexuality that semen tastes bad. Anyone with minimal sexual experience knows that although many women will perform fellatio on their partners, most bridle at the thought of swallowing the ejaculate. Its flavor is frequently characterized as revoltingly bitter or salty. The “swallow or spit” dilemma faces any woman who performs such an act, and whose partner regards swallowing as a gesture of love.
I’ll admit I was a bit surprised when the post hit my inbox, but since we’re reading Bonk, it’s an appropriate subject and one I have not considered before. Coyne took an informal poll by enlisting Dr. Fawzia Rasheed to ask her female acquaintances:
Sperm…would you spit or swallow? In other words, can you abide by or do you hate the taste?
(more…)
Today I’m headed to San Francisco, kicking off three weeks of travel. By early May I’ll hit my hometown for the NYAS Two Cultures conference and then it’s back west for a few days at the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach. Posting from me may be patchy at times, but I have full confidence Chris will keep everyone on their toes. While I’m miles overhead, some odds and ends:
1) Jim Carrey in HuffPo:
In this growing crisis, we cannot afford to blindly trumpet the agenda of the CDC, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) or vaccine makers.
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again, for the sake of our kids, parents: do not confuse entertainment with the ability to provide sound medical advice.
2) Recently came across terrific audio from a 2002 episode of This American Life while researching testosterone for my next book. Griffin Hansbury is a transsexual who asserts that after receiving ‘T’ (testosterone), he became interested in science and understood physics. Perhaps, but I suspect he may also be susceptible to placebo. Listen and decide for yourself.
3) I’ve just learned coincidentally, that Mary Roach–author of Bonk–is speaking in San Fransisco tonight. Small world.
4) Since I’m headed to Oakland next week, it’s good reason to remind readers that in 21 days, Green Day’s long anticipated 21st Century Breakdown drops! Today also marks the debut of the first video from a track called Know Your Enemy. Great expectations for this album…
