Comments on: Bad gossip affects our vision as well as our judgment

By: geeta

geeta — Fri, 27 May 2011 14:51:26 +0000

Any kind of gossip, good/bad, about a stranger will turn my attention to the stranger, at least for a bit. But in any case, I move away from the gossipper (or change the subject, making it obvious that I have no interest in hearing about their opinions about someone else), as Charlie B says in #9

By: Joe Marfice

Joe Marfice — Mon, 23 May 2011 22:55:33 +0000

Most people seem to define gossip as “when others talk about people in a way I don’t like”; of course, gossip is vitally important to reinforcing our social networks. Charlie B’s pleasant ideals aside, no human actually follows that rule. The article helps point out why it is as dangerous to ignore gossip as it is to follow gossip blindly.

By: Kim Y

Kim Y — Mon, 23 May 2011 14:40:26 +0000

Nice to give credit to Anderson & Siegel, but the senior/lead researcher is actually the final author listed (Barrett). That’s standard practice in many scientific journals.

By: Charlie B

Charlie B — Sat, 21 May 2011 11:27:38 +0000

Malicious gossip just makes question the gossipers motive. Why disparage a stranger to me? I move away from the gossiper – they are usually liar’s or looking to get leverage over a better.

By: David Dobbs

David Dobbs — Sat, 21 May 2011 06:12:40 +0000

Nice post on a nifty piece of research. This meshes well with Robin Dunbar’s idea that about 2/3 of human speech is gossip (broadly defined as talking about others). To Dunbar, this replaces the exchange of information and maintenance of alliances that many nonhuman primates accomplish through grooming: Both sorts of exchange let us learn much about the primate we’re gossiping with or grooming as well as those we gossip about or observe gossiping. I wrote about this some in an article about a Times Magazine article about Williams syndrome a while back; people with Williams syndrome tend to miss much of negative and veiled information in these exchanges. (See “The Gregarious Brain,” http://tinyurl.com/2cqdy4; the material on Dunbar comes in about 3/4 of the way through.)

Very juicy stuff — and as this study suggests, extremely high value. Which is why we so enjoy talking with and about other people. It can be risky, but it generates huge returns in information.

By: kat

kat — Sat, 21 May 2011 04:22:21 +0000

Hey Ed, what’s up with the “xxxx” in this sentence:

“It’s why when you burn your hand, the feeling of pain and the sight of your recoiling limb seem simultaneous, even though the xxxx reaches your brain first.”

Did you forget to replace the x’s with which signal is first? [Ha! Busted! - Ed]

By: John McVey

John McVey — Fri, 20 May 2011 16:36:11 +0000

This is a special case of verbal overshadowing, though in this case, pre not post facto?

By: manju

manju — Fri, 20 May 2011 16:35:09 +0000

Thanks for the though-provoking article. Noticing or mentally registering the presence of a person with perceived negative traits seems like a natural, even primitive, instinct. Is there something Darwinian about it? `A guy who picks fights with strangers, bites puppies’ OR a caveman from a rival gang, a lion lazying around at a far awy spot has to be kept in one’s sight. Probably, that gives one a sense of security, being prepared for a possible confrontation. Is it wired into our brains that one cannot afford to not keep track of the trouble-maker… it’s prerequisite for survival.

By: AG

AG — Fri, 20 May 2011 16:07:29 +0000

“Gossip allows human beings not only to transcend one-to-one interaction for getting along and getting ahead, but also to know the “value” of people we have never met.”

This `gossip’ might also play its role for world economy in terms of valuation. For example, Japanese product might have even better true quality, but valued at cheaper price. For human, outsourcing to cheap labor is the same. Why some one is `cheap’? Gossip does contribut big deal.
Salesmen’s skill is good at gossiping to devaluate competitors and outsell themself. Good verbal skill is critical for value transfer (or exploitation).

By: Karl defenske

Karl defenske — Fri, 20 May 2011 14:16:16 +0000

I wonder if this is the Sartre of thing that effects eye witness identification and mis-identification?