Critical Thinking

A study of critical thinking reveals the complexities in the search for truth. Much of this complexity is based in a bias by thinkers towards the material or source of information. Biases can be developed in many forms, have varying degrees of strength, and affect objectivity. A useful exercise at the beginning of a doctoral program for a student is to pause and evaluate one’s own critical thinking and biases. Such an endeavor leads to an evaluation of how to use and view media and how critical thinking can best be utilized in future research. The outcome of this evaluation influences how a researcher uses media, works in his or her professional and scholarly practice, and conducts research with critical evaluation.

Manipulation of data and biased views are not new. Throughout history, “his stories” have been told and embellished with information, perspective, and biases with varied motivations. The expansion of information access and outlets in modern media is an extension of this behavior. However, the extent of these manipulations is often more observable in the instant and distributed media productions of today. One example from this course is the alteration of images in advertising. Image control and manipulation has become the norm, and the scale and depth of these manipulations is profound.


When a researcher understands the depth of both subtle and overt media manipulation, the way he or she uses media will change. Every piece of information, imagery, video, and even sources of information can be altered to support a story. It can be difficult to determine the source behind information and motivations, methods, and data. For example, the name of a website domain holder can be obfuscated by an individual with no obvious ties even if the website has a partisan political point of view to convey.

PSY700 explored many areas of critical thinking in media including a discussion concerning gatekeeping, urban legends, bias determination, marketing, and social media content. All of these topics highlight the fragile nature of truth and the challenges for a researcher to understand information validity. For example, gatekeepers choose what information to show and how to show it. Urban legends are propagated and replicated to the point where the sheer volume lends some credibility to the information. Social media allows instant discussion and opinion on any topic, although faster responses and voluminous data are not always the best choice to support opinion and critical thinking.

There are two points a researcher must understand concerning critical thinking and the understanding of bias. These are:

1. Biases in information sources
2. Biases held by the researcher

First, the researcher must carefully evaluate sources of information and analyses even if this research is presented with facts and statistics. The biases of the study and study participants should be understood before the validity of results can be accepted.

The second point a researcher must understand is his or her own biases. A researcher needs to be diligent when analyzing data, analyses, and perspectives. It is typical to form opinions and see new material based solely on those opinions. In true critical thinking, new data and perspectives should be evaluated based on their own merit and not benefit from previous bias. This is particularly difficult for researchers who have considerable experience, political beliefs, spiritual beliefs, peer alliances, and previous research.

One major aspect to consider in critical thinking and media manipulation is the receptiveness of the audience. For a psychology perspective, the theory of cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957) provided a scientific theory for the resistance to information reception and acceptance if it is contrary to existing beliefs and biases. Researchers must work to counter their inherent biases to ensure objective thinking.

As I move forward in my doctoral studies and research, the importance of critical thinking must remain key in my approach. Our study of critical thinking revealed the complexities around the search for truth and the inherent biases that researchers and reviewers bring into their studies. To be an excellent researcher in the field of Media Psychology, I will need to continually reexamine my biases as I review data, others’ research, and create my own research materials. This diligence is the only way to ensure maximum objectivity and conduct meaningful, objective research.

References

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Social Media

Social Media provides the tools and motivation necessary to create dynamic and nontraditional groups and enhance their communication. I personally experienced the power this dynamic organization and live communication this week with the unrest and revolution in Kyrgyzstan. In 2008, I participated in a Habitat for Humanity Build in Bishkek, the capital, and became fast friends with several of the people there. We also became Facebook friends at that time. This week, one of these friends posted information about the violence and revolution occurring there. It was the first time I had a personal connection to a global story literally half way around the world.

This example illustrates several of the implications of social media. However, the range of impact of these technologies spans more than news and political information. It includes education as discussed this week by Will Richardson with his description of the formation of “learning spaces online.” He ties Web 2.0 in education to the formation of learners with similar interests into self-forming groups. This theme is expanded by Clay Shirky in Here Comes Everybody.

Humans have always formed groups for a variety of reasons ranging from basic survival to religion to personal interests. As global population has increased and the ability for much of this population to communicate and meet electronically through the Internet, it has become possible to form much more specialized groups with specific interest or goals.

Old Groups
- Fellow hunter gatherers
- Farming communities
- Cities and commercial centers
- School classroom connections
- Co-workers at a company

New Groups
- Micro causes (wolf protection in the Northern Rockies)
- Major event followers (Kyrgyzstan, Thailand)
- Students studying a subject (not necessarily in the same class or even the same school)
- Professional networks such as LinkedIn

The final and perhaps most interesting aspect of self group creation in political media is the connection of groups to humanitarian causes, educational endeavors, and political initiatives. This activity might have significant impacts in places like Kyrgyzstan when unrest develops and previously unorganized and disenfranchised peoples can connect and communicate. The impact of self-organizing groups and social media communication can be far reaching. Imagine what might be have been different if Anne Frank could have written a Blog instead of a diary.

Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York, NY: The Penguin Press.

Consumer Psychology

The concept of consumer psychology has existed in some form as long as merchants have been trying to sell goods and services. From the strategically located ancient fast food stalls in Delos, Greece to Times Square today, business people have been experimenting, studying, and speculating on why consumers do what they do and buy what they buy. This week, we read an article and watched a Frontline episode examining the latest of these consumer psychological explorations from purported guru Clotaire Rapaille. By examining Rapaille, a view into the field of consumer psychology and even media psychology can be discerned.

Initially, Rapaille’s background in psychiatry and anthropology seem to provide a strong foundation for his work. However, his techniques and charismatic style lead many to question how much science he actually uses. Is he really leading the way in decoding the consumer brain? The Fast Company article Crack This Code by Danielle SacksThe Persuaders provided personal observations with background data and Rapaille’s clients’ comments to paint a picture of his work. She concluded, “Rapaille is 25% substance and 75% shtick.” The Frontline Episode also examined Rapaille and painted an equally conflicting portrait of him and his work.

Packaging the Packager

Rapaille’s website provides several pages of “scientific” text and psychology theory. This adds credibility for many readers as it provides an impression of science and process. His personality and flair then build on the background material to create his dynamic, expert persona. However, as a first impression, it may seem odd to many to visit the website of this marketing expert and find the tagline “The Reptilian Always Wins” with an iguana staring at you. Upon further investigation, the details behind the reptilian analogy are portrayed as science-based and the core of his practice. This is the first glimpse into the conflicting message of psychology and slick packaging that seems to exemplify Rapaille.

Another interesting component of this discussion is the near star quality Rapaille has earned in some corporate and government circles. His list of clients reads like a nearly complete list of Fortune 50 companies. The people interviewed in our reading sources seemed enthusiastic and believe Rapaille’s techniques work. Much of this may be attributable to their need for new and fresh approaches, however, as the pressures to compete and move faster may discourage grinding through studies and demographics found in traditional marketing. Somewhat ironically, or perhaps purposefully, Rapaille was able to crack the code on corporate executives and at least sell himself.

Science or Hype?

So is Clotaire Rapaille and his focus on reptilian urges a modern version of a snake oil salesman? Or is he a new media psychologist? What, if anything does this mean to understating consumer psychology? As consumer psychology continues to evolve, formal processes and science must be packaged in an easily understandable format to aid in greater understanding of consumers. This is an area where trained media psychologies can and should research and uncover the differences in supported psychology research, scams, and inflated results and claims.

The main take-away from this week is that the field of consumer psychology continues to progress. Clotaire Rapaille represents an interesting blend of self-promotion and a science/pseudo-science approach. The high-pressure world of advertising continually seeks innovative ideas for marketing and understanding the consumer and potential consumers for products. Thus, consumer psychology will continue to be an important component of media psychology as companies explore how to market their products to a global, increasingly segmented marketplace.

Web Bias

My primary realization from this week’s activity is that the Web is quickly moving to a battleground of truth versus truth. Arguments can easily be fought by quoting one source against another. While there are methods to validate the authenticity of data, they can be spoofed, obfuscated, and tailored to a message. Everyone is seeking to prove that his or her viewpoint is the “truth.”

One of the primary problems in determining authenticity is in the definition of truth itself. I framed my realization as truth versus truth because people arrive at what they believe to be the truth in different ways. Some people use academic methods, religious faith, scientific methods, or social confirmation of their beliefs.

Unbiased truth: pi = 3.1415

Truth is one of those words that seems to evoke both emotion and a clear meaning to most people. However, actually defining this word is difficult. The very nature of the concept of what is right or correct is shaped by one’s belief system, education, experience, and culture. Wikipedia has more then ten definitions of the concept of Truth (Read). It is clear that the concept and definition of truth is complex. This complexity expands as the question or topic expands and contains multiple dimensions leading to the introduction of biases. Thus, most truths are biased in some way.

Biased truth: just about everything else.

The reading material this week included several sources to teach us how to detect bias in information found on the Internet. These techniques appear sound, but they are time consuming and can only really prove authenticity to a point. For example, the John’s Hopkins page on Evaluating Information Found on the Internet readily admits that all information is told with a point of view or with a point to prove. Perhaps all we are really doing with most authentication exercises is to try and show some formality and peer acceptance of the information.

Truth for Sale
I had an idea during the readings for starting a new web business called ProveMyPoint.com. Users could log in and pay a modest fee to have a pdf paper, web page, or multimedia file created proving whatever viewpoint they want. There would be legitimate sources quoted, statistics, tables, etc. proving this point. It would come certified and from a neutral third party, so it would always be “truthful.”

In many ways, I believe the Internet has already become the company I just described. There are, of course, varying degrees of authenticity. Unfortunately, the methods described by our work this week (especially Virtual Chase), require time and, more importantly, desire of those consuming the information to determine its authenticity. All of these factors complicate the search for truth in media.

Urban Legends

The nature of authenticity on the Web today is no different than the authenticity of numerous and varied stories throughout history. Recall the legends of near mythical people where fact and fiction blend into a single story. Daniel Boone is one good example of this type of truth flexibility. Interestingly, the Daniel Boone Homestead website’s history page performs a little media psychology analysis on Boone's legend. In particular, the site observed, “In biographies, literature, and art, the frontiersman was subject to the whims and personal agendas of writers and artists, rendering it difficult to separate the man from the myth.” This was the early 1800s.

Urban legends today have far more reach and immediacy than early American frontier stories. With regard to the Internet as a new and increasingly dominant information source, there are two dynamics that must be recognized:

1. Information Explosion: The shear volume of information available and exchanged over the Internet is immense. It is often difficult to determine what is true and what is false, the degrees of accuracy, and the subtle and overt manipulation of information.
   
2. Abundance of Experts: Anyone can post information on any viewpoint claiming almost any level of expertise—deserved or not.

Biases are present in many forms and on all sides of information exchange. The creator and writer of the information, the reader and consumer of the information, and other parties who review, edit, and comment on the content all have their own biases. The nature of these biases have been described from a psychological perspective in many ways including Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957), which stated that people will seek consistency in information to become more conformable with their existing beliefs. Consistency in a perspective can be found in the massive amounts of easily accessible information in the Internet  that can be compiled to confirm practically any side of any issue

The Future of Urban Legends

As Media Psychology students entering the second decade of the 21st Century, we have an opportunity to frame discussion around authenticity and the creation, confirmation, or debunking of new Urban Legends. While it is important to understand psychological theory behind why behaviors and beliefs occur, it is also important to understand the role personal experience, education, motivation, spiritual underpinnings, and social relationships have in the search for truth in this vast maze of information called the Internet.

The framing of the discussion and perhaps the creation of a new methodology must take into account the bias factor of every site including so called "fact-checker" sites. The variations of stories, legends, and facts must be accounted for in a simple to understand, science-based approach. Note that one early version of this methodology and communication system is the Snopes color bullet ratings.

---

Reference

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row & Peterson.

Photoshopped Images in Media

After listening to Dr. Karen Dill's presentation Gate Keeping and Concepts of Self in Media, I was intrigued by the discussion about digital retouching of models’ images. I also watched the The Photoshop Effect listed on our course Blog and was amazed, disturbed, and concerned over the extent of this practice. Tim Lynch of Tim Lynch Photography claimed that 99.9% of all photographs in magazines are retouched. It made me wonder if the "ugly" pictures found on tabloid covers are digitally manipulated as well. One example of image manipulation for negative value (perhaps unintended as claimed) was the infamous mug shot of O. J. Simpson on the cover of Time magazine in 1994 (View).

As a new Media Psychology student, I am interested in examining the broader the implications of the practice of image manipulation. Clearly, creating an image of the perfect women can affect girl’s self image, and it is unfair to use software like Photoshop to secretly create these images. Beyond the world of models and self-image, are there increasing instances of blatant image manipulations in the media?

I recall seeing a picture that circulated around the Internet immediately after 9/11. This was supposedly a photo of a young tourist on top of one of the towers with a plane in the background. (See here!) I first received this link from a well-educated friend of mine who thought it was real. Even though I am typically skeptical of anything in my in-box, I spent a fair amount of time trying to determine if it was authentic. Reflecting on this now, I am sure in less emotional times a fraud such as this would have been easier to identify.

There are two issues for consideration in the manipulation of images.

1) Gate Keeping

The first issue is in the area of gate keeping. Given the amount of coverage any politician or celebrity receives, who decides which pictures to take, show, or alter? For example, did some in the “media” prevent the showing of pictures of candidate Obama smoking cigarettes? Did anyone agonize over showing the video of President Ford stumbling on the stairs of Air Force One? How discrete were reporters in not showing President Franklin Roosevelt in his wheelchair? Are these gatekeepers who want to create or reinforce a certain image of a politician? How does that play in the modern world of 24/7 news and cameras everywhere?

2) The Loudest Voice

The second issue for consideration is in the need for the “loudest voice” to be heard in the crowded media of today. Daniel’s video for our NSO-Santa Barbara highlighted the almost absurd volume and shock value of many media outlets on television. As a photographer, I can attest to the difficultly and time it takes to create a singular compelling image. Have media become lazy in the pursuit of imagery or manipulative by resorting to gate keeping and image distortion?

These issues need to be studied by practitioners in the field of Media Psychology. The use of altered images in media for advertising, politics, and shock value is an important phenomenon that requires particular attention. We need to be able to determine how to assess use of these images from moral, ethical, and legal viewpoints. Information can be gathered and analyzed for public policy makers and

A Definition of Critical Thinking

In an age of instance gratification, it is understandable to want to have a simple yes or no answer for every question. This desire, coupled with the wide range of information available on the Internet, allows us to find an answer for just about any question in a short amount of time.

But what kind of thinking do we engage in? Do we accept arguments and information we see because it confirms our existing beliefs? Or is a deeper, more critical thinking required?

Critical thinking is defined as the ability to examine information, explore several perspectives, review data, and construct an informed answer to a question or questions. To perform proper critical thinking, a researcher must understand his or her own biases for inferring and making assumptions. A researcher must force self-discipline to explore multiple perspectives and suppress any emotions related to the topic in question.