The Halo Effect
There is in psychology a phenomenon called the halo effect. For the teacher it essentially comes to this: if a student does well on the first few exam problems graded, the teacher will normally grade higher the remainder of the problems. The counter to this is to grade the first question of all exams, then the second, and so on. It takes more time. But it erases the effect. Of course, it is important to not know student names, to try not to remember handwriting, and other clues to whose paper is being graded.
But the halo effect applies to many other phenomena.
Now suppose I was going to talk about science, like to tell you things that are generally new and mostly unknown. How would you receive it? If you knew me and trusted my words are carefully measure, you would look more favorably toward what I say, and vise-versa. Again, the halo effect. On the other hand, if you didn't know me, you would read the words with a more questioning outlook and decide well into the piece if it had merit. Here there is little halo effect, and good. This is not to say it is better not to know anything about the author, for there are plausibility factors being shot at you, and you may not know anything other than to accept or not. The words, and the skill with which they are used constitute a type of indirect and generalized halo effect.
Now suppose I'm telling you about some new science, but before I begin I say that climate change is here, it is proven scientifically, and it is without any question. Oh,oh. If you, too, believe these things, then the halo effect is back and the next topic will be received with greater enthusiasm and believability. And conversely. Similarly, if you adore the current administration, and believe it is doing the best for mankind, you will likely watch a news station with a similar viewpoint. You will trust their commentators, and be more receptive to much of what they say, even about other topics. And conversely. Again,we have the halo effect. Politicians, of all persuasion, understand implicitly and instinctively the halo effect. This causes some to take hard-rock positions. It appeals to their base, the halo of their constituency. Others try to take no hard positions, hoping to appeal to a broader constituency, hoping to bask in a somewhat thinner halo shining not as brightly.
Basically, we just can't escape the halo effect, except through a rather stringent form of skepticism, which is neither a philosophy nor way of life. Total skepticism is a "square-one" point of view. Through this lens it becomes difficult to accept anything without extreme scrutiny. But that is in itself an inverse halo effect. The bottom line is we come to trust and believe in things and support the sources of those things, whether in words, in action, or in doctrine.
There is in psychology a phenomenon called the halo effect. For the teacher it essentially comes to this: if a student does well on the first few exam problems graded, the teacher will normally grade higher the remainder of the problems. The counter to this is to grade the first question of all exams, then the second, and so on. It takes more time. But it erases the effect. Of course, it is important to not know student names, to try not to remember handwriting, and other clues to whose paper is being graded.
But the halo effect applies to many other phenomena.
Now suppose I was going to talk about science, like to tell you things that are generally new and mostly unknown. How would you receive it? If you knew me and trusted my words are carefully measure, you would look more favorably toward what I say, and vise-versa. Again, the halo effect. On the other hand, if you didn't know me, you would read the words with a more questioning outlook and decide well into the piece if it had merit. Here there is little halo effect, and good. This is not to say it is better not to know anything about the author, for there are plausibility factors being shot at you, and you may not know anything other than to accept or not. The words, and the skill with which they are used constitute a type of indirect and generalized halo effect.
Now suppose I'm telling you about some new science, but before I begin I say that climate change is here, it is proven scientifically, and it is without any question. Oh,oh. If you, too, believe these things, then the halo effect is back and the next topic will be received with greater enthusiasm and believability. And conversely. Similarly, if you adore the current administration, and believe it is doing the best for mankind, you will likely watch a news station with a similar viewpoint. You will trust their commentators, and be more receptive to much of what they say, even about other topics. And conversely. Again,we have the halo effect. Politicians, of all persuasion, understand implicitly and instinctively the halo effect. This causes some to take hard-rock positions. It appeals to their base, the halo of their constituency. Others try to take no hard positions, hoping to appeal to a broader constituency, hoping to bask in a somewhat thinner halo shining not as brightly.
Basically, we just can't escape the halo effect, except through a rather stringent form of skepticism, which is neither a philosophy nor way of life. Total skepticism is a "square-one" point of view. Through this lens it becomes difficult to accept anything without extreme scrutiny. But that is in itself an inverse halo effect. The bottom line is we come to trust and believe in things and support the sources of those things, whether in words, in action, or in doctrine.
Comments
Post a Comment
Please Comment.