View Full Version : There is NO "Macbeth effect"

20-11-18, 17:24
The crisis in psychology continues as another study fails to replicate.


"Perhaps no concept has been more important to social psychology in recent years — for good and ill — than “social priming”, or the idea, as the science writer Neuroskeptic (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2016/10/13/social-priming-works-after-all/%23.W-CodZNKhPb) once put it, that “subtle cues can exert large, unconscious influences on human behaviour.” This subgenre of research has produced a steady drumbeat of interesting findings, but unfortunately, an increasing number of them are failing to replicate (https://digest.bps.org.uk/2016/09/16/ten-famous-psychology-findings-that-its-been-difficult-to-replicate/) – including modern classics, like the idea that exposure to ageing-related words makes you walk more slowly, or that thinking about money increases your selfishness.The so-called “Macbeth effect” is another classic example of social priming that gained mainstream recognition and acceptance from psychologists and laypeople alike. The term was first introduced by the psychologists Chen-Bo Zhong and Katie Liljenquist, who reported in a 2006 paper in Science (http://www-2.rotman.utoronto.ca/facbios/file/Zhong%2520&%2520Liljenquist%25202006.pdf) that “a threat to one’s moral purity induces the need to cleanse oneself”."

21-11-18, 08:18
Psychologists are priests; and there is nothing wrong with that, but that is how they should present themselves, and not as scientists.

01-03-19, 11:07
Very interesting, I've never thought about “Macbeth effect” before.