Resources:
Tag: psychology
-
The Psychology of Marketing: A Series (Part 1 – Introduction)
We are bombarded by advertising and marketing techniques every day, everywhere we go. Knowing how these methods work can help people sort out what they actually want to buy or support and what they are simply being persuaded and convinced to buy through subliminal means such as a color, celebrity endorsements, voices, music, etc. All of this ties into a topic known as marketing psychology which will be examined in parts within this series. We begin with some background information to express how information is taken in and how this should be considered for different advertising strategies. Additionally, we will evaluate two advertisements to see what aspects are considered “good” or “bad” in terms of marketing persuasion.
Such strategies can be separated into source characteristics and message characteristics. Source characteristics refer to facets of the person/thing presenting the information (i.e., attractiveness, credibility of individual, brand name, etc.), whereas message characteristics look into the information itself (Gilovich et al., 2018). Subsequently, these topics go hand-in-hand with the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) which is a model that, when applied to persuasion, states that there are two routes – central and peripheral – that people can take when presented with persuasive pieces. Essentially, some “persuasive appeals will be more effective when the target audience is largely on “autopilot” [peripheral route], and other types will be more effective when the target audience is alert and attentive [central route]” (Petty & Cacioppo, 1896). In order to evaluate and apply these concepts, I hunted down two advertisements (both pictured below) that highlight different components of these source/message characteristics. I will also evaluate which type of route would be more effective when looking at these forms of persuasion.
The first advertisement for Pop Chips features celebrity Katy Perry. This ties into source characteristics. To begin, attractiveness comes into play. This form of persuasion is particularly effective in terms of the peripheral route but also for the central route as it increases one’s favorability of effortful thinking. In addition, there is certainty in her quote as she states that there is “nothing phony or fake” about this product. Then, we can look at the characteristics of the message itself. It is of high quality since it is clear, the product is visible, the message is in bold letters, etc. It is also vivid as expressed by the bright blue background and Katy Perry’s facial expression. In addition, since she is looking towards the message at the top, the audience is drawn to look at it. They also strategically place the bags of chips over her breasts to once again entice the audience to look at the product. This advertisement, since it is stagnant, would be more effective when presented via the peripheral route such as on a billboard or poster.
For the second advertisement, the product of Sensodyne toothpaste is being marketed as good for one’s teeth. We begin with the source characteristics as it clearly says “9 out of 10 Dentists Recommended” which indicates credibility and certainty for this product. In addition, the message itself showcases once again good quality and vividness in much the same way the first advertisement did. This can be seen in the use of colors once again, even though it is not as bright and vivid as the first one. In addition, the product is visible, and the message is in big bold font. All of these components go into making a good or bad advertisement.
Now you too can look at advertisements and point out their marketing tactics to help differentiate between the important information and the subliminal persuasion techniques being employed!
References:
Gilovich, T., Keltner, D., Chen, S., Nisbett, R. (2018). Social Psychology (5th ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 123–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60214-2
-
Music & Emotions: A Series (Part 3 – Indignant/Defiant)
Album Songs:- You’ve Seen the Butcher – Deftones
- Links 2 3 4 – Rammstein
- Psychosocial – Slipknot
- I Stand Alone – Godsmack
- Ride the Lightning – Metallica
- The Last Ten Seconds of Life – The Face
- Smells Like Teen Spirit – Nirvana
- Duality – Slipknot
- Walk – Pantera
- Dark Entries – Bauhaus
Welcome to Music and Emotions: A Series (Part 3)! In this part, we continue our series with the category of “Indignant/Defiant.” For a quick recap, an interesting study conducted by professors at the University of California Berkeley was conducted on how music evokes different emotions (Cowen et al., 2020). They decided upon 13 categorizations of music, one of which was “indignant/defiant.” They found that the way that individuals classified music based on emotions was relatively similar. All of the songs included in the above album were utilized in this study and were some of the songs that participants most frequently categorized as “indignant/defiant.”
Here, it was found that music that typically landed in this category was characterized by a “growl-like timbre” (Cowen et al., 2020). This is something often seen in music that is perceived as aggressive. In addition, there is an interesting, brief, mention of the potential connection between the threatening vocal expressions used in these songs and that of various animal species. For example, the growl of the black jaguar. This could be why there is a clear male bias in the song choices in the album since males tend to have deeper voices which are more likely to mimic the growl of an animal.
Conversely, some examples of female-centric songs that could also fall into this category could be Shitlist by L7, Rebel Girl by Bikini Kill, and Ignorance by Paramore.
As mentioned previously, they decided upon 13 categories and even included an interactive audio map where you can go in and see all of the songs used and see how you match up. Stay tuned for more of this series… 3 categories down, 10 more to go! Which other category would you want to hear about? Comment below any songs you may think hit the mark for the “Indignant/defiant” category and how you matched up to others in the interactive audio map!
Bibliography:
Cowen, A. S., Fang, X., Sauter, D., & Keltner, D. (2020). What music makes us feel: At least 13 dimensions organize subjective experiences associated with music across different cultures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(4), 1924–1934. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910704117
-
Music & Emotions: A Series (Part 2 – Amusing)
Album Songs:
- The Streetbeater (Sanford and Son Theme) – Quincy Jones
- Grass Land – Super Mario Bros. 3 (Koji Kondo)
- Sugar Zone – Silent Partner
- Frolic (Curb Your Enthusiasm Theme) – Luciano Michelini
- The Good Egg (Warner Bros Cartoons) – The Carl Stalling Project
- Benny Hill Theme – James Rich, Randolph Boots, Leslie Mark Hill
- I Write Sins Not Tragedies – Panic! At The Disco
- Jockey Full of Bourbon – Joe Bonamassa
- Issues – Julia Michaels
- Love and Happiness – AI Green
Welcome to Music and Emotions: A Series (Part 2)! In this part, we continue our series with the category of “Amusing.” For a quick recap, an interesting study conducted by professors at the University of California Berkeley was conducted on how music evokes different emotions (Cowen et al., 2020). They decided upon 13 categorizations of music, one of which was “amusing.” Within this study, the researchers had participants from the US and China listen to over 2,000 music samples and report the specific feeling they felt (“angry, “dreamy,” etc.) as well as the broad affective features they noticed (valence, arousal, etc.). This allowed them to create a pool of data which they analyzed with large-scale statistical tools in order to identify 13 distinct types of subjective experiences attached to music among both cultures (Cowen et al., 2020). All of the songs included in the above album were utilized in this study and were some of the songs that participants most frequently categorized as “amusing.”
In this study, it was found that emotions such as “amusement” and “triumph” were among those that were better translated cross-culturally. They tested both American as well as Chinese individuals which led them to this conclusion. It was also suggested that the categories dealing with subjective experiences, including “amusement,” may be more directly related to the music itself, meaning that certain features may be analyzed in a more culture-specific way among these (Cowen et al., 2020).
As mentioned previously, they decided upon 13 categories and even included an interactive audio map where you can go in and see all of the songs used and see how you match up. Here you can also toggle through the USA and China participants to see the cross-cultural translation of music and emotions. Stay tuned for the next part of this series where I will create an album on the “Indignant/Defiant” category! Comment below any songs you may think hit the mark for the “Amusing” category and how you matched up to others in the interactive audio map!
Bibliography:
Cowen, A. S., Fang, X., Sauter, D., & Keltner, D. (2020). What music makes us feel: At least 13 dimensions organize subjective experiences associated with music across different cultures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(4), 1924–1934. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910704117
-
Music & Emotions: A Series (Part 1 – Scary/Fear)
Album Songs:
- Flow – Peder B. Helland
- FSO – Jaws “The Shark Theme” – John Williams
- Halloween 1978 (main theme) – John Carpenter
- The Murder – Bernard Herrmann
- Crawling – Linkin Park
- Toccata in D Minor – Bach (1709)
- The End (It’s Near) – Noctilucant
- Pier to Nowhere – Charlie Spring
- Emperor’s New Clothes – Panic! At The Disco
- Piano Concerto 1 in B Flat Minor – Tchaikovsky
Welcome to Music and Emotions: A Series (Part 1)! This series will be delving into an interesting study conducted by professors at the University of California Berkeley in which they investigated how music evokes different emotions (Cowen et al., 2020). They decided upon 13 categorizations of music, one of which was “scary/fearful.” They found that the way that individuals classified music based on emotions was relatively similar, even cross-culturally. All of the songs included in the above album were utilized in this study and were some of the songs that participants most frequently categorized as “scary/fearful.”
According to the research, “scary/fearful” typically incorporates harmonic dissonance (Cowen et al., 2020). This emphasizes how some of the emotions people experience may have associations to specific melodic/harmonic intervals. For instance, the Herrmann piece included above is the soundtrack from the famous shower scene in Psycho! Here you can see a clear example of the tension and fear that arises from the use of harmonic dissonance. If you want to see a more in depth explanation of the genius music theory behind Herrmann’s song, here is a link to a very interesting analysis on YouTube.
As mentioned previously, they decided upon 13 categories and even included an interactive audio map where you can go in and see all of the songs used and see how you match up. Stay tuned for the next part of this series where I will create an album on the “Amusing” category! Comment below any songs you may think hit the mark for the “Scary/fear” category and how you matched up to others in the interactive audio map!
Bibliography:
Cowen, A. S., Fang, X., Sauter, D., & Keltner, D. (2020). What music makes us feel: At least 13 dimensions organize subjective experiences associated with music across different cultures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(4), 1924–1934. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910704117
-
Kiki vs. Bouba: A Psychological Phenomenon
Begin by taking this fun quiz! –> Are These More “Bouba” Or “Kiki”? (buzzfeed.com)Were you among the majority that named the spiky figure Kiki and the round figure Bouba? It seems that this is the case for many individuals. This question of “Kiki or Bouba” emerged with the famous psychological experiment conducted by neuroscientist V. S. Ramachandran and Edward Hubbard (Ramachandran and Hubbard, 2001). They asked American and Tamil Speakers to match one of the names to each of the two figures. The results were overwhelmingly the same; enough so to have a significant meaning. However, the real question now is, “Why?”
There are many theories to answer this specific question. The three that rise to the top are the linguistic, semantic, and perceptual hypotheses (Chen et al., 2021). The linguistic point of view theorizes that this is a result of the sensory-motor connections that humans make when learning speech. The semantic approach, on the other hand, highlights that people may have speech associations to certain meanings. Lastly, the perceptual hypothesis looks into the features of sounds, such as varying frequencies, in relation to the connections people make to those shapes. These hypotheses continue being tested in various ways to narrow down the potential cause of this fascinating effect.
On a similar note, have you ever associated a certain sound with a color or a number with a texture? When reviewing the literature of this phenomenon, a common term that is brought up is synesthesia. This term refers to the phenomenon that occurs when one particular sense is stimulated, but an individual actually experiences another sense (Huang, 2019). For example, hearing music but seeing colors as a result, or associating certain numbers to different colors. The reason this phenomenon is closely associated with the Kiki-Bouba Effect is because some scientists believe that the same underlying cognitive mechanisms take place for both (Ramachandran and Hubbard, 2001).
However, the Kiki-Bouba Effect is not just relevant to shapes and sounds as many studies have branched out and broadened this topic to other senses in recent years. For example, one study looks at different tastes in association with the Kiki-Bouba shapes (Bremner et al., 2012). Here it was found that taste and shape do not translate in the same way across cultures.
Although this may be very fun to think about… many people bring up other potential explanations and there are even some who doubt the veracity of the original conclusions found. One example is the debate on the shapes of the words and the actual shapes. This can be seen in the more “pointy” look of the letters used to spell Kiki compared to the more “rounded” letters used to spell Bouba.
Another concept brings up the idea of the frequency that a shape that looks like that would make if it were to break in relation to the associated Kiki-Bouba names. For example, a more jagged item would have a higher-frequency noise when dropped, which would correlate to the higher frequency emitted by the word “Kiki.” This could be related to the idea of onomatopoeias, which are words that sound like the thing they are describing.
With all of this in mind, all current research on this phenomenon is in the stage of finding out why this occurs. By answering that question, much could be unlocked. For one, it would reveal a fundamental component of understanding human perception. In knowing this, we could possibly even create robots that can perceive the world like we do!
Bibliography:
Abe, K. A. (2015, April 10). Are these more “Bouba” or “kiki”? BuzzFeed. Retrieved from https://www.buzzfeed.com/keijiroabe/are-these-more-bouba-or-kiki-17wkb.
Bremner, A. J., Caparos, S., Davidoff, J., de Fockert, J., Linnell, K. J., & Spence, C. (2013). “Bouba” and “kiki” in Namibia? A remote culture make similar shape–sound matches, but different shape–taste matches to Westerners. Cognition, 126(2), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.09.007
Chen, Y.-C., Huang, P.-C., & Spence, C. (2021). Global shape perception contributes to crossmodal correspondences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 47(3), 357–371. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000811
Huang, H. (2019, June 28). What’s the neuroscience behind the Bouba/Kiki Effect? NBB in Paris. Retrieved from https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/nbbparis/2019/06/28/whats-the-neuroscience-behind-the-bouba-kiki-effect/
Ramachandran V, Hubbard E (2001) Synaesthesia—A Window Into Perception, Thought and Language
-
The Good, the Bad, and the … Imaginary?
Working as a camp counselor, I was once yelled at by one of the children. As I went to sit down, a blood-curdling scream erupted from one of the students named Katie. My face went pale white and I stopped mid-squat. I mustered up the will to ask her what was wrong and she frantically said “You were about to sit on Mr. Snuffles!” After realizing that Mr. Snuffles was actually her imaginary friend, I calmed down, apologized to the chair I was about to sit on, and moved to a different seat.
Just like little Katie, many children create imaginary comrades to play with. These so-called imaginary friends are exactly what they sound like – an interpersonal relationship or camaraderie created by the mind that exists only in the imagination. Now although this may sound odd, it is an incredibly common psychological and social phenomenon that occurs in about 37% of children by the time they reach age 7 (Kennedy-Moore, 2013). Additionally, many may believe that talking to a fictitious creation as if they were real sounds like behavior that would be exhibited by someone that is troubled, however, this is not at all the case for these children and there is no cause for concern should a child have this type of relationship.
Now you may be asking yourself, why do only some children have imaginary friends while others never do? What makes those children different? Or even, why are these friends even created in the first place? Well, based on the existing research in this area (and there’s a lot of it!), there are some patterns observed to answer these questions which will be further expressed in this article, some of which are very surprising!
So, What Types of Children Have Imaginary Friends?
In terms of the answer to what type of children create imaginary friends, there are several different components that have been researched from which certain conclusions have been drawn. First, we look at gender: it has been said that females are more likely to have imaginary friends (Hoff, 2011). In addition, there have actually been differences between the types of friends created by females as opposed to males. For example, females are more likely to have imaginary comrades that are inferior to them and that need to be cared for and nurtured, whereas males were more likely to have imaginary friends that they idealize, such as superheroes (Hoff, 2011). One potential explanation for this could be that females have a natural tendency for being ‘motherly,’ unlike males.
Another pattern detected among those that have imaginary friends compared to those that don’t was seen in the number of siblings or the order in which they were born. One study found that those that are either the firstborn in their line of siblings, or are an only child are more likely to create imaginary relationships (Gleason et al., 2003).
There are also other factors, such as personality or emotional state, that could affect whether a child forms an imaginary relationship or not. Several studies looked into creativity levels of a child to see if this could be a potential factor. It was wondered whether ‘gifted’ children that displayed higher levels of creativity were more likely to form such friendships and it was found that that was in fact the case (Seiffge-Krenke, 1997). Another study gave a group of children two different creativity assessments and found, once again, that those that did have imaginary companions scored much higher on both of the measures of creativity (Hoff, 2011).
Moreover, whether the self-image that a child holds could affect their likelihood to have imaginary friends can be focused on. One study looked at this in-depth and concluded that although some of the data indicated a lower self-image for those children that did have imaginary friends, the data was not significant enough to make any concrete decisions (Hoff, 2011). This means that it is not necessarily true that lower self-image would be related to imaginary companions in childhood.
With all of this being said, it can be concluded that those that are more likely to form imaginary relationships are females, those that are firstborns or only children, and those that are more creative.
But Why?
Now, here there are many components that can be analyzed, such as social development, friendship, and even other theories of psychology that come into play.
The reason for these friendships that most people will come up with is that these children lack social development and need imaginary friends to cope and fill in that gap. However, the complete opposite has actually been found! It has been said that being able to develop another being within their imagination is actually a symptom of developing social intelligence (Volpe, 2019). With this comes the idea of ‘ Theory of Mind,’ which involves understanding another individual’s beliefs, knowledge, emotions, intentions, and being able to use this to navigate social situations (Thompson, 2017). With this in mind, for a child to create an imaginary friend, they must be able to conceptualize beliefs and actions that are independent and different from their own which would indicate social intelligence based on the idea of Theory of Mind.
Another concept that could explain this phenomenon is the self-determination theory which can be defined as a theory of personality and motivation based on how an individual interacts with their social environment (Legault, 2017). This theory consists of three fundamental psychological needs – competence, relatedness, and autonomy – which an imaginary friend can fulfill (Volpe, 2019). More specifically, competence can be seen when children assume dominance or leadership over their companion. Then, we can see relatedness in the same way that it is displayed in ordinary friendships with real children as they find levels to relate to each other on. Lastly, autonomy is displayed when these children incorporate their imaginary friend into a situation in order to exert a sense of control and manipulation; for example, insisting that their friend be served a plate at dinner (Volpe, 2019).
The next and most basic idea is that these companionships are simply fulfilling a child’s need for friendship. An interesting take on this idea was observed in one study that looked at the relationships between personified inanimate objects among children compared to their imaginary friends. This study found that personified objects occurred when a new toy was acquired and was typically a nurturing relationship, whereas the bond formed with imaginary friends were more so sociable and friendly and were viewed as fulfilling a need for friendship (Gleason et al., 2003).
All in all, the “why” of such relationships cannot be fully answered as the points discussed are not universal to all children with these friendships and are not an indicator of greater intelligence either. In general, however, development of social intelligence, a need for friendship, and the fulfillment of social needs based on the theory of self-determination are all plausible explanations for this phenomenon.
So… Are They Bad?
The short answer is no. Should you encounter an imaginary friend, there is no reason to discourage this behavior as it is a sign of proper social development. It can be healthy to play along and not usurp control of this friend as it is important that the child has control. It is of course okay to lay down the law should behaviors become too disruptive, however, there’s no reason to try to get rid of that child’s ‘special friend’ as it could be a sign of healthy social development.
References
Gleason, T. R. (2002). Social provisions of real and imaginary relationships in early childhood. Developmental Psychology, 38(6), 979-992. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.38.6.979
Gleason, T. R., Sebanc, A. M., & Hartup, W. W. (2000). Imaginary companions of preschool children. Developmental Psychology, 36(4), 419-428. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.36.4.419
Hoff, E. V. (2005). Imaginary companions, creativity, and self-image in middle childhood. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2-3), 167-180. doi:10.1080/10400419.2005.9651477
Kennedy-Moore, E. (2013, January 31). Imaginary friends. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/growing-friendships/201301/imaginary-friends
Legault, L. (2017). Self-Determination theory. Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences, 1-9. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1162-1
Seiffge-Krenke, I. (1997). Imaginary companions in adolescence: Sign of a deficient or positive development? Journal of Adolescence, 20(2), 137-154. doi:10.1006/jado.1996.0072
Thompson, B. (2017, July 03). Theory of Mind: Understanding others in a social world. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/socioemotional-success/201707/theory-mind-understanding-others-in-social-world
Volpe, A. (2019, July 30). Why kids invent imaginary friends. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2019/07/why-do-kids-have-imaginary-friends/594919/
