Opinion Science

Joe Fuld founded the political consulting firm, The Campaign Workshop, and he also co-hosts the podcast, "How to Win a Campaign." In this episode, he shares his background in political and advocacy campaigns and what you need to consider if you're thinking of running for office yourself.At the top of the show, I also talked to Pavan Parikh. He's currently running for Probate Court Judge in Hamilton County, Ohio. You can learn more about Pavan at https://www.pavanforjudge.com/ or follow his campaign on Facebook or Twitter.A few articles related to topics that Joe Fuld mentions:The Tully Message BoxThe Seven Cs of Campaign MessagingFor a transcript of this show, visit the episode's webpage: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/political-campaigning-with-joe-fuld/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.Additional music this week: Firefly by Podington Bear, licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 International License. For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Dr. Zakary Tormala is a professor of behavioral science and marketing at Stanford University’s business school. He studies how people can become certain of an opinion and what that means for their willingness to share their views. We talk about what certainty is, how it affects people's choices and resistance to change, and how the research about certainty can inform best practices in persuasion.Some of the things that come up in this episode:Robert Burton's article, "The Certainty Epidemic" (also see his book, On Being Certain)The difference between "clarity" and "correctness" (Petrocelli, Tormala, & Rucker, 2007)The relationship between certainty and advocacy (Cheatham & Tormala, 2015; 2017)How successfully resisting persuasion can boost certainty (Tormala & Petty, 2002)How apparent social consensus increases certainty (Clarkson, Tormala, Rucker, & Dugan, 2013)Why uncertainty can get people to pay attention (Karmarkar & Tormala, 2010)For an overview of some of the ideas in this episode, check out Dr. Tormala's brief article in Current Opinion in Psychology: "The role of certainty (and uncertainty) in attitudes and persuasion" or his article in Harvard Business Review: "How certainty transforms persuasion."For a transcript of this show, visit the episode's webpage: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/certainty-with-zakary-tormalaLearn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Dr. Gordon Pennycook studies why people share misinformation. His research has used many techniques to understand people’s ability to judge the accuracy of information, their willingness to share that information, and what we can do to encourage people to only spread true information. Some of the things that come up in this episode:There’s lots of coronavirus misinformation out thereSeeing fake news repeatedly makes it feel more true (Pennycook, Cannon, & Rand, 2018)Believing fake news is more about not paying attention than partisanship (Pennycook & Rand, 2019)Encouraging people to think about accuracy reduces sharing of false and misleading news (Pennycook et al., preprint)Using Twitter bots to get people to think about accuracyInterventions to stop the spread of COVID-19 misinformation (Pennycook et al., in press)The problem with biased thinking or “motivated reasoning” (Tappin, Pennycook, & Rand, 2020; preprint) For a transcript of this show, visit the episode's webpage: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episode/fake-news-with-gordon-pennycook/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.Additional music and sound effects obtained from https://www.zapsplat.com.For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Shannon Odell is a comedian and neuroscientist, and she uses comedy as a tool to teach people about science. She’s done this through hosting live shows, a YouTube series, a podcast, and other ways of getting the word out about how cool neuroscience is. In this episode, we talk about how she got into science, how she got into comedy, and how she thought to combine those two worlds. Be sure to check out some of Shannon’s work:“Your Brain on Blank”: a YouTube series about how your brain processes different life experiences (drinking, meditating, listening to music) The Science of Self-Care Podcast: a group of comedians take a deep dive into a self-care practice (e.g., acupuncture, yoga, aromatherapy) and explore the science behind it Drunk Science: Live show (turned Zoom show) where comedians defend their “research” to scientists For a transcript of this show, visit the episode's webpage. Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Dr. Sharon Shavitt is a professor of marketing at the University of Illinois. Her research has looked at consumer behavior from lots of angles, and she has been a pioneer in thinking about the role of culture in the persuasion process. In this episode, we talk about how she started to consider how the success of an advertisement depends on the audience’s cultural values and other effects of culture. She also shares her experience connecting social psychology with the world of marketing, which wasn’t that common when she was in graduate school.Links for more on some of what we talked about:Individualistic vs. collectivistic cultures (check out the great book, Clash!)Dr. Shavitt’s research on culture and persuasion (Han & Shavitt, 1994)The effect of political values on successful persuasion (Feinberg & Willer, 2016)"Preferences don't have to be personal" (Riemer, Shavitt, Koo, & Markus, 2014)Holistic vs. analytic thinking and price-quality judgments (Lalwani & Shavitt, 2013)For a transcript of this show, visit the episode's webpage.Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.Music in this episode by YOUNG BLOOOD (https://www.facebook.com/YOUNGBLOODMUSIK/). Young Blood YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwWoMQ7Y7rdXob2MQnIJe_g?sub_confirmation=1 For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Deion Hawkins is an assistant professor of Communication Studies at Emerson College. He uses in-depth interviews with members of a community to understand health communication and the effects of police brutality. In this episode, he shares his dissertation work about where members of Black community get information about police brutality and the psychological toll that information takes. We also talk more generally about the recent Black Lives Matter protests and the role of race in academic research.For a transcript of this show, visit the episode's webpage on http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.Music in this episode: Stomps Claps & Beatbox by MusicToday80; Composed by: Anwar Amr Youtube Channel; Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0); Music provided by Free Vibes.For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Phia Salter takes a cultural psychology approach to studying racism. She’s an associate professor of Psychology at Davidson College, and in this episode she draws a contrast between thinking of racism as an individual bias versus thinking of it as systemic. She talks about her research on the “Marley hypothesis” and the ways in which our environments’ discussion of racial issues shapes our own views.For more resources on understanding racism in the U.S., you can start by checking out Smithsonian magazine's Resources to Understand Racism in America. Things we mention in this episode:Dr. Salter's summary of research related to systemic racism (Salter, Adams, & Perez, 2018)The "Marley Hypothesis": Historical knowledge associated with recognizing contemporary racism (Nelson, Adams, & Salter, 2013)Research on preferences for different Black History Month materials (Salter & Adams, 2016)Writings of Derrick Bell on Critical Race Theory (For an overview of the movement, Dr. Salter recommends Delgado and Stefancic's introductory book)George Lipsitz's "The Possessive Investment in Whiteness"Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

William Brady studies how messages spread online--especially on social media sites. By mixing psychology experiments with analyses of millions of messages on social media websites, he's learned what kinds of language cuts through the clutter. Specifically, he finds that moral emotional language plays a hefty role in online communication. In this episode, Billy talks about this research and his other work on moral outrage to give us an idea of how opinions spread online.Things we mention in this episode:NYU’s Center for Social Media and Politics Paul Rozin’s research on “the process of moralization”Statistically analyzing patterns of words (check this out for a quick intro)Moral emotional language captures attention and prompts retweets (Brady et al., 2017, 2020; also see this Scientific American article)Moral outrage online (check out Molly Crockett’s article for The Globe and Mail)Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Nathan Kalmoe is a political scientist at Louisiana State University. He studies public opinion and mass political behavior. In 2017 he co-authored the book, Neither Liberal nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American Public. In this episode, we talk about his research on how political ideology means different things to political leaders than to the general public, how lots of people tend to avoid describing themselves and liberal or conservative, but how they nevertheless seem perfectly comfortable identifying as Democrat or Republican.Things we mention in this episode:Early research and writing by Phillip Converse and Walter LippmanNathan's recent article in Political Psychology: "Uses and Abuses of Ideology in Political Psychology"Nathan's book with Donald Kinder: Neither Liberal nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American PublicHis upcoming book: With Ballots and Bullets: Partisanship and Violence in the American Civil WarLearn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.

Alissa Wilkinson is a film critic and culture reporter for Vox and an associate professor of English and Humanities and The King's College in New York City. We talk about how she translates her own thoughts and feelings about a film into a written piece of criticism and the role that criticism plays in society. She shares thoughts about the job of a film critic and the delicate art of rating, reviewing, and recommending movies.This episode also features snippets from a conversation with Cody Duckworth. If you're interested, you can hear our full conversation as a bonus episode on the Opinion Science website (here!).In this episode, we mention a few things Alissa has written about before, so for full context, check out these articles:"The case for spoilers" (11/7/19)"Rotten Tomatoes, explained" (7/14/18)"Do not see The Emoji Movie" (7/29/17)Alissa's review of "The Assistant" (4/28/20)Alissa's review of "Bad Education" (4/24/20)Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.For a transcript of this episode, visit this episode's page at: http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/episodes/Learn more about Opinion Science at http://opinionsciencepodcast.com/ and follow @OpinionSciPod on Twitter.