WEBVTT - The Illusion of Control, Part 1

0:00:03.040 --> 0:00:06.880
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind, a production of iHeartRadio.

0:00:12.680 --> 0:00:14.640
<v Speaker 2>Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind. My name

0:00:14.680 --> 0:00:15.360
<v Speaker 2>is Robert.

0:00:15.120 --> 0:00:19.520
<v Speaker 3>Lamb and I am Joe McCormick. And to begin today's episode,

0:00:19.520 --> 0:00:21.880
<v Speaker 3>I want to start by sketching out a little scenario

0:00:21.960 --> 0:00:26.040
<v Speaker 3>to help you imagine something and investigate your intuitions. So

0:00:26.200 --> 0:00:28.639
<v Speaker 3>I want you to imagine you are waiting on a

0:00:28.680 --> 0:00:32.279
<v Speaker 3>friend in the lobby of a casino hotel. Maybe you're

0:00:32.280 --> 0:00:35.680
<v Speaker 3>in Las Vegas, and you realize you've got some time

0:00:35.720 --> 0:00:38.280
<v Speaker 3>to kill, maybe fifteen minutes before your friend gets there,

0:00:38.640 --> 0:00:40.839
<v Speaker 3>and you've got a few spare bucks in your pocket.

0:00:41.080 --> 0:00:42.680
<v Speaker 3>You kind of get the itch to go blow it

0:00:42.720 --> 0:00:44.960
<v Speaker 3>on one of the slot machines that keeps making all

0:00:45.000 --> 0:00:48.000
<v Speaker 3>these exciting noises nearby. And by the way, this is

0:00:48.080 --> 0:00:50.240
<v Speaker 3>just to illustrate a point. This is not behavior that

0:00:50.280 --> 0:00:54.040
<v Speaker 3>we're necessarily advising, because, oh, I don't know, we've done

0:00:54.080 --> 0:00:57.600
<v Speaker 3>episodes on slot machines before, and you know, even if

0:00:57.840 --> 0:01:00.240
<v Speaker 3>you plan to lose all the money you bet, there's

0:01:00.240 --> 0:01:02.520
<v Speaker 3>always the chance that you just might have too much

0:01:02.560 --> 0:01:03.320
<v Speaker 3>fun with them.

0:01:04.400 --> 0:01:07.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Back in twenty fifteen, we did an episode titled

0:01:07.200 --> 0:01:11.200
<v Speaker 2>one arm Bandits the Science of slot machines, and I

0:01:11.280 --> 0:01:15.520
<v Speaker 2>found it rather illuminating myself. So I'd recommend anyone who's

0:01:15.640 --> 0:01:19.920
<v Speaker 2>interested and just just to what extent these are fair

0:01:20.040 --> 0:01:22.679
<v Speaker 2>or unfair, I recommend go back and listen to that

0:01:22.720 --> 0:01:24.960
<v Speaker 2>episode spoiler the House always wins.

0:01:25.520 --> 0:01:27.440
<v Speaker 3>I haven't been to Vegas, but from what I understand,

0:01:27.480 --> 0:01:29.560
<v Speaker 3>there's a lot of fun stuff to do other than gambling.

0:01:30.000 --> 0:01:33.560
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, Vegas is great. My family and I went

0:01:33.600 --> 0:01:36.160
<v Speaker 2>out there for the first time a few months back,

0:01:36.200 --> 0:01:39.520
<v Speaker 2>and yeah, there's some great restaurants. You see the Hoover

0:01:39.640 --> 0:01:42.600
<v Speaker 2>Dam not too far away, and they have a tremendous

0:01:42.640 --> 0:01:44.720
<v Speaker 2>male wolf, so lot to see.

0:01:44.760 --> 0:01:46.959
<v Speaker 3>There is that one Omega Mart.

0:01:46.560 --> 0:01:50.000
<v Speaker 2>That's Omega Mart. Yeah it's special. It's pretty great.

0:01:50.640 --> 0:01:53.800
<v Speaker 3>But anyway, so back to the scenario. So you decide

0:01:53.840 --> 0:01:55.720
<v Speaker 3>you're going to blow some money at a slot machine.

0:01:55.840 --> 0:01:58.160
<v Speaker 3>You go up to the machine, you put your money in,

0:01:58.640 --> 0:02:01.200
<v Speaker 3>but you're new to this and you don't see the

0:02:01.240 --> 0:02:04.400
<v Speaker 3>button that spins the digital wheel. So you start looking

0:02:04.440 --> 0:02:07.080
<v Speaker 3>around and there's a lady sitting at the slot machine

0:02:07.080 --> 0:02:09.600
<v Speaker 3>next to you, and she plays these things all the time.

0:02:09.760 --> 0:02:13.480
<v Speaker 3>She sees you scanning the machine in confusion, and she

0:02:13.600 --> 0:02:16.800
<v Speaker 3>leans over and says it's right here, and she reaches

0:02:16.840 --> 0:02:20.200
<v Speaker 3>across and presses the button for you, And then you

0:02:20.200 --> 0:02:23.640
<v Speaker 3>see the wheel spin on the digital screen. It slows down,

0:02:23.880 --> 0:02:26.280
<v Speaker 3>there's a ding, and it's a bus. Do you lose

0:02:26.320 --> 0:02:29.520
<v Speaker 3>your bet? Now? Everybody's reaction to the scenario might be

0:02:29.520 --> 0:02:34.480
<v Speaker 3>somewhat different, but I think an extremely common reaction for

0:02:34.639 --> 0:02:38.240
<v Speaker 3>people to have would be annoyance and a feeling of

0:02:38.320 --> 0:02:41.320
<v Speaker 3>having been wronged by the woman who pushed the button

0:02:41.400 --> 0:02:44.000
<v Speaker 3>for you. And this could be for a number of reasons.

0:02:44.080 --> 0:02:46.800
<v Speaker 3>Some of those reasons might be purely social, like it

0:02:46.880 --> 0:02:49.560
<v Speaker 3>might feel like a violation of your personal space by

0:02:49.600 --> 0:02:52.720
<v Speaker 3>a stranger. You might be upset that somebody robbed you

0:02:52.840 --> 0:02:55.560
<v Speaker 3>of the fun of pressing a button, because sometimes it

0:02:56.080 --> 0:02:58.560
<v Speaker 3>can be fun to press a button. But beyond all that,

0:02:58.760 --> 0:03:01.880
<v Speaker 3>I think a very common reaction, even among people who

0:03:02.000 --> 0:03:06.880
<v Speaker 3>rationally know better, would be a feeling of having been cheated.

0:03:07.360 --> 0:03:11.760
<v Speaker 3>This random stranger didn't just invade your personal space and

0:03:11.880 --> 0:03:15.800
<v Speaker 3>interrupt your fun. She lost your money for you. It's

0:03:15.880 --> 0:03:18.680
<v Speaker 3>her fault you lost that money and did not win.

0:03:19.320 --> 0:03:22.480
<v Speaker 3>At the same time, you would probably realize correctly that

0:03:22.600 --> 0:03:25.720
<v Speaker 3>a slot machine is not a game of skill. It's

0:03:25.720 --> 0:03:28.399
<v Speaker 3>a game of chance, and thus it literally makes no

0:03:28.520 --> 0:03:32.600
<v Speaker 3>difference whatsoever to your probability of winning whether you push

0:03:32.680 --> 0:03:35.360
<v Speaker 3>the button or someone else does. It is not as

0:03:35.400 --> 0:03:39.160
<v Speaker 3>if you placed a bet on, you know, throwing darts

0:03:39.200 --> 0:03:42.400
<v Speaker 3>at a dartboard or something where conceivably you might be

0:03:42.400 --> 0:03:45.520
<v Speaker 3>better at hitting the center than the person who throws

0:03:45.520 --> 0:03:48.960
<v Speaker 3>the dart for you. Everybody knows that with the slot machine,

0:03:49.040 --> 0:03:52.560
<v Speaker 3>it truly does not matter who presses the button. And yet,

0:03:52.840 --> 0:03:56.040
<v Speaker 3>even though we know this rationally, I think I think

0:03:56.080 --> 0:03:59.040
<v Speaker 3>if I personally were in this situation, it would be

0:03:59.080 --> 0:04:02.200
<v Speaker 3>really hard for me to shake the feeling that this

0:04:02.280 --> 0:04:05.400
<v Speaker 3>stranger had cheated me out of possible winnings. So I

0:04:05.440 --> 0:04:07.960
<v Speaker 3>would know it's not true, but it would just be

0:04:08.080 --> 0:04:13.680
<v Speaker 3>an extremely tenacious illusion that whoever presses the button really matters.

0:04:14.200 --> 0:04:16.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, this is interesting to think about it. I hadn't

0:04:16.120 --> 0:04:18.800
<v Speaker 2>really thought about it so much. You know, we'll get

0:04:18.800 --> 0:04:22.760
<v Speaker 2>into the idea of other rituals associated with this sort

0:04:22.800 --> 0:04:24.719
<v Speaker 2>of behavior, like, you know, am I wearing my lucky

0:04:24.720 --> 0:04:28.200
<v Speaker 2>shirt or not? When I go to gamble, or when

0:04:28.200 --> 0:04:31.039
<v Speaker 2>I go to watch my favorite sports team or take

0:04:31.040 --> 0:04:34.320
<v Speaker 2>a test, et cetera. So it's interesting to think about

0:04:34.360 --> 0:04:36.960
<v Speaker 2>how this scenario I push the button versus a stranger

0:04:37.000 --> 0:04:40.279
<v Speaker 2>pushes the button. How that compares or doesn't compare to

0:04:40.520 --> 0:04:42.800
<v Speaker 2>the luck related scenario of I push the button with

0:04:42.839 --> 0:04:45.119
<v Speaker 2>my lucky shirt on or I push the button without

0:04:45.160 --> 0:04:48.040
<v Speaker 2>my lucky shirt on. Are we more likely to disregard

0:04:48.600 --> 0:04:53.279
<v Speaker 2>the logic of the latter? What have we left the

0:04:53.320 --> 0:04:57.000
<v Speaker 2>stranger wear our lucky shirt? That still doesn't seem right?

0:04:57.520 --> 0:05:00.520
<v Speaker 3>Well, yeah, these are all you know, who presses the button,

0:05:00.920 --> 0:05:04.600
<v Speaker 3>whether they're wearing their lucky charm or not. These are

0:05:04.640 --> 0:05:07.960
<v Speaker 3>all variations on the idea that there is something you

0:05:08.040 --> 0:05:11.719
<v Speaker 3>can do to increase or decrease your chance of winning

0:05:11.800 --> 0:05:14.320
<v Speaker 3>at the slot machine. And it's just not true, Like,

0:05:14.600 --> 0:05:17.400
<v Speaker 3>none of these things influence what your chances of winning are.

0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:19.520
<v Speaker 3>Your chances are equally low no matter what.

0:05:20.160 --> 0:05:23.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, your chances are all locked up in that machine already,

0:05:23.320 --> 0:05:27.640
<v Speaker 2>they are programmed into it. And who pushes that button?

0:05:27.880 --> 0:05:33.560
<v Speaker 2>Who actually ends up executing the final the final button push,

0:05:33.600 --> 0:05:37.680
<v Speaker 2>whatever form that takes in a given gambling machine, it's

0:05:37.680 --> 0:05:38.960
<v Speaker 2>already been figured out by the.

0:05:38.920 --> 0:05:41.880
<v Speaker 3>Machine, right, And so I sketched out this scenario to

0:05:42.000 --> 0:05:46.799
<v Speaker 3>illustrate a concept in psychology called the illusion of control.

0:05:47.400 --> 0:05:51.280
<v Speaker 3>So the illusion of control refers to a common type

0:05:51.360 --> 0:05:55.920
<v Speaker 3>of cognitive illusion, a mistaken pattern of reasoning in which

0:05:55.960 --> 0:05:59.719
<v Speaker 3>we overestimate the extent to which our choices or behavior

0:05:59.800 --> 0:06:05.599
<v Speaker 3>can effect outcomes, even totally random or uncontrollable outcomes. So,

0:06:05.839 --> 0:06:10.040
<v Speaker 3>according to illusion of control theory, either we think we

0:06:10.120 --> 0:06:13.320
<v Speaker 3>have control over an outcome when we have no control

0:06:13.360 --> 0:06:16.640
<v Speaker 3>at all, or we do have some control, but we

0:06:16.720 --> 0:06:20.240
<v Speaker 3>think we have more control than we actually do. So

0:06:20.279 --> 0:06:22.880
<v Speaker 3>today we're kicking off a series where we're going to

0:06:22.920 --> 0:06:26.120
<v Speaker 3>take a look at research on the illusion of control,

0:06:26.440 --> 0:06:29.240
<v Speaker 3>to what extent the concept is a valid description of

0:06:29.240 --> 0:06:32.200
<v Speaker 3>how we think, what the evidence for it is, some

0:06:32.360 --> 0:06:35.799
<v Speaker 3>criticisms of the concept, how it works in theory and practice,

0:06:36.200 --> 0:06:39.159
<v Speaker 3>and why we might experience it to the extent that

0:06:39.200 --> 0:06:39.520
<v Speaker 3>we do.

0:06:40.279 --> 0:06:43.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and it's going to be interesting to talk about

0:06:43.080 --> 0:06:44.839
<v Speaker 2>this and think about it, especially in a world that

0:06:45.480 --> 0:06:48.200
<v Speaker 2>can very often feel rather out of our control, and

0:06:48.279 --> 0:06:50.480
<v Speaker 2>that as well discuss plays into the whole scenario.

0:06:50.680 --> 0:06:53.599
<v Speaker 3>That's right. But before we dive into the research on

0:06:53.640 --> 0:06:55.360
<v Speaker 3>this subject, I thought it would be good to kick

0:06:55.400 --> 0:06:58.520
<v Speaker 3>off with some just classic examples that we can think

0:06:58.560 --> 0:07:00.880
<v Speaker 3>of from day to day life stuff. You don't even

0:07:00.920 --> 0:07:03.280
<v Speaker 3>need an experiment to see. You can just you know,

0:07:03.360 --> 0:07:05.360
<v Speaker 3>it happens to us all the time we do it.

0:07:05.920 --> 0:07:10.040
<v Speaker 3>You already mentioned Rob the idea of lucky rituals that

0:07:10.080 --> 0:07:13.000
<v Speaker 3>people put in place to help steer the outcome of

0:07:13.040 --> 0:07:16.960
<v Speaker 3>a public event on which the ritual has no rational

0:07:17.000 --> 0:07:20.200
<v Speaker 3>reason to have any influence. So whether your football team

0:07:20.280 --> 0:07:23.640
<v Speaker 3>wins that, you know, does that depend on whether you're

0:07:23.640 --> 0:07:27.320
<v Speaker 3>wearing your lucky shirt. And people might participate in lucky

0:07:27.400 --> 0:07:31.160
<v Speaker 3>rituals like this for a number of different reasons. Not

0:07:31.280 --> 0:07:34.840
<v Speaker 3>all of those reasons would be a genuine expectation that

0:07:34.880 --> 0:07:37.560
<v Speaker 3>it will help influence the outcome of the event. But

0:07:37.760 --> 0:07:40.720
<v Speaker 3>to the extent that someone does feel it will actually

0:07:40.840 --> 0:07:44.080
<v Speaker 3>change the probability of you getting the outcome you want,

0:07:44.440 --> 0:07:46.680
<v Speaker 3>that would be an example of the illusion of control.

0:07:47.280 --> 0:07:51.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, because sometimes these activities, you know, various lucky items.

0:07:51.360 --> 0:07:54.800
<v Speaker 2>Sometimes it's probably more in the fun category than anything.

0:07:55.040 --> 0:07:58.480
<v Speaker 2>You know, you wear your lucky scarf to go enjoy

0:07:58.520 --> 0:08:03.000
<v Speaker 2>a football game other football fans. You know, yeah, it's

0:08:03.040 --> 0:08:03.760
<v Speaker 2>just a fun thing to.

0:08:03.720 --> 0:08:06.120
<v Speaker 3>Do, or just to regulate your own emotions. Like it

0:08:06.240 --> 0:08:09.400
<v Speaker 3>might be literally functional, but operating on the self instead

0:08:09.400 --> 0:08:10.600
<v Speaker 3>of on the external world.

0:08:11.000 --> 0:08:13.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Yeah, and as always, you know, to what degree

0:08:13.160 --> 0:08:17.920
<v Speaker 2>does something become maladaptive or a hindrance. I mean, you

0:08:18.000 --> 0:08:20.960
<v Speaker 2>do hear cases of Okay, someone's wearing their their lucky

0:08:20.960 --> 0:08:24.560
<v Speaker 2>shirt to a game. Okay, fair, someone's wearing their lucky

0:08:24.640 --> 0:08:28.360
<v Speaker 2>underwear to a game. Fair, Someone's wearing their lucky underwear

0:08:29.240 --> 0:08:31.280
<v Speaker 2>to this game and they wore it to last game

0:08:31.320 --> 0:08:34.679
<v Speaker 2>and hasn't been washed since last game. You hear about

0:08:34.720 --> 0:08:37.240
<v Speaker 2>cases like that as well. And I don't know, I

0:08:38.000 --> 0:08:40.880
<v Speaker 2>think maybe in some of those cases there's another discussion

0:08:41.520 --> 0:08:43.840
<v Speaker 2>to have there, But I don't know. Sports and their rituals.

0:08:44.840 --> 0:08:46.000
<v Speaker 2>There's a lot going on here.

0:08:46.200 --> 0:08:48.479
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, that's the version that's truly maladaptive.

0:08:49.000 --> 0:08:51.240
<v Speaker 2>Now other times, you know, I think we shouldn't dismiss

0:08:51.280 --> 0:08:54.040
<v Speaker 2>the importance of religious faith in all of this, particularly

0:08:54.080 --> 0:09:00.840
<v Speaker 2>regarding amulets. Various traditions, various religions out there have some

0:09:00.880 --> 0:09:03.679
<v Speaker 2>sort of an amulant tradition, some sort of essentially a

0:09:03.760 --> 0:09:06.640
<v Speaker 2>lucky charm tradition, be it a crucifix or a small

0:09:06.880 --> 0:09:09.360
<v Speaker 2>statue of a deity that you may carry around with

0:09:09.440 --> 0:09:12.560
<v Speaker 2>you and that may be used casually or you know,

0:09:12.679 --> 0:09:15.880
<v Speaker 2>very devotedly. There are different approaches to that as well.

0:09:15.880 --> 0:09:21.040
<v Speaker 2>There's all spectrum in that area of religious faith as well. Well.

0:09:21.120 --> 0:09:23.839
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and I'd say that might well be one of

0:09:23.880 --> 0:09:27.480
<v Speaker 3>those things that is literally efficacious in some way. Maybe

0:09:27.480 --> 0:09:30.040
<v Speaker 3>not in the sense of changing the outcome of a

0:09:30.040 --> 0:09:33.320
<v Speaker 3>game or something, but it does change something about you

0:09:33.559 --> 0:09:34.880
<v Speaker 3>and is helpful in that way.

0:09:35.440 --> 0:09:35.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:09:35.840 --> 0:09:36.440
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:09:36.480 --> 0:09:38.720
<v Speaker 2>And then there's the notion that a lot of times

0:09:38.760 --> 0:09:42.360
<v Speaker 2>the addition of a lucky totem or a lucky practice

0:09:42.360 --> 0:09:46.240
<v Speaker 2>of some sort very often does not necessarily induce added

0:09:46.320 --> 0:09:49.360
<v Speaker 2>cost or burden. You know, even if we're mostly dismissive

0:09:49.400 --> 0:09:52.280
<v Speaker 2>of the idea that said item or said activity will

0:09:52.400 --> 0:09:57.440
<v Speaker 2>enhance our luck or will make some sort of experience

0:09:59.200 --> 0:10:02.480
<v Speaker 2>you know, passes buy with more ease. And even if

0:10:02.520 --> 0:10:05.040
<v Speaker 2>we're not we don't have a huge investment in that idea.

0:10:05.360 --> 0:10:07.679
<v Speaker 2>It kind of comes down to, well, why not, right,

0:10:07.760 --> 0:10:09.040
<v Speaker 2>is it going to hurt? I might as well have

0:10:09.080 --> 0:10:11.880
<v Speaker 2>the amulet on me. Maybe it will help if there's

0:10:11.880 --> 0:10:15.080
<v Speaker 2>a one percent chance it helps, great, because all it

0:10:15.160 --> 0:10:16.840
<v Speaker 2>is just setting in my pocket.

0:10:16.720 --> 0:10:19.440
<v Speaker 3>Right and you know, I plan to get into this

0:10:19.520 --> 0:10:21.640
<v Speaker 3>more in one of the later episodes in the series,

0:10:21.679 --> 0:10:24.959
<v Speaker 3>maybe in part two. But there is a question of

0:10:25.120 --> 0:10:27.720
<v Speaker 3>to the extent that we experience an illusion of control,

0:10:27.880 --> 0:10:31.280
<v Speaker 3>why do we experience one? Are there ways in which

0:10:31.320 --> 0:10:34.400
<v Speaker 3>it might actually be beneficial to human life even if

0:10:34.440 --> 0:10:36.160
<v Speaker 3>it's generating false beliefs?

0:10:36.480 --> 0:10:38.960
<v Speaker 2>Yeah? I mean we kind of get into that basic

0:10:39.000 --> 0:10:41.400
<v Speaker 2>area of like, yeah, and it makes life a little easier,

0:10:41.760 --> 0:10:44.120
<v Speaker 2>and it's not hurting you, it's not hurting other people,

0:10:44.160 --> 0:10:44.640
<v Speaker 2>then why not?

0:10:44.840 --> 0:10:47.640
<v Speaker 3>Okay? I want to mention another example from everyday life.

0:10:47.679 --> 0:10:49.680
<v Speaker 3>This one comes up a lot when people think about

0:10:49.679 --> 0:10:54.040
<v Speaker 3>illusion of control. The closed door button on an elevator.

0:10:54.320 --> 0:10:58.840
<v Speaker 3>Does that button actually do anything? I think this example

0:10:58.840 --> 0:11:02.880
<v Speaker 3>actually has two levels of possible illusion of control. The

0:11:02.880 --> 0:11:05.440
<v Speaker 3>first one and we can quibble with whether this counts

0:11:05.480 --> 0:11:08.319
<v Speaker 3>as illusion of control or not. But the first level

0:11:08.440 --> 0:11:11.559
<v Speaker 3>is the question of whether the closed door button actually

0:11:11.640 --> 0:11:15.080
<v Speaker 3>closes the door. I was reading some articles about this

0:11:15.240 --> 0:11:20.280
<v Speaker 3>and was getting some contradictory conclusions from them, but like

0:11:20.320 --> 0:11:22.200
<v Speaker 3>according to there was an article in the New York

0:11:22.200 --> 0:11:24.880
<v Speaker 3>Times that cited some people in the elevator industry who

0:11:24.920 --> 0:11:28.959
<v Speaker 3>says who say that in most cases the button actually

0:11:29.000 --> 0:11:31.680
<v Speaker 3>does not change how fast the door closes. Maybe it

0:11:31.720 --> 0:11:34.880
<v Speaker 3>does in some percentage of elevators, but in the majority,

0:11:35.120 --> 0:11:38.240
<v Speaker 3>at least within the United States, it doesn't. I was

0:11:38.280 --> 0:11:41.400
<v Speaker 3>reading in another article that lifts in the UK are

0:11:41.480 --> 0:11:44.640
<v Speaker 3>more likely to have a fully functional closed door button

0:11:44.960 --> 0:11:48.280
<v Speaker 3>that does accelerate how fast the door shut. Elevators in

0:11:48.320 --> 0:11:51.120
<v Speaker 3>the US most of the time close on a timer,

0:11:51.480 --> 0:11:54.120
<v Speaker 3>and even when the closed door button is functional, it

0:11:54.559 --> 0:11:57.800
<v Speaker 3>probably works on a delay from when you press it

0:11:57.880 --> 0:12:01.560
<v Speaker 3>instead of immediately, So it's really questionable how much faster,

0:12:01.720 --> 0:12:03.959
<v Speaker 3>if at all, the doors will close after the button

0:12:04.000 --> 0:12:07.600
<v Speaker 3>is pressed. So I think the answer is not totally

0:12:07.640 --> 0:12:10.400
<v Speaker 3>clear on how often the closed door button does anything

0:12:10.440 --> 0:12:13.400
<v Speaker 3>in the States, but many people consider these buttons in

0:12:13.400 --> 0:12:16.560
<v Speaker 3>the US just a placebo. It does nothing except maybe

0:12:16.559 --> 0:12:18.120
<v Speaker 3>makes the passengers feel better.

0:12:18.600 --> 0:12:21.160
<v Speaker 2>Sometimes I feel like the closed door button exists mostly

0:12:21.240 --> 0:12:24.640
<v Speaker 2>to enhance the awkwardness of reaching for the open door button.

0:12:24.920 --> 0:12:27.040
<v Speaker 2>When someone tries to catch the elevator behind you one

0:12:27.080 --> 0:12:30.199
<v Speaker 2>of the doors close closing, will they correctly assume that

0:12:30.280 --> 0:12:32.480
<v Speaker 2>you were trying to help them, or will they think

0:12:32.480 --> 0:12:34.520
<v Speaker 2>that you were desperately trying to keep them from boarding

0:12:34.559 --> 0:12:37.440
<v Speaker 2>the elevator Like close faster. No one else on this

0:12:37.520 --> 0:12:38.160
<v Speaker 2>elevator with.

0:12:38.160 --> 0:12:40.360
<v Speaker 3>Me that's a good point. Now, on the other hand,

0:12:40.360 --> 0:12:42.800
<v Speaker 3>I think you could make a good case that the

0:12:43.160 --> 0:12:46.680
<v Speaker 3>closed door button shouldn't count as illusion of control because

0:12:46.720 --> 0:12:51.120
<v Speaker 3>there is genuine ambiguity about whether it does something or not, Like,

0:12:51.240 --> 0:12:55.400
<v Speaker 3>people really don't have information that should tell them whether

0:12:55.480 --> 0:12:57.800
<v Speaker 3>or not it works, and there's a reasonable assumption that

0:12:57.840 --> 0:13:01.520
<v Speaker 3>it should work. So pressing it is even whether or

0:13:01.520 --> 0:13:04.160
<v Speaker 3>not it works because you have a reasonable expectation that

0:13:04.200 --> 0:13:04.600
<v Speaker 3>it would.

0:13:05.160 --> 0:13:08.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it says it works. You're just doing what the

0:13:08.600 --> 0:13:10.000
<v Speaker 2>button is inviting you to.

0:13:09.960 --> 0:13:13.480
<v Speaker 3>Do, exactly. But there's the second level of door closed

0:13:13.520 --> 0:13:17.280
<v Speaker 3>button that I think is definitely illusion of control, which

0:13:17.320 --> 0:13:19.360
<v Speaker 3>is have you ever seen somebody who's in a hurry

0:13:19.480 --> 0:13:22.920
<v Speaker 3>they get in an elevator, they not only press the button,

0:13:22.960 --> 0:13:25.000
<v Speaker 3>which may or may not work, they press the button

0:13:25.200 --> 0:13:29.520
<v Speaker 3>after watching somebody else press it already, like, oh, the

0:13:29.559 --> 0:13:31.560
<v Speaker 3>other guy didn't press it, right, I need to press

0:13:31.600 --> 0:13:32.760
<v Speaker 3>it to make sure it'll work.

0:13:33.720 --> 0:13:35.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, I mean sometimes you get on board an

0:13:35.920 --> 0:13:38.560
<v Speaker 2>elevator and there's this moment of uncertainty did the other

0:13:38.600 --> 0:13:41.679
<v Speaker 2>person press it? You didn't see them press it, you

0:13:41.920 --> 0:13:44.319
<v Speaker 2>would maybe assume they did, and it might be a

0:13:44.320 --> 0:13:46.240
<v Speaker 2>little awkward if you press it now, because then you're

0:13:46.240 --> 0:13:48.120
<v Speaker 2>saying like, I'm not sure you did this right, I'm

0:13:48.160 --> 0:13:49.599
<v Speaker 2>not sure you did it. I'm going to press it,

0:13:49.640 --> 0:13:51.480
<v Speaker 2>but yeah, if you see them do it, that is

0:13:51.520 --> 0:13:58.600
<v Speaker 2>an extra level of social awkwardness right there. And I

0:13:58.600 --> 0:14:01.800
<v Speaker 2>guess you're leaning into the idea that, Okay, if I

0:14:01.840 --> 0:14:04.800
<v Speaker 2>press it more then it'll be more likely.

0:14:04.600 --> 0:14:08.000
<v Speaker 3>To comply exactly. Yeah, maybe there is reasoning of that sort,

0:14:08.080 --> 0:14:10.599
<v Speaker 3>like I wonder if button presses are cumulative.

0:14:11.160 --> 0:14:14.439
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I often fall into this as well. I mean,

0:14:14.800 --> 0:14:17.040
<v Speaker 2>I'll do this thing where I go to use the

0:14:17.280 --> 0:14:20.680
<v Speaker 2>clicker to lock the car, and I won't press it once.

0:14:20.720 --> 0:14:25.440
<v Speaker 2>I'll press it two or three times, which confounds members

0:14:25.440 --> 0:14:27.360
<v Speaker 2>of my family when I do this, But for some reason,

0:14:27.480 --> 0:14:30.480
<v Speaker 2>like it just feels like three is more certain, even

0:14:30.520 --> 0:14:33.400
<v Speaker 2>though there's no cumulative effect there. There's not like, Okay,

0:14:33.400 --> 0:14:34.800
<v Speaker 2>if you press it three times to lock, you have

0:14:34.800 --> 0:14:37.320
<v Speaker 2>to press it three times to unlock it, which I

0:14:37.320 --> 0:14:40.200
<v Speaker 2>don't know. I'd kind of like that feature personally, but

0:14:40.280 --> 0:14:42.680
<v Speaker 2>that's just not how it works. One click should do it,

0:14:43.080 --> 0:14:45.920
<v Speaker 2>but my mind thinks additional clicks would be necessary.

0:14:46.120 --> 0:14:48.080
<v Speaker 3>Triples is best. Then you know it's safe.

0:14:48.200 --> 0:14:52.880
<v Speaker 2>That's true, but it's not true. It's just one of

0:14:52.880 --> 0:14:56.800
<v Speaker 2>those things we do. Another thing, another like clear example

0:14:56.800 --> 0:14:58.960
<v Speaker 2>of this one that I think a lot of us

0:14:59.040 --> 0:15:02.840
<v Speaker 2>encounter rather frequent, and another potential placebo button is the

0:15:02.880 --> 0:15:07.200
<v Speaker 2>crosswalk button, and a lot of the same situations apply here.

0:15:07.240 --> 0:15:09.200
<v Speaker 2>You know, you get up there to the crosswalk, there's

0:15:09.240 --> 0:15:12.440
<v Speaker 2>someone else already standing there. You assume they pressed it already,

0:15:12.440 --> 0:15:14.760
<v Speaker 2>but you're gonna press it as well, or you're waiting

0:15:14.760 --> 0:15:16.720
<v Speaker 2>on it. Seems to be taking forever. You know it's

0:15:16.760 --> 0:15:19.400
<v Speaker 2>been pressed, you've pressed it once, Maybe press it two

0:15:19.480 --> 0:15:21.520
<v Speaker 2>or three more times to let it know that you

0:15:21.600 --> 0:15:24.360
<v Speaker 2>mean business. You need to get across the street, Throw

0:15:24.440 --> 0:15:27.400
<v Speaker 2>up the red light, throw up the little green walk

0:15:27.440 --> 0:15:29.920
<v Speaker 2>in or white or light up walking man.

0:15:30.520 --> 0:15:34.320
<v Speaker 3>Also, as with the elevator button, there's legitimate question over

0:15:34.360 --> 0:15:36.200
<v Speaker 3>whether the button does anything or not.

0:15:36.840 --> 0:15:38.720
<v Speaker 2>That's right. I was looking into this a little bit,

0:15:38.720 --> 0:15:41.320
<v Speaker 2>and the broad answer on whether the cross button works

0:15:41.440 --> 0:15:44.720
<v Speaker 2>at all seems to be a resounding. It depends so

0:15:44.880 --> 0:15:50.880
<v Speaker 2>different countries, different city traffic systems, They're gonna have the

0:15:50.920 --> 0:15:55.040
<v Speaker 2>button function differently. Sometimes it actually speeds up crossings, other

0:15:55.080 --> 0:15:57.880
<v Speaker 2>times it doesn't. But what do we do? We push

0:15:57.920 --> 0:16:00.680
<v Speaker 2>it anyway, And part of that is again, standing there,

0:16:01.000 --> 0:16:03.920
<v Speaker 2>you probably don't have anything else to do, Push it

0:16:03.960 --> 0:16:05.600
<v Speaker 2>a few more times and see if it works.

0:16:06.320 --> 0:16:08.520
<v Speaker 3>As we already established, sometimes it's just fun to push

0:16:08.560 --> 0:16:09.000
<v Speaker 3>a button.

0:16:09.720 --> 0:16:13.240
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean, you're in a situation where you either

0:16:13.280 --> 0:16:15.880
<v Speaker 2>have no control or you realize you have a limited

0:16:15.880 --> 0:16:18.240
<v Speaker 2>amount of control. What can you do. You can't get

0:16:18.280 --> 0:16:20.320
<v Speaker 2>out there and stop cars, you can't stop traffic, but

0:16:20.320 --> 0:16:22.400
<v Speaker 2>you can press the button again and again, and it

0:16:22.480 --> 0:16:35.240
<v Speaker 2>feels like at least you're doing something now. The illusion

0:16:35.280 --> 0:16:37.920
<v Speaker 2>of control also applies to situations in which we know

0:16:38.040 --> 0:16:41.720
<v Speaker 2>experience anxiety due to perceived lack of control. And one

0:16:41.760 --> 0:16:43.640
<v Speaker 2>of these, and I can relate to this a bit,

0:16:43.760 --> 0:16:47.720
<v Speaker 2>is flying. Two examples I've read about with this scenario.

0:16:47.880 --> 0:16:51.600
<v Speaker 2>Or of course, there's of course pre enduring flight routines.

0:16:52.480 --> 0:16:54.320
<v Speaker 2>Many of these are so slight that we might not

0:16:54.400 --> 0:16:58.640
<v Speaker 2>even think about them as being pre flight rituals having

0:16:58.640 --> 0:17:02.480
<v Speaker 2>to do with an illusion of control. The examples given

0:17:02.920 --> 0:17:05.840
<v Speaker 2>in the Air Travel Design Guide include things like wearing

0:17:05.880 --> 0:17:09.320
<v Speaker 2>comfy clothing or brushing on one's teeth before a flight.

0:17:10.080 --> 0:17:12.520
<v Speaker 2>I don't know, I those just sound like good things

0:17:12.560 --> 0:17:13.800
<v Speaker 2>to do before a long flight.

0:17:14.200 --> 0:17:17.119
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, but they also controlling an outcome. I mean that

0:17:17.240 --> 0:17:19.359
<v Speaker 3>just seems like that's what you do to feel good.

0:17:19.840 --> 0:17:22.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, But I mean, I guess, and I can relate

0:17:22.520 --> 0:17:24.640
<v Speaker 2>to this a bit. It's like, maybe, like feeling good

0:17:24.840 --> 0:17:27.320
<v Speaker 2>is that thing you have control over, and so maybe

0:17:27.359 --> 0:17:30.040
<v Speaker 2>you've become more indulgent of those in a way to

0:17:30.119 --> 0:17:32.520
<v Speaker 2>sort of, you know, to make something that can be

0:17:32.600 --> 0:17:35.399
<v Speaker 2>uncomfortable more comfortable, which is just obviously you want to

0:17:35.440 --> 0:17:37.600
<v Speaker 2>do that. But also it's like so many things are

0:17:37.600 --> 0:17:40.919
<v Speaker 2>out of my control here, but the exact headpillow have

0:17:41.080 --> 0:17:43.760
<v Speaker 2>I have is in my control. The exact playlist I

0:17:43.800 --> 0:17:46.440
<v Speaker 2>download ahead of time is in my control. How you

0:17:46.480 --> 0:17:49.080
<v Speaker 2>know which movie I downloaded my phone prior to the flight,

0:17:49.160 --> 0:17:51.439
<v Speaker 2>that's within my control. I will do that, and I'll

0:17:51.480 --> 0:17:52.720
<v Speaker 2>put a lot of effort into.

0:17:52.600 --> 0:17:56.040
<v Speaker 3>That, and maybe from all of that effort at control,

0:17:56.080 --> 0:17:58.960
<v Speaker 3>there could be some conceptual creep where actually it makes

0:17:58.960 --> 0:18:03.280
<v Speaker 3>you feel like the plane is less likely to crash.

0:18:03.600 --> 0:18:05.840
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I mean, and I don't even know if necessarily

0:18:05.880 --> 0:18:08.359
<v Speaker 2>everyone's mind directly goes there, you know, but it's like,

0:18:08.880 --> 0:18:11.560
<v Speaker 2>you know, you're you're dealing with one thing that they

0:18:11.960 --> 0:18:14.320
<v Speaker 2>When I was reading this ear Travel Design Guide website

0:18:14.440 --> 0:18:15.720
<v Speaker 2>that they pointed out, you know, it's like there's a

0:18:15.760 --> 0:18:18.120
<v Speaker 2>lot going on when you fly. Obviously, you know you're

0:18:18.280 --> 0:18:23.400
<v Speaker 2>you're traveling, your your your your circadian rhythms are are interrupted,

0:18:23.720 --> 0:18:26.360
<v Speaker 2>you may eat lunch three times in a given day,

0:18:26.400 --> 0:18:27.959
<v Speaker 2>that sort of thing, and then there are all these

0:18:28.000 --> 0:18:30.760
<v Speaker 2>other constraints. So there's a lot going on in the

0:18:30.800 --> 0:18:34.760
<v Speaker 2>mind and in the body. They also cite gamification as

0:18:34.800 --> 0:18:38.360
<v Speaker 2>a as a way that we interact with this illusion

0:18:38.400 --> 0:18:40.960
<v Speaker 2>of control. I found this bit interesting. This is a quote.

0:18:41.400 --> 0:18:45.600
<v Speaker 2>The airport is a unique type of architectural typology where

0:18:45.600 --> 0:18:48.879
<v Speaker 2>the spaces are subdivided and arranged to usher large groups

0:18:48.880 --> 0:18:52.960
<v Speaker 2>of people to move uni directionally. This encourages people to

0:18:53.000 --> 0:18:56.520
<v Speaker 2>develop strategies to game the system and to feel competitive

0:18:56.520 --> 0:18:59.120
<v Speaker 2>with other passengers moving through the airport.

0:18:59.359 --> 0:19:02.480
<v Speaker 3>Oh my god, that's right. I feel seen that. That's

0:19:02.720 --> 0:19:07.240
<v Speaker 3>like I do not I'm not normally a competitive walker,

0:19:07.440 --> 0:19:10.199
<v Speaker 3>like trying to get ahead of people walking, you know,

0:19:10.359 --> 0:19:13.200
<v Speaker 3>around me on the sidewalk. The only scenario in which

0:19:13.240 --> 0:19:15.840
<v Speaker 3>I catch myself doing that is at the airport, and

0:19:15.880 --> 0:19:17.919
<v Speaker 3>I want, yeah, that may be right. That it's like,

0:19:17.960 --> 0:19:20.879
<v Speaker 3>because it's funnel, you know, structured to have everybody moving

0:19:20.880 --> 0:19:25.879
<v Speaker 3>in the same direction, and it's so yeah, controlled like that.

0:19:27.000 --> 0:19:29.439
<v Speaker 3>It's some for some reason, makes you feel like I've

0:19:29.480 --> 0:19:31.680
<v Speaker 3>got to get in front of this this guy here,

0:19:31.840 --> 0:19:33.560
<v Speaker 3>you know, I've got Yeah.

0:19:33.640 --> 0:19:35.399
<v Speaker 2>So it's interesting to think about it from a design

0:19:35.400 --> 0:19:37.800
<v Speaker 2>standpoint where a lot of control needs to be taken

0:19:37.800 --> 0:19:41.639
<v Speaker 2>away from people going through this system, but you also

0:19:41.760 --> 0:19:46.000
<v Speaker 2>need to give them a sense of control, control over

0:19:46.080 --> 0:19:48.600
<v Speaker 2>little things, and and also realize that there's going to

0:19:48.680 --> 0:19:51.199
<v Speaker 2>be this illusion of control in place as well. But

0:19:51.280 --> 0:19:53.960
<v Speaker 2>you have another example to to to bring up here,

0:19:53.960 --> 0:19:57.120
<v Speaker 2>and this one is even more fun than flying. Oh.

0:19:57.160 --> 0:19:59.600
<v Speaker 3>I wonder if you had the same experience. So I

0:19:59.640 --> 0:20:01.920
<v Speaker 3>was thinking back to childhood, and this may be an

0:20:01.920 --> 0:20:06.760
<v Speaker 3>embarrassing admission, but I'm thinking about the illusory functionality of

0:20:07.840 --> 0:20:12.560
<v Speaker 3>objectively non responsive video game controls. A couple of examples here.

0:20:13.160 --> 0:20:15.040
<v Speaker 3>I am at the Pizza Hut. I'm a little kid.

0:20:15.160 --> 0:20:18.280
<v Speaker 3>I desperately want to play the Neogo machine or the

0:20:18.440 --> 0:20:21.199
<v Speaker 3>X Men Arcade cabinet, but I have no quarters, so

0:20:21.240 --> 0:20:25.040
<v Speaker 3>I can't play. But while these machines are idle, there

0:20:25.119 --> 0:20:29.080
<v Speaker 3>is a kind of pre recorded gameplay demo that loops

0:20:29.119 --> 0:20:31.240
<v Speaker 3>on the screen, so it looks like somebody's playing. You know,

0:20:31.280 --> 0:20:34.359
<v Speaker 3>the characters are walking around fighting the bad guys and stuff,

0:20:34.920 --> 0:20:37.920
<v Speaker 3>and according to vague memories, I can't be sure I'm

0:20:38.000 --> 0:20:41.240
<v Speaker 3>right about this, but I think I would sometimes go

0:20:41.400 --> 0:20:45.919
<v Speaker 3>up to the machine and falsely believe that I was

0:20:46.080 --> 0:20:51.120
<v Speaker 3>maybe somewhat partially controlling the gameplay in this demo by

0:20:51.160 --> 0:20:54.600
<v Speaker 3>moving the joystick around without putting money in. Or maybe

0:20:54.600 --> 0:20:56.959
<v Speaker 3>what I'm remembering is that I would stare at the

0:20:57.000 --> 0:20:59.600
<v Speaker 3>machine while the demo's going, and I would not be

0:20:59.680 --> 0:21:02.879
<v Speaker 3>touching it, but I would be imagining that this were possible.

0:21:03.240 --> 0:21:06.280
<v Speaker 3>Another variation is a trick. Sometimes I think people would

0:21:06.280 --> 0:21:09.600
<v Speaker 3>play on their little siblings with home video game consoles,

0:21:09.760 --> 0:21:13.399
<v Speaker 3>so instead of fighting over whose turn it is to

0:21:13.440 --> 0:21:17.800
<v Speaker 3>play Mario, maybe the big sister actually plays Mario and

0:21:17.880 --> 0:21:21.360
<v Speaker 3>gives the little sister another controller which is not plugged

0:21:21.359 --> 0:21:24.400
<v Speaker 3>in to make her think she's playing, while actually she's

0:21:24.440 --> 0:21:27.239
<v Speaker 3>just watching the big sister play on the screen and

0:21:27.280 --> 0:21:31.199
<v Speaker 3>pressing buttons that do nothing. I recall this happening around

0:21:31.240 --> 0:21:33.080
<v Speaker 3>me and being surprisingly convincing.

0:21:34.359 --> 0:21:36.639
<v Speaker 2>I guess maybe's more convincing with some games than others,

0:21:36.680 --> 0:21:40.080
<v Speaker 2>But I remember I did this as well with arcade

0:21:40.119 --> 0:21:43.439
<v Speaker 2>games when I was a little kid, and arguably with

0:21:43.600 --> 0:21:45.960
<v Speaker 2>I mean X Men Arcade Cabinet. That was a pretty

0:21:45.960 --> 0:21:49.160
<v Speaker 2>great game. But on the other hand, you're probably better

0:21:49.160 --> 0:21:52.560
<v Speaker 2>off just thinking you were playing it. Looking back at

0:21:52.560 --> 0:21:54.120
<v Speaker 2>it from a modern standpoint.

0:21:54.160 --> 0:21:56.520
<v Speaker 3>I really liked being Colossus and doing the roar.

0:21:57.240 --> 0:22:04.560
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, the yeah, it's funny. I had an experience

0:22:04.560 --> 0:22:06.960
<v Speaker 2>with just this the other day. We were out to

0:22:07.040 --> 0:22:08.959
<v Speaker 2>eat at a place that had arcade machines and they

0:22:08.960 --> 0:22:12.520
<v Speaker 2>were old arcade machines, and my son and one of

0:22:12.520 --> 0:22:16.280
<v Speaker 2>his friends and my son's eleven. Now, they went up

0:22:16.320 --> 0:22:18.440
<v Speaker 2>to these machines and I hadn't given them any quarters,

0:22:18.440 --> 0:22:19.679
<v Speaker 2>and I think I should give them some quarters so

0:22:19.680 --> 0:22:21.800
<v Speaker 2>they can play these machines. But they're over there moving

0:22:21.800 --> 0:22:24.680
<v Speaker 2>the sticks around, watching the screen, and I was like, oh,

0:22:24.760 --> 0:22:26.320
<v Speaker 2>I think they're just pretending to play.

0:22:26.520 --> 0:22:27.080
<v Speaker 3>Oh.

0:22:27.119 --> 0:22:28.280
<v Speaker 2>And then I was like, I think maybe they're a

0:22:28.320 --> 0:22:30.760
<v Speaker 2>little too old to be doing that. And then I

0:22:30.800 --> 0:22:32.520
<v Speaker 2>asked them, do you guys want some real quarters? They're like, oh,

0:22:32.560 --> 0:22:36.639
<v Speaker 2>these machines are free, so it was a non issue.

0:22:37.480 --> 0:22:40.480
<v Speaker 2>But yeah, yeah, the reaches, you reach a point where

0:22:40.480 --> 0:22:43.640
<v Speaker 2>you outgrow it for sure, where You don't just want

0:22:43.680 --> 0:22:45.400
<v Speaker 2>to watch the games. You don't just want to watch

0:22:45.440 --> 0:22:47.800
<v Speaker 2>other people play these games. You want to get in there,

0:22:48.160 --> 0:22:50.439
<v Speaker 2>even if you are going to fail miserably and just

0:22:50.480 --> 0:22:51.920
<v Speaker 2>have to sing more quarters in the thing.

0:22:52.560 --> 0:22:56.880
<v Speaker 3>I will pay the endless tax to be Colosses. Yeah. Wait,

0:22:56.920 --> 0:22:58.879
<v Speaker 3>what was your X Men Arcade game character?

0:22:59.560 --> 0:23:03.080
<v Speaker 2>Oh? You know, oftentimes when I would play, there were

0:23:03.200 --> 0:23:04.720
<v Speaker 2>like a lot of people, so it's like whoever you

0:23:04.760 --> 0:23:08.720
<v Speaker 2>could get. But you know, obviously Colossus will Cyclops was

0:23:08.720 --> 0:23:10.919
<v Speaker 2>pretty great. He had the ibam attack, you know, that

0:23:10.920 --> 0:23:12.159
<v Speaker 2>would really tear up the screen.

0:23:12.520 --> 0:23:15.400
<v Speaker 3>I remember Colossus was my first pick and night Crawler

0:23:15.520 --> 0:23:16.119
<v Speaker 3>was my second.

0:23:16.359 --> 0:23:18.240
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, he had a good attack as well. I

0:23:18.240 --> 0:23:20.639
<v Speaker 2>mean really, I would just be happy. I was happy

0:23:20.680 --> 0:23:22.360
<v Speaker 2>to be playing the X Men Arcade game.

0:23:22.840 --> 0:23:24.760
<v Speaker 3>All right, Well, I think maybe we should talk about

0:23:24.800 --> 0:23:28.520
<v Speaker 3>some of the research history on the illusion of control,

0:23:28.640 --> 0:23:31.600
<v Speaker 3>some of the papers that have explored this topic in

0:23:31.680 --> 0:23:35.640
<v Speaker 3>the past. And though this phenomenon had been I think

0:23:35.800 --> 0:23:39.000
<v Speaker 3>noticed previously in a variety of ways. It gets the

0:23:39.160 --> 0:23:42.960
<v Speaker 3>name illusion of control from important research by the American

0:23:43.000 --> 0:23:46.919
<v Speaker 3>psychologist Ellen J. Langer, who published a paper in nineteen

0:23:47.000 --> 0:23:50.280
<v Speaker 3>seventy five called the Illusion of Control in the Journal

0:23:50.320 --> 0:23:52.120
<v Speaker 3>of Personality and Social Psychology.

0:23:52.800 --> 0:23:55.720
<v Speaker 2>Langer was born in nineteen forty seven. She's also known

0:23:55.760 --> 0:23:58.920
<v Speaker 2>for her work on aging and mindfulness theory. I also

0:23:58.960 --> 0:24:02.240
<v Speaker 2>want to call out that she was a series consultant

0:24:02.320 --> 0:24:06.159
<v Speaker 2>on a BBC series title The Young Ones. But this

0:24:06.320 --> 0:24:08.919
<v Speaker 2>is not the classic comedy series, but rather a documentary

0:24:08.920 --> 0:24:11.000
<v Speaker 2>that explored reminiscence therapy.

0:24:12.440 --> 0:24:15.000
<v Speaker 3>I'm not familiar either way. What's the comedy series?

0:24:15.520 --> 0:24:20.040
<v Speaker 2>Oh, the Young Ones? Oh? This is a classic British

0:24:20.119 --> 0:24:23.199
<v Speaker 2>comedy series about these young men living in a like

0:24:23.240 --> 0:24:27.920
<v Speaker 2>a dormitory house type situation. Yeah, and they would also

0:24:27.920 --> 0:24:30.040
<v Speaker 2>have musical guests on the show, like Motorhead was on

0:24:30.040 --> 0:24:30.919
<v Speaker 2>one of the episodes.

0:24:31.359 --> 0:24:31.679
<v Speaker 3>Nice.

0:24:32.160 --> 0:24:36.479
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, so yeah, classic classic series. I'm sure it may

0:24:36.520 --> 0:24:38.600
<v Speaker 2>have come up in passing on Weird House Cinema before,

0:24:39.200 --> 0:24:40.840
<v Speaker 2>but I have a feeling in the future we'll probably

0:24:40.880 --> 0:24:44.080
<v Speaker 2>touch on some films on Weird House Cinema that include

0:24:44.119 --> 0:24:47.399
<v Speaker 2>actors from that show. All right, But The Young Ones

0:24:47.480 --> 0:24:49.800
<v Speaker 2>a series that she was associated This is a documentary

0:24:49.800 --> 0:24:51.640
<v Speaker 2>series that came like decades later.

0:24:51.840 --> 0:24:55.760
<v Speaker 3>Okay, okay. But in the nineteen seventy five paper The

0:24:55.800 --> 0:25:01.080
<v Speaker 3>Illusion of Control, Langer defined the phenomenon more narrowly than

0:25:01.080 --> 0:25:04.440
<v Speaker 3>we've been talking about. She defined the illusion of control

0:25:04.520 --> 0:25:10.120
<v Speaker 3>as quote, an expectancy of a personal success probability inappropriately

0:25:10.200 --> 0:25:14.280
<v Speaker 3>higher than the objective probability would warrant. So I'm not

0:25:14.320 --> 0:25:17.720
<v Speaker 3>going to do a detailed breakdown of Langer's full paper here,

0:25:17.720 --> 0:25:20.159
<v Speaker 3>because there are like six experiments total a lot of

0:25:20.200 --> 0:25:23.800
<v Speaker 3>variables being tested, but I'll summarize the main idea and

0:25:23.880 --> 0:25:26.840
<v Speaker 3>a couple of highlights that stuck out to me. So

0:25:27.000 --> 0:25:31.159
<v Speaker 3>her intro mentions a bunch of different reasons for thinking that,

0:25:31.400 --> 0:25:35.000
<v Speaker 3>in her words, quote, while people may pay lip service

0:25:35.080 --> 0:25:38.719
<v Speaker 3>to the concept of chance, they behave as though chance

0:25:38.800 --> 0:25:43.680
<v Speaker 3>events are subject to control. And she produces a lot

0:25:43.720 --> 0:25:48.080
<v Speaker 3>of examples given to provide prima facie evidence of this

0:25:48.200 --> 0:25:51.359
<v Speaker 3>idea before the experiments are carried out. And one of

0:25:51.400 --> 0:25:55.080
<v Speaker 3>these examples that I thought was interesting was a sociological

0:25:55.080 --> 0:26:00.000
<v Speaker 3>observation of how people treat dice when gambling. She mentioned

0:26:00.280 --> 0:26:06.280
<v Speaker 3>particularly behavior observed by Hinslin in nineteen sixty seven. So

0:26:06.320 --> 0:26:09.160
<v Speaker 3>the idea is, if you watch people playing a dice

0:26:09.200 --> 0:26:11.720
<v Speaker 3>based game, maybe you're in a casino in Vegas again,

0:26:11.800 --> 0:26:15.200
<v Speaker 3>and you go up to a craps table. Whatever their

0:26:15.280 --> 0:26:19.480
<v Speaker 3>true beliefs about chance or skill being involved in this game,

0:26:19.600 --> 0:26:23.200
<v Speaker 3>and it is a game of chance, their externally visible

0:26:23.240 --> 0:26:26.760
<v Speaker 3>behavior implies that they think they have some degree of

0:26:26.800 --> 0:26:30.639
<v Speaker 3>control over the numbers they roll with the dice. Examples

0:26:30.640 --> 0:26:34.440
<v Speaker 3>here would include that people tend to roll dice more

0:26:34.560 --> 0:26:37.560
<v Speaker 3>softly if they want to roll low numbers, and throw

0:26:37.600 --> 0:26:40.320
<v Speaker 3>the dice hard if they want to roll high numbers.

0:26:40.880 --> 0:26:45.080
<v Speaker 3>They appear to concentrate in preparation for the dice throw

0:26:45.600 --> 0:26:48.960
<v Speaker 3>the same way a person would concentrate before like doing

0:26:49.000 --> 0:26:51.320
<v Speaker 3>a skill based throw, like an aimed throw if they're

0:26:51.320 --> 0:26:56.159
<v Speaker 3>playing darts or something. And this belief in dice rolls

0:26:56.200 --> 0:27:00.159
<v Speaker 3>as a skilled activity also seem to be present and

0:27:00.240 --> 0:27:03.639
<v Speaker 3>observers because other people at the table would tend to

0:27:03.840 --> 0:27:07.520
<v Speaker 3>bet with a person who appeared to be exerting more

0:27:07.600 --> 0:27:08.960
<v Speaker 3>control in this way.

0:27:09.560 --> 0:27:12.840
<v Speaker 2>Oh that's fascinating, you know, you know, I don't gamble

0:27:13.400 --> 0:27:17.000
<v Speaker 2>with the dice, but I do throw some D twenties

0:27:17.119 --> 0:27:19.639
<v Speaker 2>pretty much every week in Dungeons and Dragons, and I

0:27:19.680 --> 0:27:21.920
<v Speaker 2>know that I do catch myself. I hadn't really thought

0:27:21.920 --> 0:27:24.639
<v Speaker 2>about it before, but like, if I'm rolling especially an

0:27:24.640 --> 0:27:28.000
<v Speaker 2>important D twenty I'm gonna I'm gonna put a little

0:27:28.119 --> 0:27:29.960
<v Speaker 2>time and effort into it, and there's gonna be a pause.

0:27:30.119 --> 0:27:32.280
<v Speaker 2>I'm gonna make sure my form is right. I'm gonna

0:27:32.280 --> 0:27:35.159
<v Speaker 2>make sure I get an appropriate clatter, you know. From that,

0:27:35.320 --> 0:27:37.680
<v Speaker 2>From that that twenty as I give it a roll.

0:27:37.840 --> 0:27:41.160
<v Speaker 3>I do exactly the same thing, and I it feels

0:27:41.320 --> 0:27:44.159
<v Speaker 3>like I can roll the dice better or worse. I

0:27:44.200 --> 0:27:44.960
<v Speaker 3>know that I can't.

0:27:45.720 --> 0:27:47.920
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I'm still gonna get a natural one here and there,

0:27:47.960 --> 0:27:50.040
<v Speaker 2>but but it feels better for some reason.

0:27:50.240 --> 0:27:53.480
<v Speaker 3>And to be fair, dice rolls in reality are probably

0:27:53.520 --> 0:27:58.000
<v Speaker 3>not perfectly random, like I think. I've read about gambling

0:27:58.080 --> 0:28:01.120
<v Speaker 3>cheats who with a lot of training claim that they

0:28:01.240 --> 0:28:04.439
<v Speaker 3>can learn ways to hold or toss the dice so

0:28:04.560 --> 0:28:07.280
<v Speaker 3>as to increase the chances of getting the role they want.

0:28:07.280 --> 0:28:09.480
<v Speaker 3>I think, especially if they do things you're not allowed

0:28:09.520 --> 0:28:13.639
<v Speaker 3>to do, like sliding the dice on the velvet instead

0:28:13.640 --> 0:28:17.640
<v Speaker 3>of actually throlling it, throwing them so they tumble. But anyway,

0:28:17.680 --> 0:28:21.399
<v Speaker 3>for the vast, vast majority of regular gamblers, this is

0:28:21.440 --> 0:28:24.119
<v Speaker 3>not the case. People cannot do this most for the

0:28:24.119 --> 0:28:27.160
<v Speaker 3>most part, and dice can be treated as effectively random

0:28:27.520 --> 0:28:30.320
<v Speaker 3>if they weren't effectively, random casinos would not use them.

0:28:30.720 --> 0:28:39.120
<v Speaker 2>That's right.

0:28:41.120 --> 0:28:44.040
<v Speaker 3>Anyway. To come back to Langer's paper from seventy five,

0:28:44.120 --> 0:28:48.640
<v Speaker 3>so to test for an illusion of control, which she hypothesized,

0:28:48.720 --> 0:28:54.800
<v Speaker 3>she did six experiments in which chance based games had

0:28:54.920 --> 0:28:59.720
<v Speaker 3>various elements that we would associate with skill based games

0:29:00.360 --> 0:29:03.320
<v Speaker 3>introduced and this was her idea. It was that if

0:29:03.360 --> 0:29:07.320
<v Speaker 3>you make a game feel like it is skill based

0:29:07.400 --> 0:29:11.640
<v Speaker 3>even though it's clearly not, people will be confused into

0:29:11.760 --> 0:29:15.360
<v Speaker 3>thinking that they have control over outcomes that they actually don't.

0:29:16.840 --> 0:29:20.680
<v Speaker 3>For one example, one variable that is explored in this

0:29:20.760 --> 0:29:25.280
<v Speaker 3>paper is the variable of competition. If you are competing

0:29:25.480 --> 0:29:29.480
<v Speaker 3>against an opponent in a skill based game, the ability

0:29:29.560 --> 0:29:33.120
<v Speaker 3>of your opponent determines your likelihood of winning. Therefore, if

0:29:33.160 --> 0:29:36.000
<v Speaker 3>you're placing bets on whether or not you're gonna win,

0:29:36.560 --> 0:29:39.200
<v Speaker 3>how much you bet will in part depend on how

0:29:39.280 --> 0:29:42.320
<v Speaker 3>good your opponent is at the game. So you know,

0:29:42.400 --> 0:29:45.320
<v Speaker 3>if you're playing chess against a chess pro, you're probably

0:29:45.360 --> 0:29:48.200
<v Speaker 3>gonna bet less or maybe bet nothing. If you're playing

0:29:48.320 --> 0:29:52.040
<v Speaker 3>chess against somebody you perceive as worse than you at chess,

0:29:52.120 --> 0:29:54.640
<v Speaker 3>you will probably bet more. Of course, if it's a

0:29:54.680 --> 0:29:58.480
<v Speaker 3>purely chance based game, there is no relevant skill variable.

0:29:58.560 --> 0:30:01.360
<v Speaker 3>So if you're offered the chance to bet on outcomes,

0:30:01.600 --> 0:30:05.320
<v Speaker 3>your betting behavior should be based on something else, maybe

0:30:05.400 --> 0:30:09.520
<v Speaker 3>social factors, maybe just baseline appetite for risk, maybe a

0:30:09.640 --> 0:30:12.600
<v Speaker 3>desire to be seen by others as taking risks, etc.

0:30:13.120 --> 0:30:16.960
<v Speaker 3>It should be based on something other than your perception

0:30:17.080 --> 0:30:19.240
<v Speaker 3>of whether you're likely to win based on how good

0:30:19.240 --> 0:30:21.520
<v Speaker 3>your opponent is. That doesn't make any difference in a

0:30:21.600 --> 0:30:25.320
<v Speaker 3>chance based game. So in the first experiment described in

0:30:25.360 --> 0:30:29.800
<v Speaker 3>the study, Langer had people play a purely chance based

0:30:29.840 --> 0:30:34.120
<v Speaker 3>card game. The game was high card draw between two players.

0:30:34.560 --> 0:30:38.080
<v Speaker 3>No skill involved, pure luck of the draw. You pick

0:30:38.080 --> 0:30:40.800
<v Speaker 3>a card out of the deck. Is your card higher

0:30:40.800 --> 0:30:44.440
<v Speaker 3>than the other person's. Is there any room in looking

0:30:44.520 --> 0:30:46.840
<v Speaker 3>at that game to think I'm better than other people

0:30:46.880 --> 0:30:51.840
<v Speaker 3>at this? There shouldn't be. But the independent variable manipulated

0:30:51.880 --> 0:30:56.440
<v Speaker 3>by the experimenters here was the behavior and appearance of

0:30:56.640 --> 0:31:01.520
<v Speaker 3>your opponent. Do they seem confident and self assured or

0:31:01.520 --> 0:31:05.040
<v Speaker 3>do they seem awkward and nervous and prepared to lose?

0:31:05.560 --> 0:31:08.560
<v Speaker 3>In other words, are you playing against somebody who feels

0:31:08.680 --> 0:31:12.040
<v Speaker 3>like a winner or not? And remember, there's no logical

0:31:12.080 --> 0:31:14.720
<v Speaker 3>reason anybody should be a winner at this game. There's

0:31:14.840 --> 0:31:18.960
<v Speaker 3>zero skill involved, and yet the experiment did find that

0:31:19.000 --> 0:31:23.240
<v Speaker 3>people were willing to bet significantly more against a competitor

0:31:23.680 --> 0:31:26.920
<v Speaker 3>who seemed awkward and nervous than they were against a

0:31:26.960 --> 0:31:30.640
<v Speaker 3>competitor who seemed outgoing and confident. Now, I think this

0:31:30.720 --> 0:31:33.680
<v Speaker 3>is a really interesting result, but it's important to note

0:31:33.720 --> 0:31:38.120
<v Speaker 3>the limitations of this experimental design, and Langer herself flags

0:31:38.120 --> 0:31:41.120
<v Speaker 3>some of these limitations in the paper, so they didn't

0:31:41.160 --> 0:31:45.000
<v Speaker 3>go unnoticed by the authors here. So it seems like this.

0:31:45.640 --> 0:31:49.600
<v Speaker 3>It seems likely that this result could be caused by

0:31:49.760 --> 0:31:53.880
<v Speaker 3>a mistaken perception that skill or control would somehow factor

0:31:53.920 --> 0:31:57.040
<v Speaker 3>into this random game, But you can't be sure that's

0:31:57.080 --> 0:32:00.560
<v Speaker 3>the cause guiding the differences in how people bet. Maybe

0:32:00.560 --> 0:32:03.840
<v Speaker 3>other variables are operating here in response to the behavior

0:32:03.840 --> 0:32:06.880
<v Speaker 3>and appearance of the competitor. Maybe they have to do

0:32:07.080 --> 0:32:11.160
<v Speaker 3>with how the subject wants to be perceived in terms

0:32:11.240 --> 0:32:14.080
<v Speaker 3>of taking risks or not. Who knows. There could be

0:32:14.120 --> 0:32:17.880
<v Speaker 3>other things at work here. So that's the competition element,

0:32:17.960 --> 0:32:21.600
<v Speaker 3>which Langer concludes could make a chance based game have

0:32:21.840 --> 0:32:26.360
<v Speaker 3>illusory qualities of a skill based game. Other elements like

0:32:26.400 --> 0:32:29.760
<v Speaker 3>this explored in the paper are choice. So the idea

0:32:29.840 --> 0:32:32.840
<v Speaker 3>is if you give people a choice over, say, which

0:32:32.920 --> 0:32:36.160
<v Speaker 3>lottery ticket they receive. Of course it makes no difference

0:32:36.160 --> 0:32:39.320
<v Speaker 3>in the probability of winning, it increases their feeling of

0:32:39.360 --> 0:32:43.320
<v Speaker 3>the likelihood of winning, though with the choice element in particular.

0:32:43.440 --> 0:32:45.600
<v Speaker 3>There's a study I came across from twenty twenty one.

0:32:45.640 --> 0:32:48.080
<v Speaker 3>I might get into this more in the second episode,

0:32:49.080 --> 0:32:55.400
<v Speaker 3>but that study undercuts specifically the choice variable in particular,

0:32:55.480 --> 0:32:59.320
<v Speaker 3>So whether or not choice has this effect is up

0:32:59.320 --> 0:33:02.000
<v Speaker 3>for debate. But other ones explored in this paper are

0:33:02.280 --> 0:33:05.720
<v Speaker 3>familiarity with the game or with elements of the game.

0:33:05.880 --> 0:33:09.840
<v Speaker 3>So familiarity would be associated with a better chance of

0:33:09.840 --> 0:33:12.160
<v Speaker 3>winning a skill based game. Right, if you've played the

0:33:12.160 --> 0:33:14.440
<v Speaker 3>game before, you're probably better at it. You're more likely

0:33:14.480 --> 0:33:17.160
<v Speaker 3>to win. In a chance game, it doesn't matter. But

0:33:17.200 --> 0:33:20.320
<v Speaker 3>the study found that familiarity made people more confident in

0:33:20.360 --> 0:33:21.320
<v Speaker 3>their ability to win.

0:33:22.160 --> 0:33:23.960
<v Speaker 2>Okay, I mean I could see where like if you

0:33:24.080 --> 0:33:26.200
<v Speaker 2>know that what the odds are, even if you know

0:33:26.320 --> 0:33:29.720
<v Speaker 2>the odds are slim, like you do the math, You're like,

0:33:29.720 --> 0:33:32.240
<v Speaker 2>all right, I have a five percent chance of pulling

0:33:32.240 --> 0:33:35.400
<v Speaker 2>the right card. You know you could Still there's still

0:33:35.480 --> 0:33:37.680
<v Speaker 2>plenty of room in the human psyche to lean into

0:33:37.720 --> 0:33:40.080
<v Speaker 2>that and think I've got a five percent shot. That's

0:33:40.200 --> 0:33:43.840
<v Speaker 2>that's a non zero percent chance of winning this game.

0:33:44.000 --> 0:33:47.800
<v Speaker 3>Well, and there are games that have that are largely

0:33:48.160 --> 0:33:53.040
<v Speaker 3>determined by chance, but also have skill elements where familiarity

0:33:53.080 --> 0:33:55.560
<v Speaker 3>can make a big difference. Like I would say familiarity

0:33:55.600 --> 0:33:58.800
<v Speaker 3>with playing poker probably makes a big difference in how

0:33:58.840 --> 0:34:00.720
<v Speaker 3>well you do, because how well you do in poker

0:34:01.360 --> 0:34:03.880
<v Speaker 3>is a mix of chance and skill. You know, it's

0:34:03.920 --> 0:34:05.840
<v Speaker 3>the chance of what cards you draw, but also the

0:34:05.880 --> 0:34:08.520
<v Speaker 3>skill of like your betting strategy and all that.

0:34:08.960 --> 0:34:10.560
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I guess it also comes down to, like, what

0:34:10.600 --> 0:34:12.840
<v Speaker 2>does it mean to lose in a given game. I

0:34:12.880 --> 0:34:14.560
<v Speaker 2>haven't played much in the way of poker, but it's

0:34:14.560 --> 0:34:17.479
<v Speaker 2>my understanding like a game like poker gambling games where

0:34:17.520 --> 0:34:20.960
<v Speaker 2>actual money of any value is involved, losing just sucks.

0:34:20.960 --> 0:34:23.560
<v Speaker 2>There's no fun in losing. If you're losing at the game,

0:34:23.560 --> 0:34:26.600
<v Speaker 2>you're not having a good time. Whereas, and certainly you

0:34:26.600 --> 0:34:31.080
<v Speaker 2>can take that attitude, unfortunately into any gaming scenario. But

0:34:31.640 --> 0:34:36.320
<v Speaker 2>if you're doing it right, losing or rolling poorly, whatever

0:34:36.360 --> 0:34:40.200
<v Speaker 2>the exact form this takes in say, Dungeons and Dragons

0:34:40.719 --> 0:34:42.800
<v Speaker 2>is not necessarily bad, it can be a great moment

0:34:42.920 --> 0:34:47.879
<v Speaker 2>for character development, storytelling, and so forth. Likewise, just for

0:34:47.920 --> 0:34:50.960
<v Speaker 2>fun games like I'll play a bit of this little

0:34:51.000 --> 0:34:54.200
<v Speaker 2>phone game called Marvel Snap. It's pretty fun. You're not

0:34:54.239 --> 0:34:57.920
<v Speaker 2>betting any real money on it, and sometimes like losing.

0:34:58.400 --> 0:35:03.040
<v Speaker 2>Sometimes losing is like earlier, but other times it's amusing

0:35:03.080 --> 0:35:05.440
<v Speaker 2>to see how the other person beats you. And then

0:35:05.480 --> 0:35:07.480
<v Speaker 2>sometimes you know, you know, okay, I've got a very

0:35:07.520 --> 0:35:10.120
<v Speaker 2>slim chance of pulling this combo off or you know

0:35:10.160 --> 0:35:13.320
<v Speaker 2>this real hail Mary maneuver to use a sports term,

0:35:13.440 --> 0:35:15.600
<v Speaker 2>But sometimes you go for it because you don't have

0:35:15.680 --> 0:35:18.040
<v Speaker 2>money on the line. It's not the end of the world.

0:35:18.520 --> 0:35:21.680
<v Speaker 2>If you lose, you're likely to lose, but if there's

0:35:21.719 --> 0:35:24.440
<v Speaker 2>a small chance you're going to pull off something amazing,

0:35:24.719 --> 0:35:26.040
<v Speaker 2>you go for it. And you do that in games

0:35:26.040 --> 0:35:27.319
<v Speaker 2>like Dungeons and Dragons as well.

0:35:27.480 --> 0:35:30.440
<v Speaker 3>That's right, and this highlights that, I mean, a big

0:35:30.480 --> 0:35:33.680
<v Speaker 3>thing about studying games is that there are different reasons

0:35:33.719 --> 0:35:36.920
<v Speaker 3>people play games, and not all games are just about winning.

0:35:38.000 --> 0:35:41.600
<v Speaker 3>I think one reason that games like this, if you're

0:35:41.600 --> 0:35:44.319
<v Speaker 3>going to study them in terms of trying to find

0:35:44.360 --> 0:35:47.920
<v Speaker 3>people's real motivation to win, you need things like cash prizes,

0:35:48.080 --> 0:35:53.359
<v Speaker 3>because that makes the winning condition really meaningful. Yeah, because yeah,

0:35:53.800 --> 0:35:56.359
<v Speaker 3>if there's not money involved, I'm just like, I don't know,

0:35:56.560 --> 0:35:59.080
<v Speaker 3>it's fun to just play a weird game and lose

0:35:59.120 --> 0:36:00.120
<v Speaker 3>and not know what you're doing.

0:36:00.160 --> 0:36:03.400
<v Speaker 2>I mean, where a game like high card draw, it's

0:36:03.440 --> 0:36:06.120
<v Speaker 2>only going to be interesting if there's money involved.

0:36:05.800 --> 0:36:09.120
<v Speaker 3>In missum exactly. But anyway, coming back, so, this study

0:36:09.160 --> 0:36:13.160
<v Speaker 3>found in its experiments that familiarity with a game, even

0:36:13.160 --> 0:36:16.040
<v Speaker 3>a game purely of chance, where familiarity would actually not

0:36:16.120 --> 0:36:19.240
<v Speaker 3>make any difference at all, people still seem to behave

0:36:19.320 --> 0:36:23.080
<v Speaker 3>as if they thought it made a difference. Another variable

0:36:23.080 --> 0:36:26.640
<v Speaker 3>looked at in these experiments was the subject's level of involvement.

0:36:26.800 --> 0:36:29.840
<v Speaker 3>You know, how involved or hands on are you with

0:36:29.920 --> 0:36:34.319
<v Speaker 3>the process that decides the winner. So, in general, this

0:36:34.440 --> 0:36:38.320
<v Speaker 3>original nineteen seventy five paper found that, yes, experiments do

0:36:38.480 --> 0:36:42.360
<v Speaker 3>find that adding in elements that superficially remind people of

0:36:42.440 --> 0:36:47.480
<v Speaker 3>skill based games increases the illusion of control. And the

0:36:47.520 --> 0:36:49.759
<v Speaker 3>research did not stop there. There have been many, many

0:36:49.760 --> 0:36:52.960
<v Speaker 3>studies on the illusion of control in the decade since

0:36:53.120 --> 0:36:57.080
<v Speaker 3>this paper from nineteen seventy five. There have been sort

0:36:57.120 --> 0:37:02.319
<v Speaker 3>of three major branches of investigatory methods to look into

0:37:02.360 --> 0:37:05.160
<v Speaker 3>the evidence for the illusion of control and to understand

0:37:05.800 --> 0:37:09.800
<v Speaker 3>what variables influence when and the extent to which it occurs.

0:37:10.160 --> 0:37:13.720
<v Speaker 3>There's also been some criticism of the idea and maybe

0:37:14.960 --> 0:37:18.200
<v Speaker 3>looking at different theoretical ways to make sense of the

0:37:18.280 --> 0:37:21.080
<v Speaker 3>results of these kinds of experiments. And so I think

0:37:21.120 --> 0:37:22.880
<v Speaker 3>maybe in the next episode we're going to talk a

0:37:22.960 --> 0:37:26.200
<v Speaker 3>bit more about the research history, talk about what some

0:37:26.440 --> 0:37:30.560
<v Speaker 3>variables are that determine when people experience an illusion of control,

0:37:30.640 --> 0:37:33.440
<v Speaker 3>and look at criticisms of the concept.

0:37:33.800 --> 0:37:37.520
<v Speaker 2>All right, so join us next time as we'll continue

0:37:37.560 --> 0:37:40.640
<v Speaker 2>this look at the illusion of control. In the meantime,

0:37:40.640 --> 0:37:42.759
<v Speaker 2>we'd love to hear from everyone out there, because you know,

0:37:42.800 --> 0:37:46.720
<v Speaker 2>we've touched on some very basic ideas about human nature

0:37:46.760 --> 0:37:53.040
<v Speaker 2>here and specific examples of gameplay and gambling and so forth,

0:37:53.400 --> 0:37:55.360
<v Speaker 2>and so I know you're gonna have a lot of

0:37:55.360 --> 0:37:57.279
<v Speaker 2>thoughts and we'd love to hear from you, so write in.

0:37:58.200 --> 0:37:59.719
<v Speaker 2>We'll have that email address here at the end of

0:37:59.719 --> 0:38:02.680
<v Speaker 2>the oppis a couple other ways to interact with the show.

0:38:02.680 --> 0:38:04.759
<v Speaker 2>I haven't no think I've mentioned these recently, but if

0:38:04.760 --> 0:38:07.279
<v Speaker 2>you are on the Facebook, there is a Facebook group

0:38:07.360 --> 0:38:08.880
<v Speaker 2>for stuff to Blow your mind. It is the stuff

0:38:08.920 --> 0:38:12.520
<v Speaker 2>to Blow your Mind discussion module. You just go there.

0:38:12.560 --> 0:38:15.160
<v Speaker 2>You ask to be admitted and if I think you

0:38:15.160 --> 0:38:17.920
<v Speaker 2>have to answer a question, that's a very easy one

0:38:17.960 --> 0:38:19.480
<v Speaker 2>you should be able to get if you listen to

0:38:19.560 --> 0:38:24.279
<v Speaker 2>the show. Also, there is a discord server room. What

0:38:24.440 --> 0:38:27.040
<v Speaker 2>have you for, stuff to blow your mind? If you

0:38:27.080 --> 0:38:29.400
<v Speaker 2>want to join that, email us and we'll send you

0:38:29.440 --> 0:38:32.200
<v Speaker 2>the link. It's that simple. And let's see. What else

0:38:32.239 --> 0:38:34.919
<v Speaker 2>do we mention? Oh? Yeah, thanks to everyone out there

0:38:35.880 --> 0:38:38.279
<v Speaker 2>who jumped in and give us a nice rating and

0:38:38.360 --> 0:38:40.400
<v Speaker 2>review on the various places where you can do that,

0:38:40.480 --> 0:38:44.560
<v Speaker 2>and yeah, continue to ask for that. If you haven't

0:38:44.640 --> 0:38:47.080
<v Speaker 2>rated the show and given us a sprinkling of stars,

0:38:47.640 --> 0:38:49.160
<v Speaker 2>go ahead and do that because that helps us out.

0:38:49.600 --> 0:38:51.920
<v Speaker 2>And likewise, if you listen to the show on an

0:38:51.920 --> 0:38:55.120
<v Speaker 2>Apple device, Apple Podcasts and so forth, maybe pop in

0:38:55.160 --> 0:38:57.160
<v Speaker 2>and just make sure that you're still subscribed and that

0:38:57.200 --> 0:38:58.440
<v Speaker 2>you were receiving downloads.

0:38:58.960 --> 0:39:02.480
<v Speaker 3>Huge thanks as always to our excellent audio producer JJ Posway.

0:39:02.800 --> 0:39:04.399
<v Speaker 3>If you would like to get in touch with us

0:39:04.400 --> 0:39:06.920
<v Speaker 3>with feedback on this episode or any other, to suggest

0:39:07.000 --> 0:39:09.480
<v Speaker 3>topic for the future, or just to say hello, you

0:39:09.520 --> 0:39:12.200
<v Speaker 3>can email us at contact at Stuff to Blow Your

0:39:12.200 --> 0:39:20.440
<v Speaker 3>Mind dot com.

0:39:20.520 --> 0:39:23.440
<v Speaker 1>Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of iHeartRadio. For

0:39:23.560 --> 0:39:26.319
<v Speaker 1>more podcasts from my heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio app,

0:39:26.480 --> 0:39:43.760
<v Speaker 1>Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.