Academic

A FRIEND ON FACEBOOK COMMENTS: Listening to NPR reminds me of a clever psych experiment on what c?

By Glenn Reynolds

A FRIEND ON FACEBOOK COMMENTS:

Listening to NPR reminds me of a clever psych experiment on what constitutes an argument or explanation. In that experiment, the testers would walk to people standing in line to a library copier, ask to cut in line, and record people’s responses. Sometimes, the testers would simply ask to cut in line without saying anything else. And sometimes, they would say: “Can I cut in line because I need to make copies?” It turned out that if you just say the obvious (“because I need to make copies”), people will let you through at a much higher rate than if you simply ask to do something without uttering the magic word “because”. Apparently, simply saying “because” generates an impression that a meaningful explanation was provided.
So, NPR is trying to convince the audience that J. Barrett should not be appointed. The newest argument: “Because the election is so soon and some people already voted! Some people already voted!”
I actually stopped for a minute to understand why having “some people already voted” could possibly matter for J. Barrett’s appointment — until I realized this was from the department of “because I need to make copies”.

Heh.

Full post as published by Instapundit.com on October 09, 2020 (boomark / email).