PsyPost
  • Mental Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Cognitive Science
  • Neuroscience
  • About
No Result
View All Result
Join
My Account
PsyPost
No Result
View All Result
Home Exclusive Social Psychology

People who are more receptive to ‘pseudo-profound bullshit’ are less likely to donate to charity

by Eric W. Dolan
August 14, 2018
Reading Time: 3 mins read
(Photo credit: Voyagerix)

(Photo credit: Voyagerix)

Share on TwitterShare on Facebook

People who are impressed by seemingly profound statements that are actually nonsensical tend to be less charitable, suggests new research published in PLOS One. The study indicates that bullshit-sensitivity is linked to prosocial behavior.

“The overarching theme of my research is prosocial decision making (e.g. donating money to charity organizations) so this was the reason I wanted to focus on that dependent variable,” said study author Arvid Erlandsson, a postdoctoral researcher in psychology at Linkรถping University.

“Bullshit-sensitivity refers to the ability to distinguish pseudo-profound bullshit sentences such as ‘Good health imparts reality to subtle creativity’ from genuinely profound sentences such as ‘A river cuts through a rock, not because of its power but its persistence’,” he explained.

“I got interested in bullshit-sensitivity after reading the very alluringly named article ‘On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit‘ by Pennycook et al. (2015) in Judgment and Decision Making and we decided to include reactions to bullshit as one individual difference variable in one large scale survey that we conducted.”

In the study, one thousand participants rated the meaningfulness of 14 statements. They also indicated whether they had donated to charity in the past year and were given an option to complete a few questions on behalf of a charity.

The researchers found receptivity to bullshit was negatively related to prosocial behavior. In other words, people who tended to rate bullshit sentences as being meaningful also tended to be less likely to donate to charity.

“To our knowledge, we are the first study that links reactions to bullshit to an actual behavior rather than to self-reported measures. We also measure prosociality in two different ways, which makes the findings more robust and generalizable,” Erlandsson told PsyPost.

“We emphasize the importance to distinguish bullshit-receptivity (the tendency to perceive bullshit-quotes such as ‘The hidden meaning transforms the abstract beauty’ as meaningful) from bullshit-sensitivity (the ability to distinguish pseudo-profound quotes from quotes that are actually profound such as ‘Your teacher can open the door, but you have to step in’).”

Google News Preferences Add PsyPost to your preferred sources

“We find that people who are good at distinguishing the actually profound from the pseudo-profound are more prosocial.”

The study has some limitations.

“We see this finding as a small but interesting contribution to a fun and quickly emerging field of research rather than something groundbreaking or conclusive. We are open with the fact that the results were found in exploratory analyses, and we cannot currently say much about the underlying mechanisms,” Erlandsson explained.

“As the reaction to bullshit is currently a rather ‘hot’ and easily accessible topic in social and decision-making psychology, we thought that it was appropriate to publish these findings even though we currently can only say something about correlations.

“Future studies could potentially test causality (e.g. see whether courses in critical thinking could make people better at distinguishing the actually profound from the pseudo-profound and whether this also influences their prosociality compared to a control group).”

The researchers who are studying bullshit believe that modern communications technologies have probably made the problem worse.

“This paper focuses on pseudo-profound bullshit sentences, but we and others have tentatively linked this to individual differences in susceptibility to fake news and the ability/inability to distinguish real ‘true’ news from fake news,” Erlandsson said.

“Improving people’s (on both sides of the political spectrum) ability to separate fake news from real news is arguably a more important task than increasing their ability to detect bullshit.”

The study, “Bullshit-sensitivity predicts prosocial behavior“, was authored by Arvid Erlandsson, Artur Nilsson, Gustav Tinghรถg, and Daniel Vรคstfjรคll.

TweetSendScanShareSendPin1ShareShareShareShareShare

Follow PsyPost

The latest research, however you prefer to read it.

Daily newsletter

One email a day. The newest research, nothing else.

Google News

Get PsyPost stories in your Google News feed.

Add PsyPost to Google News
RSS feed

Use your favorite reader.

Copy RSS URL
Social media
Support independent science journalism

Ad-free reading, full archives, and weekly deep dives for members.

Become a member

Trending

  • What millions of voter records reveal about political independents
  • Left-leaning Americans are driving the U.S. birth decline, new study finds
  • The association between autistic traits and camouflaging is stronger in the general population
  • Scientists accidentally discover an inherent human tendency for counterclockwise movement
  • Highly gendered languages are linked to larger personality differences between men and women

Science of Money

  • When the boss is a narcissist, employees may start bending the rules
  • Lottery-like stocks dominate Reddit investing forums, new research shows
  • Do artists work less when handed free money? This study says no
  • New research maps how dense partnership networks can undermine product innovation
  • When the weight comes off: what GLP-1 drugs reveal about the penalty women pay for body size

Recent

  • Artificial intelligence accurately charts sleep stages without intrusive brain sensors
  • Brain imaging reveals what makes professional visual artists unique
  • Could a daily cup of coffee protect the brain against depressive symptoms?
  • Social media users tend to face more political hostility in less democratic and more unequal countries
  • Why a single IQ score may not capture your true brainpower
  • Anxious attachment is linked to populating future daydreams with other people, study finds
  • Women who perceive their partner as more desirable report higher motivation to please them sexually
  • A single dose of psilocybin reduces reward-seeking behavior by altering inhibitory brain cells
  • Are preprint servers inadvertently legitimizing scientific racism?
  • Artificial intelligence chatbots adopt human power dynamics and social biases in conversations

PsyPost is a psychology and neuroscience news website dedicated to reporting the latest research on human behavior, cognition, and society. (READ MORE...)

  • Mental Health
  • Neuroimaging
  • Personality Psychology
  • Social Psychology
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Cognitive Science
  • Psychopharmacology
  • Contact us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms and conditions
  • Do not sell my personal information

(c) PsyPost Media Inc

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In

Add New Playlist

Subscribe
  • My Account
  • Cognitive Science Research
  • Mental Health Research
  • Social Psychology Research
  • Drug Research
  • Relationship Research
  • About PsyPost
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy

(c) PsyPost Media Inc