Category Psychology

You are a Target Market

From the New York Times article New York Hotels Entice Customers with Lure of TV Life, by Diane Cardwell

In a city like New York, there are many reasons to pick a particular watering hole: a sympathetic bartender, a selective jukebox, the collection of patrons bellied up alongside you.

But for Kate Hughes and Toni Suppa, friends since high school, it was the guilty pleasures of TV’s “Gossip Girl” that helped lure them on a recent evening to the Lobby Bar of the Empire Hotel on West 63rd Street, a fixture in the series about hard-partying Upper East Side teenagers.

“We knew they had a ‘Gossip Girl’ drink list, and it’s fun,” Ms. Hughes said, laughing sheepishly as she savored a B, named for the character Blair: gin served straight up with blood orange bitters and a rock candy swizzle stick. (“Her bittersweet venom,” the bar menu elaborated, “is addictive but always leaves a sting.”)

Ms. Suppa, who was having an Eau de Vanessa, a popular concoction of pear vodka, pear nectar and white grape juice, defined that fun as dipping a toe into the show’s racy milieu. “You kind of feel like you’re a part of it, whatever ‘Gossip Girl’ is putting out there,” she said, adding, “We’re also 30 years old ——”

“So we’re doing it a little ironically,” Ms. Hughes said, finishing the thought.

These days, a number of the city’s hotels are counting on customers like them, hoping to edge out the competition by leveraging a connection — real or invented — with a popular television show or movie that sells a vision of a carousing New York.

On the Upper East Side, visitors are urged to have “A Mad Affair at the Pierre,” as Duck and Peggy once did on “Mad Men,” which began its fourth season on AMC last month. Starting at $970 for one night in a suite, the package includes a bottle of Champagne, $150 worth of room service or lobby bar dining, and a DVD boxed set of the series.

The Blue Bar at the Algonquin Hotel, which figured into some early “Mad Men” scripts, is trying to use its vintage boozy swank to capitalize on the show. It has developed special cocktails to fit the characters: 1960s Madison Avenue advertising executives and the women who orbit them through clouds of cigarette smoke. Rodney Landers, a mixologist at the hotel, said he was planning a Dirty Don Draper mojito, with dark rum to make it masculine and brown sugar to make it “dirty,” like the perennially unfaithful character, who recently revealed a taste for being slapped by a prostitute.

“Over all, I think his character’s kind of dirty,” Mr. Landers said, adding that he was working on something called the white lady, essentially a gin sidecar, for Mr. Draper’s repressed ex-wife, Betty. (No matter that on the show, Don and Betty stick to old-fashioneds and gimlets.)

In the meatpacking district, the Hotel Gansevoort is using the movie “Sex and the City 2” to draw in would-be Carries, Samanthas, Charlottes and Mirandas for a night with two Cosmopolitans by the pool, discounts at nearby boutiques, passes to a nightclub and a related book or DVD. The package starts at $545.

This cross-promotional relationship between entertainment and commerce is not new to New York — “Seinfeld” drove business to Tom’s Restaurant and the Soup Man — but it has been building in recent years, hotel and tourism executives say, as more shows make the city a central character.

“The image of New York on a global basis is so much made out of the popular culture that has proliferated about New York,” said George A. Fertitta, the chief executive of NYC & Company, the city’s tourism and marketing arm.

He added that the TV shows and films offered glimpses into what life in the city could be.

“Sex and the City,” with its merry-go-round of flashily dressed, ambitious women eating and drinking their way through Manhattan, may have taken the relationship to extreme heights. But “Gossip Girl,” which is currently in production and was scouting the roof at the Pod Hotel in Midtown the other day for a possible shoot, has become among the most coveted shows to appear on.

Even the city is getting in on the deal: NYC & Company recently negotiated inclusion of Fashion’s Night Out, a shopping promotion it organizes with the Council of Fashion Designers of America, in a “Gossip Girl” plot line.

Blake Danner, the executive vice president of the Empire Hotel, which also serves “Sex and the City” cocktails in its lobby bar, said the two shows shared a similar marketing appeal because visitors were looking to experience the social whirlwinds they portray.

“Both shows are about an upper-end, see-and-be-seen kind of fun form of the excesses of New York City,” Mr. Danner said.

Indeed, the use of real locations, or real places meticulously reproduced, confers a sense of authenticity that can affect viewers in surprising ways, said Jennifer Foley, vice president for public relations at the Morgans Hotel Group, whose Hudson Hotel has appeared in “Ugly Betty,” “Sex and the City” and “Gossip Girl.”

“We’ve done ‘Entourage’ at the Mondrian in L.A., and that brought in hipsters and people thinking they were going to run into these guys,” she said, referring to the show’s characters. “There’s that weird perception of, maybe they really are hanging out there.”

[ Continue ]

They Couldn’t See Black as Pigment

Indeed, Rauschenberg had been very troubled by the reception of his black paintings (1951-1953), which critics and viewers alike assumed were to be understood at that emotive level. “They couldn’t see black as pigment,” he complained. “They moved immediately into association with ‘burned-out,’ ‘tearing,’ ‘nihilism,’ and ‘destruction.’…I’m never sure what the impulse is psychologically, I don’t mess around with my subconscious.” For good measure, he added, “If I see any superficial subconscious relationships that I’m familiar with—clichés of association—I change the picture.”

Rosalind Krauss, Perpetual Inventory, Robert Rauschenberg, October Files 4

Inception: Architecture of the Mind

Evolution of the Shrug: Darwin’s Principle of Antithesis

Scientists Prove Meditation Increases Attention Span

Via PhysOrg

It’s nearly impossible to pay attention to one thing for a long time. A new study looks at whether Buddhist meditation can improve a person’s ability to be attentive and finds that meditation training helps people do better at focusing for a long time on a task that requires them to distinguish small differences between things they see.

The research was inspired by work on Buddhist monks, who spend years training in meditation. “You wonder if the mental skills, the calmness, the peace that they express, if those things are a result of their very intensive training or if they were just very special people to begin with,” says Katherine MacLean, who worked on the study as a graduate student at the University of California, Davis. Her co-advisor, Clifford Saron, did some research with monks decades ago and wanted to study meditation by putting volunteers through intensive training and seeing how it changes their mental abilities.

About 140 people applied to participate; they heard about it via word of mouth and advertisements in Buddhist-themed magazines. Sixty were selected for the study. A group of thirty people went on a meditation retreat while the second group waited their turn; that meant the second group served as a control for the first group. All of the participants had been on at least three five-to-ten day meditation retreats before, so they weren’t new to the practice. They studied meditation for three months at a retreat in Colorado with B. Alan Wallace, one of the study’s co-authors and a meditation teacher and Buddhist scholar.

The people took part in several experiments; results from one are published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science. At three points during the retreat, each participant took a test on a computer to measure how well they could make fine visual distinctions and sustain visual attention. They watched a screen intently as lines flashed on it; most were of the same length, but every now and then a shorter one would appear, and the volunteer had to click the mouse in response.

Participants got better at discriminating the short lines as the training went on. This improvement in perception made it easier to sustain attention, so they also improved their task performance over a long period of time. This improvement persisted five months after the retreat, particularly for people who continued to meditate every day.

The task lasted 30 minutes and was very demanding. “Because this task is so boring and yet is also very neutral, it’s kind of a perfect index of meditation training,” says MacLean. “People may think meditation is something that makes you feel good and going on a meditation retreat is like going on vacation, and you get to be at peace with yourself. That’s what people think until they try it. Then you realize how challenging it is to just sit and observe something without being distracted.”

This experiment is one of many that were done by Saron, MacLean and a team of nearly 30 researchers with the same group of participants. It’s the most comprehensive study of intensive meditation to date, using methods drawn from fields as diverse as molecular biology, neuroscience, and anthropology. Future analyses of these same volunteers will look at other mental abilities, such as how well people can regulate their emotions and their general well-being.

The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains

From The Economist

The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains, by Nicholas Carr. Norton; 276 pages

In 1492, the same year that Christopher Columbus crossed the Atlantic, a Benedictine abbot named Trithemius, living in western Germany, wrote a spirited defence of scribes who tried to impress God’s word most firmly on their minds by copying out texts by hand. To disseminate his own books, though, Trithemius used the revolutionary technology of the day, the printing press. Nicholas Carr, an American commentator on the digital revolution, faces a similar dichotomy. A blogger and card-carrying member of the “digerati”, he is worried enough about the internet to raise the alarm about its dangers to human thought and creativity.

The recent uproar over privacy on Facebook is only the latest backlash against man’s newly wired existence. Mr Carr did his bit to encourage the anxiety in 2008 with an essay in the Atlantic entitled “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” His new book is an expanded survey of the science and history of human cognition. Worry of this kind is not new: a decade ago, the first evidence suggested that PowerPoint changed not just how executives presented information, but also how they thought. Mr Carr’s contribution is to offer the most readable overview of the science to date. It is clearly not intended as a jeremiad. Yet halfway through, he can’t quite help but blurt out that the impact of this browsing on our brains is “even more disturbing” than he thought.

Humans like to believe they control the tools they use, even if Socrates, Marshall McLuhan and Ivan Illich are among those who have argued that often they do not. From the alphabet to clocks and printing, every major new technology has profoundly altered the way in which humans think. The digital gadgets on which we now depend, Mr Carr explains, have already begun rewiring our brains.

Neurological research has demolished the myth of the static brain. Neural networks can be rapidly reorganised in response to new experiences such as going on the web. Mr Carr surveys current knowledge about the effects on thinking of “hypermedia”—in particular clicking, skipping, skimming—and especially on working and deep memory. He draws some chilling inferences. There is evidence, he says, that digital technology is already damaging the long-term memory consolidation that is the basis for true intelligence.

Only by combining data stored deep within our brains can we forge new ideas. No amount of magpie assemblage can compensate for this slow, synthetic creativity. Hyperlinks and overstimulation mean the brain must give most of its attention to short-term decisions. Little makes it through the fragile transfer into deeper processing. Clearly, argues Mr Carr, this is a radical upending of the “literate mind” that has been the hallmark of civilisation for more than 1,000 years. From a society that valued the creation of a unique storehouse of ideas in each individual, man is moving to a socially constructed mind that values speed and group approval over originality and creativity.

True, there are compensations: better hand-eye co-ordination, pattern recognition and the very multitasking skills the machines themselves require. Sceptics will rightly point out that similar concerns have accompanied each new technology. Something is always lost, and something gained. Some evolutionary biologists claim that the scholarly mind is an historical anomaly: that humans, like other primates, are designed to scan rapidly for danger and opportunity. If so, the net delivers this shallow, scattered mindset with a vengeance.

Mr Carr offers few prescriptions. The author himself retreated to an (unplugged) mountain hideout to write his book, but he thinks most people depend too much on the net for work and fun to do the same. And he fails to address the ways in which the internet acts like a drug. Other critics have probed this issue more deeply, notably Jaron Lanier, a virtual-reality pioneer, in a recent book, “You Are Not a Gadget”. Yet surely online bingeing is no different from eating too many sweets: its remedy is a matter of old-fashioned self-restraint.

Morality: Rose-Colored Spectacles?

From The Economist

Cheats may or may not prosper, but they despise themselves for cheating

Those who buy counterfeit designer goods project a fashionable image at a fraction of the price of the real thing. You might think that would make them feel rather smug about themselves. But an intriguing piece of research published in Psychological Science by Francesca Gino of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, suggests the opposite: wearing fake goods makes you feel a fake yourself, and causes you to be more dishonest in other matters than you would otherwise be.

Dr Gino and her colleagues provided a group of female volunteers with Chloé sunglasses that cost about $300 a pair, supposedly as part of a marketing study. They told some of the volunteers that the sunglasses were real, and others that they were counterfeit. They then asked the volunteers to perform pencil-and-paper mathematical quizzes for which they could earn up to $10, depending on how many questions they got right. The participants were spun a yarn about how doing these quizzes would allow them to judge the comfort and quality of the glasses.

Crucially, the quizzes were presented as “honour tests” that participants would mark themselves, reporting their own scores to the study’s organisers. The quiz papers were unnumbered and thus appeared to be untraceable, and were thrown away at the end of the study. In fact, though, each had one unique question on it, meaning that it could be identified—and the papers were recovered and marked again by the researchers after they had been discarded.

Of participants told that they were wearing authentic designer sunglasses, 30% were found to have cheated, reporting that they had solved more problems than was actually the case. Of those who thought they were wearing fake sunglasses, by contrast, about 70% cheated.

The results were similar when the women completed a computer-based task that involved counting dots on a screen. In this case, the location of the dots determined the financial reward. The women who thought they were wearing counterfeits lied about those locations more often than those who did not.

In a third part of the study, the participants were asked questions about the honesty and ethics of people they knew and people in general. Those who thought they had knock-offs were more likely to say that people were dishonest and unethical.

It looked, then, as if believing they were wearing fakes made people feel like fakes. To test that hypothesis, Dr Gino and her colleagues ran the experiment again, this time including a test meant to detect self-alienation. They asked the participants if they agreed with statements like, “right now, I feel as if I don’t know myself very well”. Those who thought they were wearing fakes did indeed feel more alienated from themselves than those who knew they were wearing the real things.

It remained possible, however, that it was the sense of self-alienation which was normal, and that believing you were wearing designer glasses made you more at ease with yourself. To test that, the team ran one final set of experiments, in which some people were given sunglasses to wear without any indication of their provenance. Volunteers in this control group behaved like those who believed the glasses were authentic.

The moral, then, is that people’s sense of right and wrong influences the way they feel and behave. Even when it is someone else who has made them behave badly, it can affect their subsequent behaviour. Next time you are offered fake accessories, beware: wearing them can make you feel like a bad person, not a better one.

Schizophrenic / Autonomous Architecture

One should ask not whether architecture is autonomous, or whether it can willfully be made so, but rather how it can be that the question arises in the first place, what kind of situation allows for architecture to worry about itself to this degree.

And so Eisenman’s effort to push architecture into this new era is driven by a felt historical imperative: to represent the inner logic of the object in the object itself is necessary not because of some subjective decision to exclude other considerations but because of a historical evolution crucial, if not unique, to the discipline of architecture, which delegitimizes older meanings, demands that the cultural content of an older functionalism migrate into an autonomous architecture, and concludes that the true revolutionary artist of our time is not Karel Teige or Hannes Meyer but the seemingly apolitical logothete of an “atemporal, decompositional mode.”

The contemporary struggle of architecture to return to itself through autonomous formal operations alerts us not to architecture’s success, but to its coming to grief against a historical moment, one that shuts down certain social functions that architecture had previously performed.

K. Michael Hays, The Oppositions of Autonomy and History, Oppositions reader introduction, xi, x, xiii

Love Without Mercy

If it means anything today—culture, in this all pervasive sense of cultural studies and so on— cultures are social phenomenons towards which we precisely maintain a minimal distance; like religion, you’re supposed to believe in it, if not, then it turns into a cultural phenomenon.

Slavoj Žižek, Love Without Mercy, Deitch Projects, Lacanian Ink 21, March 10, 2003

Songbirds Learn Their Songs During Sleep

Via ScienceDaily:

When zebra finches learn their songs from their father early in life, their brain is active during sleep.

That is what biologists at Utrecht University conclude in a paper published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B. Their findings are a further demonstration that birdsong learning is very similar to the way that children learn how to speak.

This discovery has important consequences for our understanding of the brain processes involved in learning and memory. Human infants learning to speak show increased activation in a part of the brain that is comparable to that studied in young zebra finches. Furthermore, language learning in children is improved when they are allowed to take a nap. The Utrecht discovery will increase our understanding of the role of sleep in the formation of memory.

A model for speech learning

Previously the researchers, Sharon Gobes, Thijs Zandbergen and Johan Bolhuis, had demonstrated that the way in which zebra finches learn their songs is very similar to the way in which children learn to speak. In both cases learning takes place during early youth and involves considerable practise. Also, in children and songbirds alike, different brain regions are involved in learning and in speaking or singing. The new research shows that, just as in human infants, the brain of the young zebra finch is also active during sleep. This makes songbirds a good animal model to study the role of sleep in human speech acquisition.

The brain is active during sleep It has been known that sleep plays an important role in learning in humans and other mammals. In songbirds it had been shown previously that during sleep the brain has the same pattern of activity as during singing the day before. The present findings show that the more young songbirds have learned from their father’s song, the more active their brain is during subsequent sleep.

[ In relation ]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 36 other followers