Ad
related to: another way of saying suggests that we are likely to support the effects
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Ben Franklin Effect suggests that how we treat our dogs during training influences how we think about them as individuals – specifically, how much we like (or dislike) them. When we do nice things for our dogs in the form of treats, praise, petting and play to reinforce desired behaviors, such treatment may result in our liking them more.
Another possible cause is that older adults have fewer cognitive resources available to them and are more likely to default to less cognitively demanding strategies when faced with a decision. [11] They tend to rely on easily accessible information, or frames, regardless of whether that information is relevant to making the decision in question ...
Sensenig & Brehm [7] applied Brehm's reactance theory [8] to explain the boomerang effect. They argued that when a person thinks that his freedom to support a position on attitude issue is eliminated, the psychological reactance will be aroused and then he consequently moves his attitudinal position in a way so as to restore the lost freedom.
The halo effect is a perception distortion (or cognitive bias) that affects the way people interpret the information about someone with whom they have formed a positive gestalt. [11] An example of the halo effect is when a person finds out someone they have formed a positive gestalt with has cheated on their taxes.
Causal reasoning is the process of identifying causality: the relationship between a cause and its effect.The study of causality extends from ancient philosophy to contemporary neuropsychology; assumptions about the nature of causality may be shown to be functions of a previous event preceding a later one.
Find a way that feels right for you (in-person versus over the phone, for example). Find a suitable time and place in a setting that makes you feel more comfortable. Practice what you want to say.
The fewer effects the possible choices have in common, the more confident one can be in inferring a correspondent disposition. Or, put another way, the more distinctive the consequences of a choice, the more confidently one can infer intention and disposition.
Research to support this can be displayed by the following example: when given a choice between two brands of popcorn, participants were more likely to choose the one with the superior alignable differences, such as "pops in its own bag" compared with "requires a microwaveable bowl" than the one with superior non-alignable differences, such as ...