Data Skeptic15 Jan 2016

Detecting Pseudo-profound BS

A recent paper in the journal of Judgment and Decision Making titled On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit explores empirical questions around a reader's ability to detect statements which may sound profound but are actually a collection of buzzwords that fail to contain adequate meaning or truth. These statements are definitively different from lies and nonesense, as we discuss in the episode.

This paper proposes the Bullshit Receptivity scale (BSR) and empirically demonstrates that it correlates with existing metrics like the Cognitive Reflection Test, building confidence that this can be a useful, repeatable, empirical measure of a person's ability to detect pseudo-profound statements as being different from genuinely profound statements. Additionally, the correlative results provide some insight into possible root causes for why individuals might find great profundity in these statements based on other beliefs or cognitive measures.

The paper's lead author Gordon Pennycook joins me to discuss this study's results.

If you'd like some examples of pseudo-profound bullshit, you can randomly generate some based on Deepak Chopra's twitter feed.

To read other work from Gordon, check out his Google Scholar page and find him on twitter via @GordonPennycook.

And just for fun, if you think you've dreamed up a Data Skeptic related pseudo-profound bullshit statement, tweet it with hashtag #pseudoprofound. If I see an especially clever or humorous one, I might want to send you a free Data Skeptic sticker.

Denne episoden er hentet fra en åpen RSS-feed og er ikke publisert av Podme. Den kan derfor inneholde annonser.

Episoder(601)

Student Spotlight: Aaron Payne, Data Analyst

Aaron Payne, an MBA student at Georgia Tech studying business analytics and a Senior Insights Analyst at Chick-fil-A, joins Kyle Polich to talk about turning analytics into decisions that matter. They...

1 Mai 25min

The Future is Agentic in Recommender Systems

Kyle Polich sits down with Yashar Deldjoo, research scientist and Associate Professor at the Polytechnic University of Bari, to explore how recommender systems have evolved and why trustworthiness mat...

25 Apr 49min

Book Ratings and Recommendations

Goodreads star ratings can be misleading as measures of "book quality," and research from Hannes Rosenbusch suggests that for many professionally published books, differences between readers often mat...

27 Mar 39min

Disentanglement and Interpretability in Recommender Systems

Ervin Dervishaj, a PhD student at the University of Copenhagen, discusses his research on disentangled representation learning in recommender systems, finding that while disentanglement strongly corre...

10 Mar 30min

Collective Altruism in Recommender Systems

Ekaterina (Kat) Fedorova from MIT EECS joins us to discuss strategic learning in recommender systems—what happens when users collectively coordinate to game recommendation algorithms. Kat's research r...

27 Feb 54min

Niche vs Mainstream

Anas Buhayh discusses multi-stakeholder fairness in recommender systems and the S'mores framework—a simulation allowing users to choose between mainstream and niche algorithms. His research shows spec...

18 Feb 34min

Healthy Friction in Job Recommender Systems

In this episode, host Kyle Polich speaks with Roan Schellingerhout, a fourth-year PhD student at Maastricht University, about explainable multi-stakeholder recommender systems for job recruitment. Roa...

2 Feb 26min

Fairness in PCA-Based Recommenders

In this episode, we explore the fascinating world of recommender systems and algorithmic fairness with David Liu, Assistant Research Professor at Cornell University's Center for Data Science for Enter...

26 Jan 49min