Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Self-categorization theory wikipedia , lookup
James M. Honeycutt wikipedia , lookup
Social loafing wikipedia , lookup
Group dynamics wikipedia , lookup
False consensus effect wikipedia , lookup
Social commerce wikipedia , lookup
Social dilemma wikipedia , lookup
Social perception wikipedia , lookup
making decisions IT’S WHO YOU KNOW! PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania (Achieve3000, April 27, 2009). Conventional wisdom holds that it's not always what you know; it's often who you know. Now, however, scientists are finding that in many cases, it's also who the people you know know. In other words, your social network—as well as the network of each person within your network—can influence various decisions you make. These decisions include how you vote, and even your personal preferences. Michael Kearns, a University of Pennsylvania computer scientist, has done extensive research on the connections between social networks and human behavior. While most networking experiments in the past had been conducted using computer models, Kearns has become a pioneer in developing techniques for testing real people. In one of his most recent experiments, Kearns investigated whether a small minority of people can influence the voting behavior of a majority. To conduct this experiment, Kearns gathered a group of 36 students. He then created several networks within the group by placing each student at a work station that was linked to varying numbers of other test subjects. For example, some students were placed in networks that contained as many as 18 other subjects, while others were grouped into networks that were made up of as few as 2 other test subjects. Kearns then told all 36 students that they would be asked to vote for a color—either red or blue. If everyone in the group could agree to vote for the same color within 60 seconds, everyone would receive a financial reward. If the group failed to reach a unanimous agreement, however, no rewards would be given. Kearns held several rounds of voting so that he could compare the outcomes. To motivate students to vote for a particular color, Kearns promised some subjects $1.50 for each round of voting that red won and 50 cents for each round that blue won. These incentives were reversed for other subjects. "There's this tension between all of them wanting to collectively agree but selfishly wanting everyone to agree on their preferred color," Kearns said. Despite the one-minute deadline, Kearns said, people came to some agreement in 55 out of 81 separate votes. The majority did not always win, however. In one trial, for example, Kearns promised 6 students the $1.50 payout if red won. He promised 30 students $1.50 each if blue won. In this vote, blue should have won because it was better for more people to vote for blue. However, red won the vote. How could this have happened? Kearns explained that although the six people wanting red to win were in the minority, they belonged to larger networks. Their larger sphere of influence benefited them. "'Influential' people can determine the outcome to their liking," Kearns said, even if the majority has a strong incentive to go the other way. In this case, having lots of connections made a subject influential. This scenario is not unlike real-world elections, Kearns said, where networking is already becoming important. For example, Barack Obama used networking to rally support during his 2008 presidential campaign. Social networks have also been found to affect people's personal preferences. In another recent experiment, Duncan Watts, a networking expert at Yahoo! Inc., recruited 14,000 people. He then asked them to rank a series of 48 new songs that they had never heard before. The research revealed that when the volunteers were aware of the selections made by their fellow volunteers, they changed their preferences completely to conform to those of the group. Watts then divided the recruits into eight groups and did not allow the groups to intermingle. Then results varied radically between the groups. For example, one group's top-rated song might be ranked 42nd by another group. "We assume things are popular because that's what people want," Watts said. However, he added, "This is showing that's wrong." Other researchers, including experts at computer science, math, sociology, and other disciplines, are finding that social networks don't only shape voting decisions and tastes. They also shape people's purchases and habits. They even shape their levels of health and happiness. Excerpt from the National Survey of American Attitudes on Substance Abuse XVI: Teens and Parents The article "It's Who You Know" discussed research showing that social networks can shape a person's decisions and preferences. According to this 2011 back-to-school survey by The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA Columbia), American teens who spend any time on social networking sites are more likely to have used alcohol, tobacco, or marijuana. A portion of the survey related to social networking and teen substance abuse is shown below. Excerpt from the National Survey of American Attitudes on Substance Abuse XVI:Teens and Parents Time Spent on Social Networking Sites For the first time this year [2011], we asked teens, "In a typical day, how many hours do you spend on Facebook, Myspace or other social networking site?" Seventy percent of teens spend time on a social networking site in a typical day, while 30 percent spend no time on such a site in a typical day. Social Networking Signals Increased Risk of Teen Substance Abuse Compared to teens who do not spend time on a social networking site in a typical day, teens who spend time on a social networking site in a typical day are: Five times likelier to have used tobacco (10% vs. 2%); Three times likelier to have used alcohol (26% vs. 9%); Twice as likely to have used marijuana (13% vs. 7%). Our report distinguishes between no time and any time spent on a social networking site in a typical day because our analysis showed no significant difference in substance use among teens spending 1 to 30 minutes, 31 to 90 minutes or more than 90 minutes on a social networking site in a typical day. 1. Take a look at “It’s Who You Know.” Which of these statements belong in a summary of the experiment Michael Kearns conducted? Circle all that apply. Look at the “National Survey” excerpt. Which evidence from the text supports the idea that social networking is related to teen substance abuse? Circle ALL answers that apply; SHORT ANSWER QUESTION Do you think that the best decisions are made when people allow themselves to be influenced by others? Support your answer with reasons and evidence from the article, the survey results, the table, and your own experiences. DIRECTIONS: Use data from the readings and your own life to write an argument about how people make decisions. Your response should be 1-2 pages in length and include quotes, paraphrases, and information from your life to support your argument. ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________