Tag Archives: Harvard

Gettin into Pareidolia [loading 65%]

if we are not too scientific, we are too straightforward to be fascinated

pareidolia may have helped early societies organize chaos and make the world intelligible for our ancestors.

 —————– .Simple quick-picture question.———————-



!! The best percentage wins-

-until further notice!!

Simple def. [wiki]

Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon involving a vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) being perceived as significant. Common examples include seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon, and hearing hidden messages on records played in reverse.

*Bot Special*

Evolutionary advantage-

-Carl Sagan hypothesized that as a survival technique, human beings are “hard-wired” from birth to identify the human face. This allows people to use only minimal details to recognize faces from a distance and in poor visibility but can also lead them to interpret random images or patterns of light and shade as being faces.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

muhaha..more to come ;)

About these ads

How Google Search affects our Memory ?!

mooorning my minions,

New week and lets start with something stimulating for yo brains.

Im sure you are all familiar with the cyborgian agent known as GOOGLE SEARCH

(if not [omg] click ☞ here)

visualization via Crisp360 Link ☞ Here

“We are becoming symbiotic with our computer tools,

growing into interconnected systems that remember less

by knowing information than by knowing where the information can be found.”

This sentence comes from the findings of a new study conducted by psychology professors at Columbia University, the University Of Wisconsin-Madison, and Harvard University.

Essentially, the study asserts that internet search is destroying our “internal memory.”

“When people expect to have future access to information, they have lower rates of recall of the information itself and enhanced recall instead for where to access it.”

In other words, instead of remembering the name of every U.S. President, we now remember where we can find those names on Google (“external memory”).

“It may be no more that nostalgia at this point, however, to wish we were less dependent on our gadgets,” the study concludes. Perhaps relying on external memory isn’t such a bad thing—unless your smartphone runs out of battery, that is.

Google Effects on Memory:

Cognitive Consequences

of Having Information at Our  Fingertips

The advent of the Internet, with sophisticated algorithmic
search engines, has made accessing information as easy as
lifting a finger. No longer do we have to make costly
efforts to find the things we want. We can “Google” the
old classmate, find articles online, or look up the actor
who was on the tip of our tongue. The results of four
studies suggest that when faced with difficult questions,
people are primed to think about computers and that
when people expect to have future access to information,
they have lower rates of recall of the information itself
and enhanced recall instead for where to access it. The
Internet has become a primary form of external or
transactive memory, where information is stored
collectively outside ourselves.
In a development that would have seemed extraordinary just
over a decade ago, many of us have constant access to
information. If we need to find out the score of a ballgame,
learn how to perform a complicated statistical test, or simply
remember the name of the actress in the classic movie we are
viewing, we need only turn to our laptops, tablets, or
smartphones and we can find the answers immediately. It has
become so commonplace to look up the answer to any
question the moment it occurs, it can feel like going through
withdrawal when we can’t find out something immediately.
We are seldom offline unless by choice and it is hard to
remember how we found information before the Internet
became a ubiquitous presence in our lives. The Internet, with
its search engines such as Google and databases such as
IMDB and the information stored there, has become an
external memory source that we can access at any time.
Storing information externally is nothing particularly
novel, even before the advent of computers. In any long term
relationship, a team work environment, or other ongoing
group, people typically develop a group or transactive
memory (1), a combination of memory stores held directly by
individuals and the memory stores they can access because
they know someone who knows that information.

* * *

The present research explores whether having online access to
search engines, databases, and the like, has become a primary
transactive memory source in itself. We investigate whether
the Internet has become an external memory system that is
primed by the need to acquire information. If asked the
question whether there are any countries with only one color
in their flag, for example, do we think about flags—or
immediately think to go online to find out? Our research then
tested if, once information has been accessed, our internal
encoding is increased for where the information is to be found
rather than for the information itself.
In Experiment 1, participants were tested in two withinsubject conditions (4).

Participants answered either easy or
hard yes/no trivia questions, in two blocks. Each block was
followed by a modified Stroop task (a color naming task with
words presented in either blue or red) to test reaction times to
matched computer and non-computer terms (including
general and brand names for both word groups). People who
have been disposed to think about a certain topic typically
show slowed reaction times (RTs) for naming the color of the
word when the word itself is of interest and is more
accessible, because the word captures attention and interferes
with the fastest possible color naming.
Paired within-subject t-tests were conducted on colornaming reaction times to computer and general words after
the easy and difficult question blocks.

Confirming our hypothesis, computer words were more accessible

(colornaming RT M = 712 milliseconds (ms), SD = 413 ms) than
general words (M = 591 ms, SD = 204 ms) after participants
had encountered a series of questions to which they did not
know the answers, t(68) = 3.26, P < .003, two-tailed. It seems
that when we are faced with a gap in our knowledge, we are
primed to turn to the computer to rectify the situation.
Computer terms also interfered somewhat more with color
naming (M = 603 ms, SD = 193 ms) than general terms

(M =559 ms, SD = 182 ms) after easy questions,

t (68) = 2.98, P < 005,

suggesting that the computer may be primed when the concept of knowledge in general is activated.

Comparison using a repeated measures analysis of
variance (ANOVA) of specific search engines
(Google/Yahoo) and general consumer good brand names
(Target/Nike) revealed an interaction with easy vs. hard
question blocks, F(1,66) = 5.02, P < .03, such that search
engine brands after both easy (M = 638 ms, SD = 260 ms) and
hard questions (M = 818 ms, SD = 517 ms) created more
interference than general brands after easy

(M = 584 ms, SD =220 ms) and hard

(M = 614 ms, SD = 226 ms )

Simple effects tests showed the interaction was driven by a
significant increase in RT for the two search engine terms
after the hard question block, F(1,66) = 4.44, P < .04

Although the concept of knowledge in general seems to prime
thoughts of computers, even when answers are known; not
knowing the answer to general knowledge questions primes
the need to search for the answer, and subsequently computer
interference is particularly acute.
In Experiment 2, we tested whether people remembered
information they expected to have later access to—as they
might with information they could look up online (4).
Participants were tested in a 2 × 2 between-subject
experiment by reading 40 memorable trivia statements of the
type that one would look up online (both of the new
information variety e.g., “An ostrich’s eye is bigger than its
brain” and information that may be remembered generally,
but not in specific details, e.g., “The space shuttle Columbia
disintegrated during re-entry over Texas in Feb. 2003.”).
They then typed them into the computer to assure attention
(and also to provide a more generous test of memory). Half
the participants believed the computer would save what was
typed; half believed the item would be erased. In addition,
half of the participants in each of the saved and erased
conditions were asked explicitly to try to remember the
information. After the reading and typing task, participants
wrote down as many of the statements as they could remember

READ the rest of the paper


Betsy Sparrow,* Jenny Liu, Daniel M. Wegner

Department of Psychology, Columbia University, 1190 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027, USA. 

Department of  Psychology, University of Wisconsin–Madison, 1202 West Johnson Street, Madison, WI 53706, USA. 

Department of  Psychology, Harvard University, 33 Kirkland Street, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.

*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: sparrow@psych.columbia.edu



Busan Opera House Competition//Monsta-wha??

BAck to back with a 4xblodbath session…The FG fished out a little nonedited monster-aki scamming its way to the final 10 entries…under a rock.

—hit refresh-+–

Small autistic details:

An amazing very site specific project ,super skin, third value of the structural beams, frozen columns dancing in the field, sound scape monsters everywhere, plot density ^^93.2% (according to brief), extra pedestrian food supplies straight to you, someone is giving pain here, no joke, diagrams are kiling it, interiorizing the bottom part of the upper cascades, + zaha in the house

Its all about form finding with suffiecient ubiquitous experiments as Tsakas mentioned in the jury

yo yo yo  suckerpunch (+)


Introducting Apophenia // Leave 0.05% out and GOTCHA

Yo my minion readers.

Until now you have responded quite well to all the “wisdom” posts in the FG. So we decided to kick up the level of your intelligence with a series of new articles

Please enjoy and get some XP points asap..


We find ourselves in an unquestioning, patternless existence where everything occurs seemingly without reason.

There is no learning from experience: “Once bitten, twice shy,” becomes “Once bitten, never shy,” and the rhythms of the natural world are unappreciated


Lets take alook

How We Believe (Times Books),Michael Shermer.Scientific American(+),

‘’I argue that our brains are belief engines: evolved pattern-recognition machines that connect the dots and create meaning out of the patterns that we think we see in nature. Sometimes A really is connected to B; sometimes it is not. When it is, we have learned something valuable about the environment from which we can make predictions that aid in survival and reproduction. We are the ancestors of those most successful at finding patterns. This process is called association learning, and it is fundamental to all animal behavior, from the humble worm C. elegans to H. sapiens.’’

Hmm..[believing that we are 70% on the same page here], a sample connection example is tested

Using evolutionary modeling(aha) and having a demonstration through it, Harvard University biologist Kevin R. Foster and University of Helsinki biologist Hanna Kokko in ’08.. tested the theory and tried to have a gist out of it:

They begin with the formula pb > c,

where a belief may be held when the cost (c) of doing so is less than the probability (p) of the benefit (b). For example, believing that the rustle in the grass is a dangerous predator when it is only the wind does not cost much, but believing that a dangerous predator is the wind may cost an animal its life. !!

Gist: natural selection will favor patternicity..whenever |the cost of believing a false pattern is real| is less than |the cost of not believing a real pattern|

[Our goal is to never fall under 80%.. Although reaching a high barrier consists a lot of  mind streaming continuation]



-weakness of human cognision=pervasive(to any direction) tendency of human beings to see order in random configurations


-[bot special(+)]

”the entire enterprise of science, after all, is the organized and rational search for order in the seeming randomness surrounding us'(skeptic)   + “Science is not formal logic, it needs the free play of the mind in as great a degree as any other creative art.”(believer) =“merely noting patterns or coincidences is not proof in and of itself but, applied properly, can be the creative leap needed to devise new and testable hypotheses.”(DBS Sceptic)

Being a bit fussy[open for anykind of fight] could never really help anyone, so lets experience the  proposed INJECTION on  meaningful coincidence in life

  • Every coincidence is meaningful
  • It  happens to everyone but the person far best qualified to comprehend them is the one whom they occur to
  • It  is usually confirmation of whatever it is you are engaged in at the moment.
  • All meaningful coincidences(Synchronicity) are indeed signs pointing us in a specific direction at the most opportune moment.

~Creativity + Apophenia~

[Bonus to start with +5%] Brugger describes a “‘relativity of creativity,’ i.e., [a] continuum from creative detection of real patterns at one end, to the ‘hypercreative’ interpretation of patterns in ‘noise’ [randomness] at the other end.”

Leonardo Da Vinci, utilizing this tendency in order to harness the creativity of his students, advised them to :

Look at walls covered with many stains . . . with the idea of imagining some scene, you will see in it a similarity to landscapes adorned with mountains, rivers, rocks, trees, plains, broad valleys, and hills of all kinds… also battles and figures with lively gestures and strange faces and costumes and an infinity of things which you can reduce to separate and complex forms.

[Nothing but net]

Apophenia, in its more benign(!) state provides us

1)a powerful tool to make sense and safety of the world and people around us.

2) it is a well-spring of pseudo-science and nonsense, an irrational leap bypassing reason and rationality.

science fiction

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Follow my blog with Bloglovin


Sunday Bluff// Model Deconstruction


just raising our equity by range merging the off-hand stats from our leader position with this post about destroying models…smashing things is super awesome.!!

the DeathFromAbove

the JustPlayin’Stoopid

the ItHitTheFan

the PrankCall

the DramaticOne


Unpacking the Archive – Paris King // J to the N




Because we can

boring friday

Holla stoopid readers,

we just got back in paris and realized that THE BIG will hit our city with his Diagram-Architecture. BORING!

It is clear that he got influenced by our negotiation techniques (yes those we used to obtain Presidents Medals winners from Mr.Richardsson)

As a result he will realize one of the most radical and potentially influential buildings of the century. Its a pure cube with one node point moved to the left WITHOUT pressing “Shift” (that was a key point for the design process)
. Up Up for THE BIG a.k.a I Make Bitches Wet (+)

we dont really care since tonight will be hitting once again all the hot spots of Paris
and after 03:00 our loft office will be looking a bit like that: