TEDxYouth@Manchester
Ben Ambridge: 9 myths about psychology, debunked
Filmed:
Readability: 4.3
3,054,590 views
How much of what you think about psychology is actually wrong? In this whistle-stop tour of disproved ideas, Ben Ambridge shares nine popular ideas about psychology that have been proven wrong -- and uncovers a few surprising truths about how our brains really work.
Ben Ambridge - Psychologist
Ben Ambridge is the author of "Psy-Q," a sparkling book debunking what we think we know about psychology. Full bio
Ben Ambridge is the author of "Psy-Q," a sparkling book debunking what we think we know about psychology. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:12
You've heard of your I.Q.,
your general intelligence,
your general intelligence,
0
857
2859
00:15
but what's your Psy-Q?
1
3716
1676
00:17
How much do you know
about what makes you tick,
about what makes you tick,
2
5392
2237
00:19
and how good are you
at predicting other people's behavior
at predicting other people's behavior
3
7629
2745
00:22
or even your own?
4
10374
1506
00:23
And how much of what you think you know
about psychology is wrong?
about psychology is wrong?
5
11880
3279
00:27
Let's find out by counting down
the top 10 myths of psychology.
the top 10 myths of psychology.
6
15159
3788
00:30
You've probably heard it said
that when it comes to their psychology,
that when it comes to their psychology,
7
18947
3396
00:34
it's almost as if men are from Mars
and women are from Venus.
and women are from Venus.
8
22343
2882
00:37
But how different
are men and women really?
are men and women really?
9
25235
2029
00:39
To find out, let's start
by looking at something
by looking at something
10
27264
2254
00:41
on which men and women really do differ
11
29518
1977
00:43
and plotting some psychological
gender differences on the same scale.
gender differences on the same scale.
12
31495
3448
00:46
One thing men and women
do really differ on
do really differ on
13
34943
2173
00:49
is how far they can throw a ball.
14
37116
1797
00:50
So if we look at the data for men here,
15
38913
1890
00:52
we see what is called
a normal distribution curve.
a normal distribution curve.
16
40803
2471
00:55
A few men can throw a ball really far,
and a few men not far at all,
and a few men not far at all,
17
43274
3208
00:58
but most a kind of average distance.
18
46482
1770
01:00
And women share
the same distribution as well,
the same distribution as well,
19
48252
2164
01:02
but actually there's
quite a big difference.
quite a big difference.
20
50416
2049
01:04
In fact, the average man
can throw a ball further
can throw a ball further
21
52465
2448
01:06
than about 98 percent of all women.
22
54913
1707
01:08
So now let's look at what
some psychological gender differences
some psychological gender differences
23
56620
3027
01:11
look like on the same standardized scale.
24
59647
2857
01:14
Any psychologist will tell you
25
62504
1586
01:16
that men are better
at spatial awareness than women --
at spatial awareness than women --
26
64090
2545
01:18
so things like map-reading,
for example -- and it's true,
for example -- and it's true,
27
66635
2738
01:21
but let's have a look
at the size of this difference.
at the size of this difference.
28
69373
2490
01:23
It's tiny; the lines are so close
together they almost overlap.
together they almost overlap.
29
71863
3387
01:27
In fact, the average woman is better
than 33 percent of all men,
than 33 percent of all men,
30
75250
3994
01:31
and of course, if that was 50 percent,
31
79244
1881
01:33
then the two genders
would be exactly equal.
would be exactly equal.
32
81125
2056
01:35
It's worth bearing in mind that this
difference and the next one I'll show you
difference and the next one I'll show you
33
83181
3658
01:38
are pretty much the biggest
psychological gender differences
psychological gender differences
34
86839
2825
01:41
ever discovered in psychology.
35
89664
1437
01:43
So here's the next one.
36
91101
1111
01:44
Any psychologist will tell you
that women are better
that women are better
37
92212
2438
01:46
with language and grammar than men.
38
94650
1665
01:48
So here's performance
on the standardized grammar test.
on the standardized grammar test.
39
96315
2589
01:50
There go the women. There go the men.
40
98904
1957
01:52
Again, yes, women are better on average,
but the lines are so close
but the lines are so close
41
100861
3699
01:56
that 33 percent of men
are better than the average woman,
are better than the average woman,
42
104560
3487
02:00
and again, if it was 50 percent,
43
108047
1673
02:01
that would represent
complete gender equality.
complete gender equality.
44
109720
2742
02:04
So it's not really
a case of Mars and Venus.
a case of Mars and Venus.
45
112462
2121
02:06
It's more a case of, if anything,
Mars and Snickers:
Mars and Snickers:
46
114583
2667
02:09
basically the same, but one's maybe
slightly nuttier than the other.
slightly nuttier than the other.
47
117250
4362
02:13
I won't say which.
48
121612
2026
02:15
Now we've got you warmed up.
49
123638
1865
02:17
Let's psychoanalyze you using
the famous Rorschach inkblot test.
the famous Rorschach inkblot test.
50
125503
3036
02:20
So you can probably see two, I dunno,
two bears or two people or something.
two bears or two people or something.
51
128539
3583
02:24
But what do you think they're doing?
52
132122
1753
02:25
Put your hand up if you think
they're saying hello.
they're saying hello.
53
133875
3184
02:29
Not many people. Okay.
54
137059
1811
02:30
Put your hands up if you think
they are high-fiving.
they are high-fiving.
55
138870
2467
02:33
Okay. What if you think they're fighting?
56
141337
1970
02:35
Only a few people there.
57
143307
1255
02:36
Okay, so if you think they're
saying hello or high-fiving,
saying hello or high-fiving,
58
144562
3077
02:39
then that means you're a friendly person.
59
147639
1991
02:41
If you think they're fighting,
60
149630
1590
02:43
you're a bit more of a
nasty, aggressive person.
nasty, aggressive person.
61
151220
2316
02:45
Are you a lover or a fighter, basically.
62
153536
1940
02:47
What about this one?
63
155476
1287
02:48
This isn't really a voting one, so on
three everyone shout out what you see.
three everyone shout out what you see.
64
156763
3622
02:52
One, two, three.
(Audience shouting)
(Audience shouting)
65
160385
3164
02:55
I heard hamster. Who said hamster?
66
163549
1692
02:57
That was very worrying.
67
165241
1537
02:58
A guy there said hamster.
68
166778
1513
03:00
Well, you should see
some kind of two-legged animal here,
some kind of two-legged animal here,
69
168291
3308
03:03
and then the mirror image of them there.
70
171599
2384
03:05
If you didn't, then this means
that you have difficulty
that you have difficulty
71
173983
3431
03:09
processing complex situations
where there's a lot going on.
where there's a lot going on.
72
177414
4090
03:13
Except, of course,
it doesn't mean that at all.
it doesn't mean that at all.
73
181504
2225
03:15
Rorschach inkblot tests
have basically no validity
have basically no validity
74
183729
2671
03:18
when it comes to diagnosing
people's personality
people's personality
75
186400
2275
03:20
and are not used
by modern-day psychologists.
by modern-day psychologists.
76
188675
2461
03:23
In fact, one recent study found
that when you do try
that when you do try
77
191136
3419
03:26
to diagnose people's personalities
using Rorschach inkblot tests,
using Rorschach inkblot tests,
78
194555
3059
03:29
schizophrenia was diagnosed
79
197614
1742
03:31
in about one sixth of apparently
perfectly normal participants.
perfectly normal participants.
80
199356
3993
03:35
So if you didn't do that well on this,
81
203349
2833
03:38
maybe you are not
a very visual type of person.
a very visual type of person.
82
206182
2554
03:40
So let's do another
quick quiz to find out.
quick quiz to find out.
83
208736
2369
03:43
When making a cake, do you prefer to --
so hands up for each one again --
so hands up for each one again --
84
211105
3778
03:46
do you prefer to use
a recipe book with pictures?
a recipe book with pictures?
85
214883
2769
03:49
Yeah, a few people.
86
217652
2020
03:51
Have a friend talk you through?
87
219672
2740
03:54
Or have a go, making it up
as you go along?
as you go along?
88
222412
2663
03:57
Quite a few people there.
89
225075
1492
03:58
Okay, so if you said A,
90
226567
1720
04:00
then this means that you
are a visual learner
are a visual learner
91
228287
2172
04:02
and you learn best when information
is presented in a visual style.
is presented in a visual style.
92
230459
3528
04:05
If you said B, it means
you're an auditory learner,
you're an auditory learner,
93
233987
2582
04:08
that you learn best when information
is presented to you in an auditory format.
is presented to you in an auditory format.
94
236569
3725
04:12
And if you said C, it means
that you're a kinesthetic learner,
that you're a kinesthetic learner,
95
240294
2935
04:15
that you learn best when you get stuck in
and do things with your hands.
and do things with your hands.
96
243229
3401
04:18
Except, of course,
as you've probably guessed,
as you've probably guessed,
97
246630
2158
04:20
that it doesn't, because
the whole thing is a complete myth.
the whole thing is a complete myth.
98
248788
2819
04:23
Learning styles are made up and are
not supported by scientific evidence.
not supported by scientific evidence.
99
251607
3858
04:27
So we know this because in
tightly controlled experimental studies,
tightly controlled experimental studies,
100
255465
3556
04:31
when learners are given material to learn
101
259021
2121
04:33
either in their preferred style
or an opposite style,
or an opposite style,
102
261142
2620
04:35
it makes no difference at all to the
amount of information that they retain.
amount of information that they retain.
103
263762
3576
04:39
And if you think about it
for just a second,
for just a second,
104
267338
2066
04:41
it's just obvious
that this has to be true.
that this has to be true.
105
269404
2078
04:43
It's obvious that
the best presentation format
the best presentation format
106
271482
2572
04:46
depends not on you,
but on what you're trying to learn.
but on what you're trying to learn.
107
274054
3298
04:49
Could you learn to drive a car,
for example,
for example,
108
277357
2122
04:51
just by listening to someone
telling you what to do
telling you what to do
109
279479
2418
04:53
with no kinesthetic experience?
110
281897
1628
04:55
Could you solve simultaneous equations
111
283525
1816
04:57
by talking them through in your head
and without writing them down?
and without writing them down?
112
285341
3146
05:00
Could you revise
for your architecture exams
for your architecture exams
113
288487
2101
05:02
using interpretive dance
if you're a kinesthetic learner?
if you're a kinesthetic learner?
114
290588
2673
05:05
No. What you need to do
is match the material to be learned
is match the material to be learned
115
293261
2941
05:08
to the presentation format, not you.
116
296202
3775
05:11
I know many of you are A-level students
117
299977
2149
05:14
that will have recently gotten
your GCSE results.
your GCSE results.
118
302126
2292
05:16
And if you didn't quite get
what you were hoping for,
what you were hoping for,
119
304418
2558
05:18
then you can't really blame
your learning style,
your learning style,
120
306976
2347
05:21
but one thing that you might want
to think about blaming is your genes.
to think about blaming is your genes.
121
309323
3627
05:24
So what this is all about is a
recent study at University College London
recent study at University College London
122
312950
3685
05:28
found that 58 percent of the variation
123
316635
2554
05:31
between different students
and their GCSE results
and their GCSE results
124
319189
3251
05:34
was down to genetic factors.
125
322440
1657
05:36
That sounds like a very precise figure,
so how can we tell?
so how can we tell?
126
324097
3136
05:39
Well, when we want to unpack
the relative contributions
the relative contributions
127
327233
3505
05:42
of genes and the environment,
128
330738
2104
05:44
what we can do is do a twin study.
129
332842
2229
05:47
So identical twins share
100 percent of their environment
100 percent of their environment
130
335071
3576
05:50
and 100 percent of their genes,
131
338647
1904
05:52
whereas non-identical twins
share 100 percent of their environment,
share 100 percent of their environment,
132
340551
3222
05:55
but just like any brother and sister,
share only 50 percent of their genes.
share only 50 percent of their genes.
133
343773
3736
05:59
So by comparing how similar
GCSE results are in identical twins
GCSE results are in identical twins
134
347509
4198
06:03
versus non-identical twins,
135
351707
2311
06:06
and doing some clever math,
136
354018
1346
06:07
we can an idea of how much variation
and performance is due to the environment
and performance is due to the environment
137
355364
3901
06:11
and how much is due to genes.
138
359265
2136
06:13
And it turns out that it's
about 58 percent due to genes.
about 58 percent due to genes.
139
361401
3777
06:17
So this isn't to undermine the hard work
that you and your teachers here put in.
that you and your teachers here put in.
140
365178
3763
06:20
If you didn't quite get the GCSE results
that you were hoping for,
that you were hoping for,
141
368941
3131
06:24
then you can always try blaming
your parents, or at least their genes.
your parents, or at least their genes.
142
372072
4506
06:28
One thing that you shouldn't blame
143
376578
2028
06:30
is being a left-brained
or right-brained learner,
or right-brained learner,
144
378606
2462
06:33
because again, this is a myth.
145
381068
1811
06:34
So the myth here is that
the left brain is logical,
the left brain is logical,
146
382879
2757
06:37
it's good with equations like this,
147
385636
1799
06:39
and the right brain is more creative,
so the right brain is better at music.
so the right brain is better at music.
148
387435
4099
06:43
But again, this is a myth
because nearly everything that you do
because nearly everything that you do
149
391534
2931
06:46
involves nearly all parts
of your brain talking together,
of your brain talking together,
150
394465
2810
06:49
even just the most mundane thing
like having a normal conversation.
like having a normal conversation.
151
397275
3320
06:52
However, perhaps one reason
why this myth has survived
why this myth has survived
152
400595
3343
06:55
is that there is
a slight grain of truth to it.
a slight grain of truth to it.
153
403938
2242
06:58
So a related version of the myth
154
406180
1610
06:59
is that left-handed people are
more creative than right-handed people,
more creative than right-handed people,
155
407790
3283
07:03
which kind of makes sense because
your brain controls the opposite hands,
your brain controls the opposite hands,
156
411073
3454
07:06
so left-handed people,
157
414527
1360
07:07
the right side of the brain
is slightly more active
is slightly more active
158
415887
2426
07:10
than the left-hand side of the brain,
159
418313
1805
07:12
and the idea is the right-hand side
is more creative.
is more creative.
160
420118
2488
07:14
Now, it isn't true per se
161
422606
1397
07:16
that left-handed people are more creative
than right-handed people.
than right-handed people.
162
424003
3201
07:19
What is true that ambidextrous people,
163
427204
2415
07:21
or people who use both hands
for different tasks,
for different tasks,
164
429619
2693
07:24
are more creative thinkers
than one-handed people,
than one-handed people,
165
432312
3762
07:28
because being ambidextrous involves
166
436074
1733
07:29
having both sides of the brain
talk to each other a lot,
talk to each other a lot,
167
437807
2729
07:32
which seems to be involved
in creating flexible thinking.
in creating flexible thinking.
168
440536
3762
07:36
The myth of the creative left-hander
169
444298
1815
07:38
arises from the fact
that being ambidextrous
that being ambidextrous
170
446113
2058
07:40
is more common amongst
left-handers than right-handers,
left-handers than right-handers,
171
448171
3127
07:43
so a grain of truth in the idea
of the creative left-hander,
of the creative left-hander,
172
451298
3049
07:46
but not much.
173
454347
1347
07:47
A related myth that you've
probably heard of
probably heard of
174
455694
2437
07:50
is that we only use
10 percent of our brains.
10 percent of our brains.
175
458131
2373
07:52
This is, again, a complete myth.
176
460504
1526
07:54
Nearly everything that we do,
even the most mundane thing,
even the most mundane thing,
177
462030
2719
07:56
uses nearly all of our brains.
178
464749
2183
07:58
That said, it is of course true
179
466932
3761
08:02
that most of us don't use our brainpower
quite as well as we could.
quite as well as we could.
180
470693
4580
08:07
So what could we do
to boost our brainpower?
to boost our brainpower?
181
475273
2966
08:10
Maybe we could listen
to a nice bit of Mozart.
to a nice bit of Mozart.
182
478239
2138
08:12
Have you heard of the idea
of the Mozart effect?
of the Mozart effect?
183
480377
2718
08:15
So the idea is that listening
to Mozart makes you smarter
to Mozart makes you smarter
184
483095
2957
08:18
and improves your
performance on I.Q. tests.
performance on I.Q. tests.
185
486052
2169
08:20
Now again, what's interesting
about this myth
about this myth
186
488221
2105
08:22
is that although it's basically a myth,
there is a grain of truth to it.
there is a grain of truth to it.
187
490326
3441
08:25
So the original study found that
188
493767
1774
08:27
participants who were played
Mozart music for a few minutes
Mozart music for a few minutes
189
495541
3781
08:31
did better on a subsequent I.Q. test
190
499322
2299
08:33
than participants who simply
sat in silence.
sat in silence.
191
501621
3413
08:37
But a follow-up study recruited
some people who liked Mozart music
some people who liked Mozart music
192
505034
3724
08:40
and then another group of people
193
508758
1781
08:42
who were fans of
the horror stories of Stephen King.
the horror stories of Stephen King.
194
510539
2668
08:45
And they played the people
the music or the stories.
the music or the stories.
195
513207
3564
08:48
The people who preferred
Mozart music to the stories
Mozart music to the stories
196
516771
2508
08:51
got a bigger I.Q. boost
from the Mozart than the stories,
from the Mozart than the stories,
197
519279
2731
08:54
but the people who preferred
the stories to the Mozart music
the stories to the Mozart music
198
522010
2838
08:56
got a bigger I.Q. boost
from listening to the Stephen King stories
from listening to the Stephen King stories
199
524848
3107
08:59
than the Mozart music.
200
527955
1215
09:01
So the truth is that listening
to something that you enjoy
to something that you enjoy
201
529170
2763
09:03
perks you up a bit
and gives you a temporary I.Q. boost
and gives you a temporary I.Q. boost
202
531933
3251
09:07
on a narrow range of tasks.
203
535184
1927
09:09
There's no suggestion that
listening to Mozart,
listening to Mozart,
204
537111
2368
09:11
or indeed Stephen King stories,
205
539479
1625
09:13
is going to make you any smarter
in the long run.
in the long run.
206
541104
3422
09:16
Another version of the Mozart myth
207
544526
2940
09:19
is that listening to Mozart can make you
not only cleverer but healthier, too.
not only cleverer but healthier, too.
208
547466
4858
09:24
Unfortunately, this doesn't
seem to be true
seem to be true
209
552324
2068
09:26
of someone who listened
to the music of Mozart almost every day,
to the music of Mozart almost every day,
210
554392
3059
09:29
Mozart himself,
211
557451
1718
09:31
who suffered from gonorrhea,
smallpox, arthritis,
smallpox, arthritis,
212
559169
2980
09:34
and, what most people think eventually
killed him in the end, syphilis.
killed him in the end, syphilis.
213
562149
4514
09:38
This suggests that Mozart
should have bit more careful, perhaps,
should have bit more careful, perhaps,
214
566673
3362
09:42
when choosing his sexual partners.
215
570035
2578
09:44
But how do we choose a partner?
216
572613
2159
09:46
So a myth that I have to say
is sometimes spread a bit by sociologists
is sometimes spread a bit by sociologists
217
574772
5026
09:51
is that our preferences in a romantic
partner are a product of our culture,
partner are a product of our culture,
218
579798
3623
09:55
that they're very culturally specific.
219
583421
1931
09:57
But in fact, the data don't back this up.
220
585352
2144
09:59
A famous study surveyed people from
[37] different cultures across the globe,
[37] different cultures across the globe,
221
587496
4045
10:03
from Americans to Zulus,
222
591541
1576
10:05
on what they look for in a partner.
223
593117
2366
10:07
And in every single culture
across the globe,
across the globe,
224
595483
2369
10:09
men placed more value
on physical attractiveness in a partner
on physical attractiveness in a partner
225
597852
3715
10:13
than did women,
226
601567
1300
10:14
and in every single culture, too,
227
602867
1741
10:16
women placed more importance than did men
on ambition and high earning power.
on ambition and high earning power.
228
604608
4614
10:21
In every culture, too,
229
609222
1383
10:22
men preferred women
who were younger than themselves,
who were younger than themselves,
230
610605
2525
10:25
an average of, I think it was 2.66 years,
231
613130
2809
10:27
and in every culture, too,
232
615939
1649
10:29
women preferred men
who were older than them,
who were older than them,
233
617588
2600
10:32
so an average of 3.42 years,
234
620188
2810
10:34
which is why we've got here
"Everybody needs a Sugar Daddy."
"Everybody needs a Sugar Daddy."
235
622998
3715
10:38
So moving on from trying
to score with a partner
to score with a partner
236
626713
2577
10:41
to trying to score in basketball
or football or whatever your sport is.
or football or whatever your sport is.
237
629290
3922
10:45
The myth here is that sportsmen go through
hot-hand streaks, Americans call them,
hot-hand streaks, Americans call them,
238
633212
4141
10:49
or purple patches,
we sometimes say in England,
we sometimes say in England,
239
637353
2200
10:51
where they just can't miss,
like this guy here.
like this guy here.
240
639553
2840
10:54
But in fact, what happens is that
if you analyze the pattern
if you analyze the pattern
241
642393
3684
10:58
of hits and misses statistically,
242
646077
1788
10:59
it turns out that it's
nearly always at random.
nearly always at random.
243
647865
2299
11:02
Your brain creates patterns
from the randomness.
from the randomness.
244
650164
2415
11:04
If you toss a coin,
245
652579
1357
11:05
a streak of heads or tails is going
to come out somewhere in the randomness,
to come out somewhere in the randomness,
246
653936
3636
11:09
and because the brain likes to see
patterns where there are none,
patterns where there are none,
247
657572
3111
11:12
we look at these streaks
and attribute meanings to them
and attribute meanings to them
248
660683
2601
11:15
and say, "Yeah he's really on form today,"
249
663284
2307
11:17
whereas actually you would
get the same pattern
get the same pattern
250
665591
2310
11:19
if you were just getting
hits and misses at random.
hits and misses at random.
251
667901
2645
11:23
So an exception to this, however,
is penalty shootouts.
is penalty shootouts.
252
671406
3466
11:26
A recent study looking
at penalty shootouts in football
at penalty shootouts in football
253
674872
3085
11:29
shows that players who represent countries
254
677957
2020
11:31
with a very bad record
in penalty shootouts,
in penalty shootouts,
255
679977
2624
11:34
like, for example, England,
256
682601
2183
11:36
tend to be quicker to take their shots
than countries with a better record,
than countries with a better record,
257
684784
3761
11:40
and presumably as a result,
they're more likely to miss.
they're more likely to miss.
258
688545
3320
11:43
Which raises the question
259
691865
1695
11:45
of if there's any way that we
could improve people's performance.
could improve people's performance.
260
693560
3389
11:48
And one thing you might think about doing
261
696949
1998
11:50
is punishing people for their misses
and seeing if that improves them.
and seeing if that improves them.
262
698947
3419
11:54
This idea, the effect that punishment
can improve performance,
can improve performance,
263
702366
3632
11:57
is what participants
thought they were testing
thought they were testing
264
705998
2206
12:00
in Milgram's famous learning
and punishment experiment
and punishment experiment
265
708204
2532
12:02
that you've probably heard about
if you're a psychology student.
if you're a psychology student.
266
710736
3008
12:05
The story goes that participants
were prepared to give
were prepared to give
267
713744
2822
12:08
what they believed to be fatal
electric shocks to a fellow participant
electric shocks to a fellow participant
268
716566
3301
12:11
when they got a question wrong,
269
719867
2021
12:13
just because someone
in a white coat told them to.
in a white coat told them to.
270
721888
2809
12:16
But this story is a myth
for three reasons.
for three reasons.
271
724697
2415
12:19
Firstly and most crucially, the lab coat
wasn't white, it was in fact grey.
wasn't white, it was in fact grey.
272
727112
4904
12:24
Secondly, the participants
were told before the study
were told before the study
273
732016
4407
12:28
and reminded any time
they raised a concern,
they raised a concern,
274
736423
2507
12:30
that although the shocks were painful,
they were not fatal
they were not fatal
275
738930
2833
12:33
and indeed caused
no permanent damage whatsoever.
no permanent damage whatsoever.
276
741763
2742
12:36
And thirdly, participants
didn't give the shocks
didn't give the shocks
277
744505
2320
12:38
just because someone
in the coat told them to.
in the coat told them to.
278
746825
2648
12:41
When they were interviewed
after the study,
after the study,
279
749473
2042
12:43
all the participants said
that they firmly believed
that they firmly believed
280
751515
2508
12:46
that the learning and punishment study
served a worthy scientific purpose
served a worthy scientific purpose
281
754023
3784
12:49
which would have
enduring gains for science
enduring gains for science
282
757807
2438
12:52
as opposed to the momentary nonfatal
discomfort caused to the participants.
discomfort caused to the participants.
283
760245
5869
12:59
Okay, so I've been talking
for about 12 minutes now,
for about 12 minutes now,
284
767025
2578
13:01
and you've probably been
sitting there listening to me,
sitting there listening to me,
285
769603
2686
13:04
analyzing my speech patterns
and body language
and body language
286
772289
2220
13:06
and trying to work out if you should
take any notice of what I'm saying,
take any notice of what I'm saying,
287
774509
3607
13:10
whether I'm telling the truth
or whether I'm lying,
or whether I'm lying,
288
778116
2461
13:12
but if so you've
probably completely failed,
probably completely failed,
289
780577
2182
13:14
because although we all think
we can catch a liar
we can catch a liar
290
782759
2345
13:17
from their body language
and speech patterns,
and speech patterns,
291
785104
2093
13:19
hundreds of psychological tests
over the years have shown
over the years have shown
292
787197
2673
13:21
that all of us, including
police officers and detectives,
police officers and detectives,
293
789870
2691
13:24
are basically at chance when it comes
to detecting lies from body language
to detecting lies from body language
294
792561
3500
13:28
and verbal patterns.
295
796061
1581
13:29
Interestingly, there is one exception:
296
797642
2044
13:31
TV appeals for missing relatives.
297
799686
2252
13:33
It's quite easy to predict
when the relatives are missing
when the relatives are missing
298
801938
2985
13:36
and when the appealers have in fact
murdered the relatives themselves.
murdered the relatives themselves.
299
804923
3331
13:40
So hoax appealers are more likely
to shake their heads, to look away,
to shake their heads, to look away,
300
808254
3515
13:43
and to make errors in their speech,
301
811769
1714
13:45
whereas genuine appealers are more likely
302
813483
2015
13:47
to express hope that the person
will return safely
will return safely
303
815498
2345
13:49
and to avoid brutal language.
304
817843
1741
13:51
So, for example, they might say
"taken from us" rather than "killed."
"taken from us" rather than "killed."
305
819584
4603
13:56
Speaking of which,
it's about time I killed this talk,
it's about time I killed this talk,
306
824187
2657
13:58
but before I do, I just want
to give you in 30 seconds
to give you in 30 seconds
307
826844
3208
14:02
the overarching myth of psychology.
308
830052
3371
14:05
So the myth is that psychology is just
a collection of interesting theories,
a collection of interesting theories,
309
833423
4297
14:09
all of which say something useful
and all of which have something to offer.
and all of which have something to offer.
310
837720
3521
14:13
What I hope to have shown you
in the past few minutes
in the past few minutes
311
841241
2499
14:15
is that this isn't true.
312
843740
1585
14:17
What we need to do is assess
psychological theories
psychological theories
313
845325
3259
14:20
by seeing what predictions they make,
314
848584
1884
14:22
whether that is that listening to Mozart
makes you smarter,
makes you smarter,
315
850468
2821
14:25
that you learn better when information is
presented in your preferred learning style
presented in your preferred learning style
316
853289
4767
14:30
or whatever it is, all of these
are testable empirical predictions,
are testable empirical predictions,
317
858056
3465
14:33
and the only way we can make progress
318
861521
1785
14:35
is to test these predictions
against the data
against the data
319
863306
2120
14:37
in tightly controlled
experimental studies.
experimental studies.
320
865426
2329
14:39
And it's only by doing so
that we can hope to discover
that we can hope to discover
321
867755
3134
14:42
which of these theories
are well supported,
are well supported,
322
870889
2624
14:45
and which, like all the ones
I've told you about today, are myths.
I've told you about today, are myths.
323
873513
3390
14:48
Thank you.
324
876903
1509
14:50
(Applause)
325
878412
3460
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Ben Ambridge - PsychologistBen Ambridge is the author of "Psy-Q," a sparkling book debunking what we think we know about psychology.
Why you should listen
Ben Ambridge is a senior lecturer in psychology at the University of Liverpool, where he researches children’s language development. He is the author of Psy-Q, which introduces readers to some of the major findings in psychology via interactive puzzles, games, quizzes and tests.
He also writes great newsy stories connecting psychology to current events. His article "Why Can't We Talk to the Animals?" was shortlisted for the 2012 Guardian-Wellcome Science Writing Prize. Psy-Q is his first book for a general audience.
Ben Ambridge | Speaker | TED.com