Language and Critical Thinking

Weasel Words

•       The Weasel Word Claim: The advertiser has created a slogan for the product, which contains a modifier that makes what follows practically meaningless. Common weasel words are: enriched, strengthened, virtually, acts, works, up to, fortified, the feel of, the look of (e.g. “leaves dishes virtually spotless.”) new,  and better .

The Rhetorical Question: A question is asked in such a way that the audience is supposed to respond in a way that affirms the superior quality of the product (e.g. “Wouldn’t you really rather have a Buick?”)

Twelve Most Persuasive Words

•       You

•        New

•        Money

•        Easy

•        Discovery

•        Free

•        Results

•        Health

•        Save

•        Proven

•        Guarantee

•        Love

Impact on Personally Held Beliefs

•       Experiment (Rugg, 1941)

•       People were asked about their views towards free speech

•       One group was asked whether “ the United States should allow public speeches against democracy” a majority said NO (62%)

•       Another group was asked if the “United States should forbid public speeches against democracy and a majority  also said “NO”  (54%)

•       Antidemocratic speeches should not be allowed and yet not forbidden!! 

One Word

•       One word changed the way the groups understood the information.  Changing one word from “Allow” to “Forbid” influenced the Groups perception of the question.   

The Human Understanding Process

•       1. Reality – What really exists and happens outside the confines of our own minds

2. Perception - How we sense or experience reality first hand

•             Thinking Processes – How we synthesize our perception of reality in order to create ideas and draw conclusions.  Our thinking processes may or may not employ critical thinking

Weasel Word  can Influence through:

•             Thinking Processes may be Influenced by Basic Emotional Needs:

      Security, Acceptance, Belonging, Recognition, Love etc.

•             Thinking Process may be influenced by Values

       and Principles: Our preconceived idea of what is

       important versus not important and what is

       right versus wrong

Leads to Conclusions

•       Conclusions: Our resulting opinions, claims, beliefs, and understanding of facts

•       We want our conclusions to be based on logic and not on Basic Emotional Need or be based on Personal Values and Principles.  A conclusion should be based on evidence.

Word Substitution

•       Abortion is an emotional issue.

•       Each side tries to influence us by attempting to play on our emotions and beliefs.

•       One side declares itself Pro-Choice – an attempt to play on our bias towards independence and personal freedom.

•       Other side declares itself Pro-Life to play on our respect and reverence towards life itself!

Words : Choice and Life

•       By using the words Choice and Life each side is framing the issue in the debate in a highly suggestive manner and makes the underlying issue appear objectionable.

•       General Philosophy of Life - Take out the abortion issue –

•       Is anyone really against democracy and unable to  make choices  or are we in favor of individuals being able to make individual choices  -prochoice)?  NO

•       Is anyone really against life and in favor of death (anti-life)?     NO

Framing Effects

•       A single term change can profoundly influence the way we feel about events

•       Classic Experiment by  Tversky and Kahneman

Experiment on Framing

•       Experiment: Subjects were given the following scenario:

•       Imagine that the United States is preparing for the outbreak of unusual Asian disease, which is expected to kill 600 people.  Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed.  Assume the exact scientific estimate of the consequences of the programs is as follows:

Consequences of the Program

•       If A is adopted, 200 people will be saved

•       If program B is adopted, there is a one-third probability that 600 people will be saved and a two-third probability that no people will be saved

•       Which program would you choose?

    Program A or Program B

Two New Options

•       Now you need to evaluate the new options and choose one 

•       If program C is adopted, 400 people will die

•       If program D is adopted there is a one-third probability that nobody will die and a two-thirds probability that 600 people will die.

•       Choose either program C or D

A / C or B / D Choice

•       Now which program would you choose, either A or C ?

•       A – 200 people will be saved

•       C – 400 people will die

•       Now which program would you choose B  or D ?

•       B – 1/3 probability that 600 people will be saved and a 2/3 probability no one will be saved

•       D – 1/3 probability that no one will die and a 2/3 probability that 600 will die

Program A/C and B/D

•       Programs A and C are identical

•       A – 200 people will be saved

•       C – 400 people will die

•       Programs B and D are also the same

•       B – Probability 1/3 of people will be saved (200) and a 2/3 probability that no one will be saved.

•       D – Probability is 1/3 that nobody will die  and a 2/3 probability that 600 will die

Findings

•       Tversky and Kahneman found the following pattern of results

•       72% of people preferred program A over B

•       Program A – 200 people will be saved (72%)

•       Program B – 1/3 probability that 600 will be saved and a 2/3 probability that no people will be saved (28%)

•       78% of people preferred program D over C

•       Program C – 400 people will die (22%)

•       Program D – 1/3 probability that no one will die and 2/3 probability that 600 people will die (78%)

Language is Key Here

•       When the problem was phrased in terms of lives saved, people were risk averse, opting for the safer sounding choice

•       When the problem is phrased in terms of lives lost people were risk seeking, choosing to try and save everyone

Prospect Theory

•       Kahneman and Tversky’s Prospect Theory explains the seemingly contradictory choices that framing effects can prompt us to make.

•       Which feels larger to you, the difference between $0 and $1 million or the difference between $100 million and $101 million. 

•       Suppose you have very little money.  Which arouses a stronger emotional reaction, gaining $1,000 or losing $1,000?

Psychological Factors

•       Most people report that the difference between $0 and $1 million is psychologically larger than the difference between $100 million and $101 million and that losing $1,000 hurts more than gaining $1,000 helps.

•       Prospect Theory is based on an S shaped gaph which depicts the relationship between actual gains or losses (the objective reality) and their utility to us (our psychological perception of value).

Cooperation and Conversational Maxims

•       Vulnerable to language tricks

•       Most ordinary conversation is guided by an implicit goal of cooperation.

•       Pseudoscientists take advantage of our assumption that they are following basic conversational rules when they are not.

Conversational Maxims

•       1. Quality – We are truthful, basing our statements on adequate evidence.

•       2. Quantity – We are as informative as necessary, but not overly detailed

•       3. Relation – We make contributions that are relevant to the topic of discussion.

•       4.  Manner – We avoid obscurity and ambiguity by being clear and concise

Quantity: Suggestive and Leading Questions

•       Communicating excessive detail through mildly suggestive phrasing may seem harmless.

Loftus and Palmer

•       Loftus and Palmer performed a classic experiment on leading questions.  Participants first watched a videotape of accident involving a car and a truck. 

•       They were then asked questions about the accident 

•       The questions used the words either “contacted” or “smashed into”

Wrong Conclusions

•       When the participants were given different adjectives to describe the force of the truck – “contacted” or “smashed into” their memories of events changed dramatically.

•       Contacted = 31.8 MPH

•       Smashed Into = 40.8 MPH

•       The words smashed into even lead to a false memory of broken glass.

 Test of Your Memory

•       Read the following sentences:

•       The ants ate the sweet jelly which was on the table.

•       The ants were in the kitchen.

•       The ants ate the sweet jelly.

•       The ants in the kitchen ate the jelly which was on the table.

•       The jelly was on the table.

•       The ants in the kitchen ate the jelly.

Were these on the list?

•       The ants ate the sweet jelly.

•       The ants ate the jelly which was on the table.

•       The ants were in the kitchen.

•       The ants in the kitchen ate the sweet jelly.

•       The ants in the kitchen ate the jelly which was on the table.

•       The jelly was on the table

•       The ants in the kitchen at the sweet jelly which was on the table.

•       The ants ate the jelly on the table which was in the kitchen.

•       The ants were on the table.

•       The jelly was in the kitchen.

•       I hate ants.

Language and Alternative Health Care

•       Pseudoscientific practitioners promote questionable, unverified treatments

•       The Pseudoscientific practitioners and patients disparage evidence-based health care

•       They employ scientific sounding jargon to evade legal accountability

 Words

•       Evidence based information and research evidence based care is referred is referred to as traditional, conventional, establishment or Western.  These words have an “old school” worn out sound to them. The terms seem to denote an inflexible,  rigid and overly conservative type of medical care.

•       Unverified health care promoters use words such as alternative, complementary, integrative and new  - these words have a fresh and innovative sound to them.

Alternative versus Conventional

•       Editorial from the highly respected New England Journal of Medicine reported that “There cannot be two kinds of medicine – conventional and alternative.  There is only medicine that works and medicine that may or may not work”

•       Treatments that cannot meet the simple “show me” requirement of research are not alternative health care – they are alternatives to health care.

Alternative Care and Claims

•       Alternative Health Care Claims uses language is obtuse.

•       The Language used to evade legal problems.

•       Example: Health foods will claim to detoxify, purify, or revitalize your body.  They may claim to stimulate the body to heal itself or strengthen your immune system.   But what do these terms really tell us?