Beware the bullshit and avoid becoming a Bullshitee.

Do you prefer to be a bullshitter (delivering) or bullshitee (receiving)?

Bullshit receptivity is an area of growing research. Beware of 'framing bias'. Description & example.

Distinguishing bullshit from non-BS is an important skill.

In a 2022 paper in the European Journal of Psychological Assessment, researchers tested bullshit receptivity among students in the United States and in Bulgaria.

They focussed on what's called "framing effect"- a common method to present statistics so as to influence thinking towards one view over another.

For example, if I suggest that a vaccine has an 80% success rate - what are you thinking?

Now, what if instead, I state that a vaccine has a 20% failure rate? What shifts in your thinking and interpretation?

The study by Rachev et al. draws upon Nobel Prize winning psychologists Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky and their research that focussed on how people make judgements and decisions - especially related to finances. (read the book: Thinking Fast and Slow).

Their metaphors for thinking- System 1 and System 2 - are excellent for describing complex cognitive processes.

System 1 is quick, automatic and intuitive. It doesn't require a lot of energy.

System 2 is slower, analytical and engages more logic- and, requires more energy and effort. It must also be engaged consciously. This is the system required to sniff out and call bullshit, and reduce becoming a Bullshitee.

At the heart of these two 'systems' are our bias and decision-making processes.

When numbers are framed, such as in the image attached to this post- it creates a framing effect, and violates what's called "the rational principle of descriptive invariance".

This means, we focus on what is framed and presented (e.g. the "70%" numbers in the image); not what is missing (e.g. the 30% or so that is not framed). This creates bias, and may represent efforts to bullshit; to influence your thinking in a certain way.

Essentially, manipulation- like a proverbial fish story.

Presenting the higher number painting positives, the lower number which may be a failure (like the 20% vaccine failure), escapes analysis.

This is the framing effect. System 1 hones in on positive. System 2 may not get engaged.
_ _ _

The numbers in the screen shot are from the Universities Canada website. This organization is "the voice of Canadian universities, at home and abroad."

This is reporting on a priority focus: "Equity, Diversity and Inclusion" (based on 2017 surveys).

Let's look beyond what is framed in these numbers, the various seventy percenters...

There are almost 100 universities that make up 'Universities Canada'. By these numbers, 30% may not "have a partnership with Indigenous communities and organizations to foster... reconciliation."

That means around 30 universities. In the current climate, how is this possible?

Which universities? Should these not be identified?

Beware the frame. Engage System 2.

Call potential BS- ask questions.