The psychology of waiting in line

People at the Houston airport complained that it took too long to get their luggage. According to the NYT,

[A]irport executives undertook a more careful, on-site analysis. They found that it took passengers a minute to walk from their arrival gates to baggage claim and seven more minutes to get their bags. Roughly 88 percent of their time, in other words, was spent standing around waiting for their bags. So the airport decided on a new approach: instead of reducing wait times, it moved the arrival gates away from the main terminal and routed bags to the outermost carousel. Passengers now had to walk six times longer to get their bags. Complaints dropped to near zero.
Several other good examples in this article. Bottom line is that it's torture to wait in line if you are not distracted in some way. A watched pot never boils. Various business take various approaches to distracting you.

Continue ReadingThe psychology of waiting in line

Liberalism vs. conservativatism as yin vs. yang

Jonathan Haidt stepped back from his liberal leanings to see that that many aspects of traditional teachings of conservatism make sense. In his book, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion, Haidt carefully notes that in recognizing some of the good aspects of conservativism, he is in no way embracing the modern American Republican Party, which declared it as a sacred quest "to sacrifice all of the good things government can do to preserve low tax rates for the wealthiest Americans." (See footnote 36). See also, Bill Moyer's recent interview with Haidt. With the above as the context, at Freakonomics, Haidt explains is change from a "liberal" to a "centrist"

Q. You say you used to be a liberal but are now a centrist. Why the change? Vincent. A. I have the personality traits, occupation, social network and lifestyle of a liberal. It was over-determined that I would be a liberal. But in 2005 I changed my research direction. I had previously studied how morality varied across nations. After a second Democratic challenger lost to George W. Bush, in part because they failed to make compelling moral arguments, I began to study left and right in the USA as though they were different cultures. Which they are. I tried to apply a cultural psychology framework to the research, meaning that I tried to understand each side from inside. I tried to get a feel for what each side held sacred, and for what values and virtues they were trying to implement in their political and economic programs. At first I disliked watching Fox News and reading National Review. But within a year, I began to see that the conservative vision of morality, history, and economics was just as coherent as the alternative liberal vision. Once I lost my feelings of repulsion and anger toward conservatism. I discovered a whole world of ideas I had never encountered. Some of them struck me as quite good, e.g., the value of institutions and traditions for creating moral order; the principle of federalism (which failed spectacularly on civil rights, but is valuable in most other cases); and the glorification of earned success while being critical of efforts to achieve equality of outcomes without attention to merit. I now hold the view that left and right are like Yin and Yang. As John Stuart Mill put it in 1859: “A party of order or stability, and a party of progress or reform, are both necessary elements of a healthy state of political life.”

Continue ReadingLiberalism vs. conservativatism as yin vs. yang

The verdict is in on Pussy Riot

As reported by the NYT, the verdict against Pussy Riot is in, and the three young women have been sentenced to two years each. The verdict has been commemorated by cartoonist Ray Gregory.

While a guilty verdict against the three women, members of a band called Pussy Riot, was widely expected, suspense had built over how severe a punishment they would receive. . . . But the judge, Marina Syrova, showed little sympathy for the trio, and it was not immediately clear whether the sentences would prompt a reaction on Moscow’s streets.

“Who is to blame for the performance at the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour and for our being put on trial after the concert? The authoritarian political system is to blame. What Pussy Riot does is oppositional art or politics.”

Continue ReadingThe verdict is in on Pussy Riot

Perpetual terrorism

Glenn Greenwald reports on a new article that explains why we will always be obsessed with terrorism:

Mueller and Stewart estimate that expenditures on domestic homeland security (i.e., not counting the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan) have increased by more than $1 trillion since 9/11, even though the annual risk of dying in a domestic terrorist attack is about 1 in 3.5 million. Using conservative assumptions and conventional risk-assessment methodology, they estimate that for these expenditures to be cost-effective “they would have had to deter, prevent, foil or protect against 333 very large attacks that would otherwise have been successful every year.” Finally, they worry that this exaggerated sense of danger has now been “internalized”: even when politicians and “terrorism experts” aren’t hyping the danger, the public still sees the threat as large and imminent. As they conclude:
… Americans seems to have internalized their anxiety about terrorism, and politicians and policymakers have come to believe that they can defy it only at their own peril. Concern about appearing to be soft on terrorism has replaced concern about seeming to be soft on communism, a phenomenon that lasted far longer than the dramatic that generated it … This extraordinarily exaggerated and essentially delusional response may prove to be perpetual.”

Continue ReadingPerpetual terrorism