I'm sure that some of you are more up to date than I am about subliminal conditioning, but as I recall, the effects are real but small. That is, the ads can increase the likelihood of an existing behavior (make you slightly more likely to eat popcorn if you habitually do so) measurably ( but not necessarily significantly at the individual level) but not get you to do something you don't normally do (eat popcorn if you normally prefer pretzels).
At 12:36 PM -0600 11/8/07, Beth Benoit wrote: >POST stands for "Peace Officer Standards and Training." (Don't be >too impressed...I googled.) Here's a website: ><http://www.post.ca.gov/training/cptn/certified.asp>http://www.post.ca.gov/training/cptn/certified.asp > >I'd be as guarded as you. "Messages in music" sounds like that same >old "Satan is there if you listen to it backwards." And of course, >we all know how valid the research on "Hidden Persuaders" is. > >Well, actually, maybe I should ask TIPSters their feelings about >subliminal conditioning. I've always taught that it doesn't work, >that a stimulus presented at, for example, 1/3000th of a second will >not induce a drive-in audience to "buy Coke" or "eat popcorn." YET, >the Baron, Byrne and Branscombe Social Psych. texts claim that >subliminal conditioning is valid. > >I have to say that I've always used Dave Myers' Social Psych. >textbooks, but I inherited this class after it had already begun and >students had already bought Baron et al. > >So this is a tangent - mea culpa - but if any want to respond to the >metaphysics of the existence of subliminal conditioning, maybe it >would be best to label the subject as such... > >Beth Benoit >Granite State College >Plymouth State University >New Hampshire > >On Nov 8, 2007 12:53 PM, ><<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >A colleague brought me a flyer today that she received from her >daughter's school. The flyer is for parents to attend an >informational meeting about "Message in the music and juvenile drug >trends" It is a 3-hour seminar about weapons, music and the hidden >messages (she wants to know, "what hidden messages?"), current drug >trends, etc. etc. > >She wants to know if anyone knows anything about this as legitimate >or more psychobabble. As his credentials, the presenter lists being >a DARE certified instructor, which set off red flags, bells and >whistles, and he is "POST" certified. She can't find out what POST >is an acronyn for. > >Anyone have more info on this stuff? > >Thanks in advance. > >Annette > > >Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. >Professor of Psychology >University of San Diego >5998 Alcala Park >San Diego, CA 92110 >619-260-4006 ><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >--- > > >--- >To make changes to your subscription contact: > >Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- The best argument against Intelligent Design is that fact that people believe in it. * PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Psychology Dept Minnesota State University * * 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 * * http://krypton.mnsu.edu/~pkbrando/ * ---
