In most cases or cases. The Backlash Effect: Why We Persevere in Our Delusions. When to put a comma before the union HOW

Guys, we put our soul into the site. Thanks for that
for discovering this beauty. Thanks for the inspiration and goosebumps.
Join us at Facebook And In contact with

There are still a lot of secrets in the halls of human consciousness, but scientists still managed to figure out some of them.

website collected the most curious: I bet you didn’t even suspect about the majority?

• People with high level testosterone get pleasure from the anger of others.
• Research has confirmed that some people are born with innate abilities and some are not.
• The brain “rewrites” the monotonous speech of boring people that we sometimes hear to make it more interesting and memorable.
• Singing reduces feelings of anxiety and anxiety, and it also helps fight depression.
• Nervous system the intestines and the brain are connected to each other: this is why some emotions immediately affect our digestive system and especially stress.
• Not having friends can be just as dangerous as smoking: the fact is that scientists have found a link between loneliness and the level of protein clotting that can cause heart attack and stroke.

• Some people are genetically predisposed to pessimism: they perceive negative events more vividly than everyone else.
• But optimism can be learned, and not just born with such an outlook on life.
• We are able to choose from only a limited number of options, despite the fact that we constantly demand more variety. This explains why large menus, thick catalogs, and huge supermarkets with a wide range of products bring confusion to our minds.
• When you try to remember some event from the past, you are, in fact, remembering your last memory about the event, not the event itself.
• Food that we didn’t cook ourselves seems tastier: in the process of preparing a dish, we “saturate” its aroma and anticipate the taste, as if we were already half full. It has also been revealed that we are more likely to eat less if we cook our own food - why not a diet idea?
• Scientists are increasingly paying attention to the connection between sarcasm and intelligence: for example, it has recently been found that sarcasm develops Creative skills.
• People born blind do not get schizophrenia.
• Many studies show that people tend to exaggerate their own positive characteristics. A typical example: most drivers believe that they drive much better than the average driver.

• When we play it safe and develop a backup plan "B", most of the time we fail in plan "A".
• Dutch scientists interviewed 5,000 people and found that the average woman

We repeat the rules of the Russian language together with the online school of Total Dictation

Text: Natalia Lebedeva/RG
Photo: totaldict.ru

When do you need to highlight introductory words?

And then, as if on a sin, as if on purpose, the words met in the dictation: firstly and secondly. Unfortunately, one cannot avoid all sorts of things, in my opinion, probably to annoyance and without exaggeration. When introductory words need to be separated by commas, he knows for sure Chief Editor portal Gramota.ru candidate of philological sciences Vladimir Pakhomov.

Everything you need to know about punctuation for introductory words in simple diagrams.

Punctuation for introductory words and combinations

Me, like everyone else, not once, not twice
Saved the introductory words
And more often than others among them
The words "first, second".
They started from afar
They gave a reason slowly
Gather your thoughts while
God knows where the soul was.
A. Kushner

Introductory words really help us gather our thoughts, help express our attitude towards our own words. You can name several meanings conveyed by introductory words.

• Firstly, this is an indication of the degree of reliability of the reported: without a doubt, certainly, undoubtedly, probably, probably, probably, certainly, probably etc.
• Secondly, it is an indication of the degree of commonness of what is being said: it happens, it happens, as usual, as usual, as usual, as usual, happens etc.
• Thirdly, introductory words express an emotional assessment of what is being reported: a sinful deed, as luck would have it, oddly enough, to annoyance, to amazement, fortunately, unfortunately, a strange thing, what good etc.
• Fourth, introductory words contain an indication of the source of the message: they say, I think, it is known, in my opinion, in your opinion, according to, from the point of view, apparently etc.
• The fifth meaning of introductory words - with their help, the speaker comments on the way of expressing thoughts: rather, guilty, in short, one can say, to put it mildly, on the contrary, in a word, if I may say, so to speak, what is called etc.
• Sixth, introductory words can help the speaker himself point out the expressive nature of the statement: jokes aside, between us, I must admit, not by the night, be it said, to tell the truth, I assure you, to be honest etc.
• The seventh meaning of the introductory words - they comment on the logic of presentation: in general, firstly, secondly, thirdly, mainly, means, as indicated, for example, I repeat, I emphasize, on the one hand, on the other hand etc.
• Introductory words - and this is their eighth meaning - call the addressee to attention: believe (whether), see (whether), see (whether), imagine (those), you understand, imagine (those) to yourself, tell (those) at mercy, agree.
• Finally, introductory words can express a restriction or clarify a statement: without exaggeration, to one degree or another, at least, at least.

Words and combinations of words are not introductory and, therefore, are not separated by commas: perhaps, as if, literally, in addition, all of a sudden, because, in the end, ultimately, as a last resort, at best, in any case, in in general terms, like, in general, often, exclusively, meanwhile, for sure, just in case, finally, once, first of all, practically, approximately, decisively, absolutely, sort of, in the meantime, in fact, supposedly.

Introductory words are separated by commas: Yevgeny Fedorovich, although bad manners,talking between us , but knowledgeable, it is quite possible to rely on him. A. Chekhov, "Ward No. 6". As for me , in verse everything should be out of place, // Not like people. A. Akhmatova, I do not need odic ratis ... But they left without delay // The next morning,As always , // Izvestia, and Pravda, // And Red Star. K. Simonov, "Song about a cheerful reporter." In our regiment there was a lieutenant ... who did not let his pipe out of his mouth, not only at the table, but even,let me tell you , in all other places. N. Gogol, Dead Souls.

It is necessary to pay attention to two difficulties associated with punctuation in introductory words.

First difficulty lies in the fact that among the introductory words and combinations there are very few that are used only as introductory and, therefore, are always isolated (for example, firstly, I think, if I may say so). In most cases, the same words can be used both as introductory and as members of a sentence (as a rule, predicates or circumstances) or auxiliary words (unions, particles). The differences between them show up in context.

For example, the word however may be an introductory, and may be an opposing union - the same as But. Here it is important to remember the following rule: the introductory word however cannot be at the beginning of a sentence, but can only be in its middle or end: Well, it musthowever , to say a few words about Sanin himself. I. Turgenev, Spring Waters. At the beginning of a sentence or part of a complex sentence, as well as between homogeneous members however - union in the meaning of "but", a comma after it is not put: The fog thickenedhowever the roofs of the houses were still visible. Only an interjection is separated by a comma at the beginning of a sentence however expressing surprise, bewilderment, indignation, etc.: However what a wind!

Word finally is introductory if it indicates that the word (expression) that follows, concludes what was said earlier or is the last one: One laughed, followed by the second, tenth, hundredth and,finally , last. F. Krivin, "Peacock's Tail". Also introductory word finally expresses dissatisfaction, impatience, annoyance: Yes, you leave mefinally !

In the meaning of "ultimately, finally, as a result" the word finally is not introductory and is not distinguished by punctuation marks: ... It seemed that the road led to heaven, because, as far as eyes could see, it kept rising andfinally lost in a cloud... M. Lermontov, "A Hero of Our Time".

Second difficulty is that the punctuation of words that are introductory also depends on their environment. Let's name 4 cases to which it is necessary to pay attention.

Case one. The meeting of two introductory words

This is the simplest situation. When two introductory words (introductory combinations, sentences) meet, a comma is placed between them.

He,unfortunately as you can see , not bad-looking, that is, ruddy, smooth, tall... I. Goncharov, " ordinary story». And here,as a sin, as if on purpose , Uncle Misha arrives. A. Rybakov, "Heavy sand". ... This visit took the whole evening and completely destroyed the feeling of loneliness so beloved by him.After all, maybe , and it's good that it destroyed ... V. Bykov, "Poor people".

Second case. Introductory word and isolated turnover

An introductory word or combination can be at the beginning or at the end of a separate member of a sentence, and also be inside it. Punctuation marks in these cases are put as follows:

A) If the introductory word is at the beginning of a separate turnover, commas are placed before the introductory word and after the entire isolated turnover. After introductory word the comma is not put (in other words, the comma, which was supposed to “close” the introductory word, is transferred to the end of a separate turnover).

... Vera Nikolaevna experienced in front of her master - in general, not at all like Ivan the Terrible - a thrill in love,May be even the worship of a loyal. V. Kataev, "The Grass of Oblivion". The comma that should have been after the introductory words May be, goes down. Similar example: I also used to write down my thoughts on anything,in particular on cigarette boxes. K. Paustovsky, "Golden Rose".

B) If the introductory word is inside a separate turnover, it is separated by commas on both sides, while the signs at the beginning and at the end of a separate turnover are preserved.

This is my essay - or,rather , lecture - has neither a definite form nor a chronological structure, which I do not recognize ... V. Kataev, "My Diamond Crown".

C) If the introductory word is at the end of a separate turnover, commas are placed before and after a separate turnover. There is no comma before the introductory word.

And instead of a speck, another road appeared ahead, that is, not exactly a road, but a scratch on the ground, rather a groove. V. Astafiev, “So I want to live.”

But it is important to remember: if the turnover is enclosed in brackets, then the introductory word at its beginning or end is separated by a comma general rule: Two are alive (as long as their bill is extended), // the third (extra, probably) is buried in paradise ... B. Okudzhava, The black raven will look through the white cloud ...

When should a comma be used before the union HOW?

In order not to make a mistake in punctuation before the union HOW, you need to learn only three simple rules. Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Philology of the Faculty of Humanitarian Education of the Novosibirsk State technical university Tatyana Permyakova

All rules in simple schemes.

Putting a comma before the union AS

A comma before the union HOW is placed in three cases:

1. If this union connects parts of a complex sentence, for example: We thought for a long time, How spell the word correctly.

2. If the sentence contains a circumstance expressed by a comparative turnover that begins with a union HOW, For example: Her voice rang, How smallest bell.

3. If this union is included in turnovers that are close in role in the sentence to the introductory words, for example: AS A RULE, AS an EXCEPTION, AS A CONSEQUENCE, AS ALWAYS, AS NOW, AS ON DESIGN, AS FOR EXAMPLE, AS NOW: In the morningas if on purpose, it started to rain.

Please note: if the sentence continues after turnovers with the union HOW, then you need to put another comma at the end of the revolution. For example: At the bottomlike a mirror glittering water; We looked for a long timeas the coals of a fire smolder, unable to tear myself away from this spectacle.

Turnovers with the union AS are not separated in five cases:

1. If the turnover with the union HOW is part of the predicate and the sentence without such a turnover does not have a complete meaning, for example: She's holding onlike a hostess or Lakelike a mirror ; Pay attention to the last example - here the union KA K stands between the subject and the predicate (without this union, a dash would have been required there).

2. If the turnover with the union HOW is part of a phraseological unit, for example: I know Russianlike the back of your hand or I feel like I'm on Total Dictationlike a fish in de.

3. If the comparative turnover is preceded by negation NOT or particles TOTALLY, PERFECTLY, ALMOST, LIKE, EXACTLY, EXACTLY, SIMPLY, for example: They do everythingnot like neighbours or him in the error dictationexactly like at a neighbor.

We are accustomed to consider ourselves open-minded and think that we are ready to accept new information, regardless of whether it contradicts our worldview. But the paradox is that when new facts refute our dearest beliefs, faith in them only strengthens. In psychology, this phenomenon is called the backlash effect. Journalist David McRain analyzes the phenomenon with an example scientific research and explains why we selectively perceive the truth and persist in our delusions.

Wired, The New York Times, Backyard Poultry Magazine - it happens to everyone. Sometimes they make mistakes and distort the facts. And then, whether it is a well-known print newspaper or an online news resource, the editors admit their guilt. If a news publication needs to maintain a good reputation, the editors publish corrections. Most of the time this technique works, but what the news outlets don't take into account is that the correction could further alienate readers from the truth if the false report is in line with their beliefs. In fact, these laconic notes on the last page of every newspaper draw our attention to one of the most powerful forces that influence how we think, feel and make decisions - to a mechanism that does not allow us to believe in the truth.

In 2006, Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler of the University of Michigan and State University State of Georgia have written several articles on key political events. The content of these articles confirmed widespread misconceptions about some controversial issues in American politics. To begin with, the subject was offered a fake article, and then another, which refuted the previous message. For example, one of the articles said that the United States found weapons in Iraq mass destruction. The next one said that the US never found it, which was true. Pacifists or adherents of liberalism basically rejected the first article and agreed with the second. The militarists and conservatives agreed with the first article and categorically rejected the second. This reaction is not surprising. What is really unexpected is the reaction of the conservatives when they found out the truth. They admitted that after reading the material that no weapons were actually found, they were even more convinced that there were indeed weapons in Iraq and that their original beliefs were correct.

“In confusion, you further strengthen your beliefs, instead of subjecting them to criticism. When someone tries to correct you, dispel your delusions, it backfires and builds your confidence."

The experiment was repeated, this time stem cell research and tax reform, and again it was found that corrections, on the contrary, reinforce the delusions of research participants if these corrections contradict their beliefs. People on different sides of the political barricades read the same articles and the same corrections, and if new information was contrary to their convictions, they began to defend their point of view with redoubled persistence. Corrections unexpectedly led to the opposite results.

When a thought becomes part of your worldview, you try to protect it from external influences. This happens instinctively and unconsciously as soon as the brain encounters information that is incompatible with its settings. Just as the mechanisms of justification protect you when you are actively seeking information, the backfire effect protects you when the facts come to you, attacking your most vulnerable places. Confused, you strengthen your beliefs even more instead of criticizing them. When someone tries to correct you, dispel your delusions, it backfires and builds your confidence. Over time, due to the backlash effect, you begin to look less critically at the facts, which allow you to still consider your beliefs to be true and legitimate.

In 1976, when Ronald Reagan was running for president, he often told voters about a Chicago swindler who made her living scamming insurance companies. Reagan said the woman had 80 names, 30 addresses, and 12 Social Security cards, which she used to collect food stamps and benefits from health insurance companies. future president said that the woman drove around in a Cadillac, did not work and did not pay taxes. He talked about this woman, whose name he never named, in every small town, and this story infuriated his listeners. Thanks to her, the concept of "Social Security Queen" entered the American political lexicon and influenced not only the political discourse of America for the next 30 years, but also social policy government. But this story was just a duck.

Of course, there have always been people who stole from the state, but there was no one who fit the description of Ronald Reagan in reality. The woman many historians suspect may have served as the inspiration for the presidential heroine was a swindling actress who used four assumed names and moved from place to place, changing her appearance each time, not some housewife mother surrounded by a bunch of howlers. children.

Despite the fact that the story was publicly refuted and a lot of time has passed, it is still alive. A fictional lady who basks in luxury and languishes over mountains of lunch coupons while hard-working Americans go on strike, and these days she constantly flickers on the pages of online newspapers. The mimetic stability of the word is impressive. This or that version of the story appears weekly in blogs and magazine articles about legal violations, although it takes a couple of clicks of the mouse to find out that this is a lie.

“When facts support beliefs, people tend to see what they expect to see and draw conclusions that match their expectations.”

Psychologists call such stories narrative scenarios - these are stories about exactly what we want to hear, confirming our beliefs and giving us the right to adhere to the opinions we have already formed. If believing in social security queens protects your worldview, you accept this myth and move on with your life. You might have found the Reagan story disgusting or ridiculous, but you didn't have to ask questions like stories like these about medical companies that interfere with research, or about unauthorized searches, or about the benefits of chocolate. you looked documentary about the harm ... something that you do not like, and you, most likely, it fell on the soul. For every "absolutely true" documentary by Michael Moore, there is exactly the same documentary of exactly the opposite content, in which the champions of the idea prove that their version of the truth is better.

A great example of selective distrust is Literallyunbelievable.org. Its creators publish comments from Facebook users who believe in articles from the satirical magazine The Onion. Articles about Oprah Winfrey offering a select few to be buried with her in a luxurious grave, news about the construction of an abortion center for hundreds of millions of dollars, or NASCAR's announcement of bounties for drivers for homophobic remarks - to such news, users leave outraged comments on the full seriously. Psychologist Thomas Gilovich wrote: “When facts support beliefs, people tend to see what they expect to see and draw conclusions that match their expectations. If the conclusion is consistent with our attitudes, we ask ourselves: “Can I believe it?”, If the conclusion disappoints us, then we ask ourselves: “Should I believe this?”,

That's why especially ardent critics who believe that Barack Obama was not born in the US will never believe hundreds of facts that clearly prove the opposite. When the presidential administration released the full text of his birth certificate to the public in April 2011, the reaction of Obama's opponents was exactly what the backlash effect suggests. They carefully studied the date of issue of the document, its appearance, form - and eventually gathered on the forum and ridiculed him. Their confidence has grown even more. So it was and always will be when it comes to conspiracy theories or any other incredible facts. A refutation will always only strengthen a person's belief in the contrary. It is always considered part of the conspiracy, and the lack of facts is attributed to the concealment of the truth.

This explains how strange, outdated and completely insane beliefs survive in the fight against science, common sense and facts. However, the truth of the phenomenon lies deeper, because none of us considers ourselves crazy. We do not believe that lightning is sent by a deity who wanted to launch a couple of charges into the ground. You don't wear special underwear to protect your libido from the light of the moon. Your beliefs are rational, logical, and factual, right?

Fine. Let's talk about corporal punishment, for example. Is it good or bad? Harmless or harmful? Can corporal punishment be considered a lack of love or, conversely, a manifestation of parental care? Science has its own answer, but we will deal with it later. And now try to realize how you feel about this, and you will understand that you yourself want to fall under someone else's influence, passionately want to be enlightened about a great many issues, but you bypass some topics.

IN last time when you got involved in or witnessed an online argument with someone who was convinced they knew absolutely everything about health care reform, gun control, same-sex marriage, sex education, the drug wars, Joss Whedon, or whether the number 0 was real, 9999 repeated ad infinitum equals zero - remember how it was? Did you teach the enemy a valuable lesson? Have you been thanked for helping to understand all the intricacies of a controversial issue after cursing your opponent for his former ignorance? Have you taken off your virtual hat for making a person better?

“It is impossible to win an argument on the Internet. When you start throwing facts and names, hyperlinks and quotes, your opponent actually becomes even more confident that he is right than before you started the argument.

Most likely no. Most of the online battles unfold according to the same scenario: each side rushes to the attack and fishes out new evidence from the depths of the Internet to strengthen their positions until one of the parties, disappointed, decides to go for broke and goes personal . If you are lucky, the comments will be deleted, and you will have time to save your honor and dignity, or some third-party commentator will help set a pack of indignant on your opponent.

A study of the backfire effect shows that it is impossible to win an argument on the Internet. When you start throwing facts and names, hyperlinks and quotes, your opponent actually becomes even more confident that he is right than before you started the argument. When he starts to contradict you, the same thing happens in your mind. The backlash effect makes both of you even more closed in the certainty that you are right.

Have you ever noticed a strange feature: we practically do not pay attention to praise addressed to us, but any criticism strikes us on the spot? thousands positive feedback may go unnoticed by us, but a single remark like "sucks" can sit in our head for several days. One of the hypotheses that explain why this happens and why the effect of the opposite result is triggered is that we actually spend much more time thinking about information with which we disagree than about information that is close to us. Information that confirms our beliefs fades from our consciousness, however, when we encounter something that calls into question the truth of our beliefs, something that contradicts previously acquired knowledge about how the world works, we stop and take note of this. Some psychologists argue that there is an explanation for this in the theory of evolution. Our ancestors paid more attention to negative incentives than positive ones, because negative events need to be responded to in some way. Those who could not adequately respond to a negative stimulus could not survive.

In 1992, Peter Ditto and David Lopez conducted an experiment in which subjects had to dip a small strip of paper into a cup of saliva. The paper was perfectly ordinary, but the psychologists told one half of the participants that it would turn green if the person had serious problems with the pancreas, and the other half that this would happen if they were completely healthy. Both groups were told that the reaction would take about 20 seconds. As a rule, people who were told that the paper would turn green if they were healthy waited much longer than the 20 seconds they were warned about for the result. If the color didn't change, 52 percent tried again. In another group where green color was supposed to mean bad news, people were mostly satisfied with 20 seconds, and only 18 percent tried to dip the paper into the bowl again.

When you read a negative comment, when someone blows away what you love and your beliefs are called into question, you meticulously and carefully scrutinize the information in search of weaknesses. The cognitive dissonance blocks the mechanisms of your thinking until you cope with the situation. In the process, you form more neutral connections, construct a new memory, and make a certain amount of effort - and when you finish thinking about a subject, your original beliefs become stronger than ever.

Psychologist, New York Times columnist Dan Gilbert observes the effect of the opposite result in the fight against excess weight: “It happens that the number on the bathroom scale goes off scale. Then we get off and stand back again to make sure that we saw the result correctly and did not lean too much on one leg. If the result suits us, we go to the shower with a smile. We take on trust the number we like without question, and try again and again if we don’t like the result, thus gently tipping the scales in our favor.”

The backlash effect is constantly tidying up your beliefs and memory, swaying you to one side or the other through a process psychologists call biased assimilation. Decades of research on various types of cognitive distortions have shown that people usually perceive the world through a thick prism of faith, clouded by attitudes and worldviews. In 1996, scientists showed a group of subjects a debate between Bob Dole and Bill Clinton and found that before the debate, everyone believed that their candidate had won. In 2000, when scholars began to study Clinton supporters and opponents through their reactions to the Monica Lewinsky scandal, they found that Clinton supporters tended to view Lewinsky as an unreliable home destroyer and found it hard to believe that Clinton was lying under oath. Of course, the opponents of the president experienced the exact opposite feelings. Fast forward to 2011, when Fox News and MSNBC were vying with each other for cable territory, each promising a delivery that would in no way question the beliefs of any part of the population. Here's biased assimilation in action.

Biased assimilation works not only in relation to the events of our time. A 2004 study by a group of scholars asked liberals and conservatives to comment on the 1970 University of Kent shooting when National Guard soldiers opened fire on anti-Vietnam demonstrators, killing four and injuring nine .

As usually happens with any historical event, the details of what happened at the University of Kent began to distort within a few hours. Years later, books, articles, broadcasts and songs weaved an impenetrable web of reasons and motivations, conclusions and assumptions, in which every opinion was justified in one way or another. In the weeks following the shooting, psychologists interviewed University of Kent students who witnessed the events and found that 6% of liberals and 45% of conservatives thought the National Guard had been provoked. Twenty-five years later, they interviewed the then students again. In 1995, 62% of liberals said that the soldiers committed the murder, and only 37% of conservatives agreed with this statement. Five years later, students were asked the questionnaire again, and the researchers found that conservatives were still more likely to say that the protesters had overstepped the boundaries of the National Guard, while liberals saw the soldiers as more of an aggressor. Strikingly, the more the respondents said they were aware of the events, the stronger was the strength of their convictions. That is, a person supported the National Guard or protesters the more fiercely, the more he knew about what had happened. People who knew only in general about what had happened, in lesser degree experienced the backlash effect when evaluating events. The same effect caused the more knowledgeable to deliberately ignore controversial details.

“The mind of a person does everything to support and agree with what he once accepted, whether because it is an object of faith, or because he likes it. Whatever the strength and number of facts to the contrary, the mind either does not notice them, or neglects them, or rejects them by means of distinctions with great prejudice, so that the reliability of those former conclusions remains intact ”- Francis Bacon

In 1997, Geoffrey Munroe and Peter Ditto released a series of fake articles. One study said that homosexuality is most likely a mental disorder. Another argued that any sexual orientation is natural and normal. Then the subjects were divided into two groups: some considered homosexuality a disease, while others did not. Each group was presented with false articles with fictitious facts and testimonies claiming that their point of view was wrong. After both groups read material that disproved their beliefs, no one claimed to suddenly have an epiphany, realizing that they had been wrong all these years. On the contrary, everyone began to assert that the solution of such problems is inaccessible to science. When the subjects were later given other topics to discuss, such as spanking and astrology, the same people stated that they no longer trusted science and did not believe in its ability to establish the truth. Rather than reconsider their beliefs and face the facts, people have chosen to throw all of science at once.

Science and literature once painted the future in which we now live. Books, movies, and comics of yesteryear depicted cyberpunks plowing through the vast expanse of information, and personal communications, enveloping a person in a cloud of beeps and calls. The stories and midnight chatter on the radio foretold the time when the whole sum human knowledge and artistic production will be continuously available on demand and millions of human lives will be connected and visible to anyone who wants to be seen. And now the very future has come in which we are surrounded by computers that can tell us everything that humanity knows, explain how to perform any task, teach us anything and reveal the essence of any phenomenon on earth. So one day a fictional life became everyday for us.

And if this promised future has already arrived, why don't we live in the realm of science and reason? Where is the most socio-political and technical utopia, empirical nirvana, the abode of the gods of analytical thought (only without overalls and neon headbands), where everyone knows the truth?

Among the many prejudices and delusions that block our way into the realm of microprocessors and tight jeans, lives a huge monster of our psyche - the effect of the opposite result. He was always there, always influenced how we and our ancestors saw the world, but the Internet released the beast into the wild, increased its persuasiveness at times, and over the years we have not become wiser.

As they develop social media and advertising, it will be increasingly difficult for us to overcome the desire of a person to confirm information that corresponds to his beliefs, and the effect of the opposite result. A person will have more opportunities to choose from the general flow exactly the information that fits into his vision of the world, and reliable, in his opinion, sources that will supply him with such information. To top it off, advertisers will continue to adapt, not only creating ads based on what they know about the person, but generating advertising strategies based on what has or hasn't worked for the person. The advertising of the future will be distributed not only based on your preferences, but also on who you voted for, where you spent your childhood, what mood you are in, what day or year it is - on any information about you that can be measured. In a world where everything you want is there, your beliefs will never be questioned.

Three thousand spoilers were tweeted hours before Barack Obama stepped into his presidential pulpit and told the world that Osama bin Laden was dead. A Facebook page, get-rich-quick sites, and millions of emails, texts, and instant messages about the terrorist's death preceded the official announcement on May 1, 2011. Stories and comments poured in one after another, search engines went white hot. Between 7:30 and 8:30 am on the first day, searches for bin Laden on Google increased by 1 million percent from the previous day. Videos with performances by Toby Keith and Lee Greenwood on Youtube took the lead in the ranking. Unprepared news sites scribbled news at full speed in order to supply the insatiable public with more and more informational food.

“In a world where all new knowledge flourishes, where every day scientific discoveries, illuminating, it would seem, all sides human life, we, like most people, still perceive information very selectively”

It was a stunning testament to how the world of information exchange had changed since September 2001, only one thing was predictable and apparently inevitable. Within minutes of the publication of the first stories about Seal Team Six, the tweets about the shooting of bin Laden and the hasty burial of his body at sea, conspiracy theories flourished on fertile soil our prejudices. A few years later, when it became clear that no photographic evidence of the incident would be provided, the conspiracy theories took shape in complete and irrefutable facts.

And although information Technology do not stand still, the behavioral patterns that a person launches when it comes to faith, indisputable facts, politics and ideology, seem to remain the same. In a world where all new knowledge flourishes, where every day scientific discoveries are made that illuminate, it would seem, all aspects of human life, we, like most people, still perceive information very selectively, even if the fact is supported by scientific data and based on centuries of research.

Well, what about corporal punishment? After you've read all of this, do you think you're ready to find out what science has to say on this subject? A secret source reports that psychologists are still studying this phenomenon, but it is now known that regular spanking makes children under seven years of age more docile if not done in public and only by hand. And now attention - a small correction: other ways to influence behavior: positive reinforcement, symbolic savings, free time and so on - can also be effective and do not require cruelty.

So, you have read these lines and they most likely evoked a strong emotional response in you. Has your opinion changed now that you know the truth?

In most cases

more, mostly, most of all, preferably, as always, as usual, as usual, mainly, mainly, as usual, mostly, for the most part, predominantly, usually

• - 1. Syn. method of constant stimuli. 2...

  Great Psychological Encyclopedia

• - logically correct reasoning, when from several conditional statements having the same consequence, a transition is made to the statement of this consequence by establishing that at least one of ...

  Dictionary of logic

• - insurance that provides for the payment of a certain sum insured in case of disability or death caused by unfavorable random events In human life...

  Glossary of business terms

• - PROOF BY CASES Reasoning by cases is a common way of logical ...

  Philosophical Encyclopedia

• - sub-sector of personal insurance...

  Big Economic Dictionary

• - expressed as the number of accidents with bodily injury or death per million man-hours in 1 ...

  Big Economic Dictionary

• - the consequences are determined by those injured at work, including those who died with a fatal outcome, those who lost their ability to work for 1 working day or more, whose disability ended in ...

  Big accounting dictionary

• - registration of injuries that entailed the need to transfer the victim to another job, temporary or permanent loss of his ability to work or death and occurred during the execution ...

  Big accounting dictionary

• - ...

  Spelling Dictionary of the Russian Language

• - /, adv. There were books on the table...

  merged. Apart. Through a hyphen. Dictionary-reference

• - MOST, -a, cf. Most of someone or something. B. present. B. votes...

  Dictionary Ozhegov

• - in the majority I adv. quality-quantity unfold For the most part, for the most part, for the most part. II adv. quality.-circumstances. unfold Having an advantage over anyone. III predict...

  Explanatory Dictionary of Efremova

• - ...

  Spelling Dictionary

• - see big...

  Synonym dictionary

• - adverb, number of synonyms: 3 mostly in most cases mostly...

  Synonym dictionary

• - more, mainly, most of all, preferably, as usual, as usual, mainly, mainly, as usual, for the most part, for the most part, predominantly, usually, most often, ...

  Synonym dictionary

"in most cases" in books