What's Your Bias? - Lee De-Wit ***

We have seen plenty of books on the psychology of decision making and how psychology can give us insights into the way that we misinterpret information or get things wrong, such as Richard Nisbett's Mindware, but this is the first that I have come across that explicitly addresses the psychology of the way we vote.

This is, perhaps, the ideal time to come out with such a book, as there have been so many surprise results in the last few years from the last two British general elections to Brexit and Trump. And there is some interesting material in this slim volume (I got through it on a longish train journey). It's very pleasing also, that Lee De-Wit gives us a good balance between UK and US examples.

Perhaps the most surprising result covered is the discover that the biggest predictor of how we will vote is how open we are to new experiences rather than, say, class or wealth. We also see how traditional party support has changed over time. Other aspects will be more familiar if you've read any popular psychology, such as the impact of confirmation bias. And there's also good coverage of the way social media and targeted internet advertising are changing the playing field.

Although this is an approachable, easy-to-read book, I went away from it a little disappointed, as it seemed just too lightweight - I felt like I was left wanting a lot more. More of the science, more insights and implications. It was a bit like reading a study (with lots of provisos) that gave you the basic facts, but didn't provide much in the way of discussion and conclusions. Even when dealing with social media, for example, we heard a lot about its existence and what was done with out, but little about its measurable impact on voters.

I would still very much recommend reading this book if you are at all interested in politics or what has been happening recently, particularly in light of the changes in social media. But I wish there had been a bit more to it.

Hardback:

Kindle:

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader. We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard. This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms. On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...

Search This Blog