Virginia Hughes

Orac can’t decide what side of the ID debate the creators of this video are on. Me neither. Regardless, I love da hook: “Dic to the Doc to the PhD, he’s smarter than you—he’s got a science degree.”

:: :: ::

This video shows you how to fold the MIT logo in three easy steps.

One piece of paper. One origami expert. Ten hours. Incredible.

Click To Play

(Hat tip: Maywa)

:: :: ::

How can we encourage large corporations, or small families, to conserve energy? Or Harley Davidson types to wear helmets? What about getting my mom to kick her smoking habit? University of Chicago economist Richard H. Thaler and law professor Cass Sunstein say that all it takes is a little nudge.

Thaler and Sunstein believe that “choice architecture”—usually not in the form of explicit regulations or laws—”can be established to nudge us in beneficial directions without restricting freedom of choice.”

John Tierney has an article about the idea as it relates to carbon footprints in the NYT today. I wasn’t particularly convinced until I read, linked in his accompanying blog post, a chapter called “A Dozen Nudges” from Thaler and Sunstein’s book, Nudge: Improving Decisions about Wealth, Health and Happiness. The chapter lists a dozen proposed nudging programs, many of them already up and running. Here are three that I find particularly smart (notice that these are all completely voluntary…which is not the case for all of the duo’s suggestions):

Stickk.com. Committing oneself to a specific action is one way to improve the odds of success. Sometimes it is easy to make a commitment, as, for example, by cutting up your credit cards…Other times it is hard. Dean Karlan, now a Yale economics professor, has teamed up with his Yale colleague Ian Ayres to propose a Web-based business [called] Stickk.com.

Stickk offers two ways to make commitments: financial and nonfinancial. With financial commitments, an individual puts up money and agrees to accomplish a goal by a certain date. He also specifies how to verify that he has met his goal. For example, he might agree to a weigh-in at a doctor’s office or a friend’s house; a urine test for nicotine at a clinic; or an honor-system verification. If the person reaches his goal, he gets his money back. If he fails, the money goes to charity. He also has the option to enter into a group financial commitment, in which the group’s pooled money is divided among those members of the group who reach their goals.

Quit smoking without a patch. CARES (Committed Action to Reduce and End Smoking) is a savings program offered by the Green Bank of Caraga in Mindanao, Philippines. A would-be nonsmoker opens an account with a minimum balance of one dollar. For six months, she deposits the amount of money she would otherwise spend on cigarettes into the account. (In some cases, a representative of the bank visits every week to collect the deposits.) After six months, the client takes a urine test to confirm that she has not smoked recently. If she passes the test, she gets her money back. If she fails the test, the account is closed and the money is donated to a charity.

The early results from this program have been evaluated by MIT’s Poverty Action Lab and look very good. Opening up an account makes those who want to quit 53 percent more likely to achieve their goal. No other antismoking tactic, not even the nicotine patch, appears to have been so successful.

The Automatic Tax Return. No sensible choice architect would design the current income tax system, which is famous for its complexity. Withholding was a major advance that simplified life for everyone. Ordinary people and the Internal Revenue Service would benefit even more if the process could be made more automatic. A simple step, suggested by the economist Austan Goolsbee, is the Automatic Tax Return. Under this approach, anyone who does not itemize deductions and has no income (such as tips) that is not reported to the IRS would receive a tax return that is already filled out. To file, the taxpayer would need only to sign it and mail it (or, even better, go to a secure IRS Web site, sign in and click). (Of course, the taxpayer would be required to make changes if her status changed, or if she started receiving unreported income.)

Goolsbee estimates that this proposal would save taxpayers up to 225 million hours of tax preparation time and more than $2 billion a year in tax preparation fees. True, many people don’t trust the IRS, so here’s one way to assure them that our tax collectors are honest: if there’s an error, you get the money back, plus a bonus (say, $100).

:: :: ::

Buy this t-shirt!

This

is

a

silly

way

to

make

my

text

align

properly

ha

Hat tip: Kambiz

I was deeply saddened to read today that my psychological hero (and Britney’s), Dr. Phil McGraw, just got some bad news:

…Read the rest here.

Dave Ng, you rock.

In case you had any doubt, Eliot Spitzer’s resignation now confirms that adultery is the fastest way for American politicians to lose public approval. Don’t get me wrong, the salacious details of the “Kristen” scandal—it was 10 p.m., on the night before Valentine’s Day, in a Washington hotel; she was a 5′5″ brunette; he asked her to, “do things that, like, you might not think were safe”—sicken me, too. I’m glad he’s out of Albany.

Evolutionary biologist David Barash is using the scandal as evidence that men (especially powerful men) are, like most other mammals, not meant to be monogamous. As he espoused in today’s LA Times:

But even a smidgen of evolutionary insight suggests that maleness plus money plus political power isn’t likely to add up to the kind of sexual restraint that the public expects. A concluding word, therefore, to the outraged voters of New York state: You want monogamy? Elect a swan. Or better yet, a Diplozöon paradoxum. [That's a monogamous species of worm.]

I agree: some knowledge of basic evolutionary biology would do our species a whole lotta good. As Barash explains, because sperm is so cheap, evolutionary drivers push men to be “aggressive sexual adventurers, inclined to engage in sex with multiple partners when they can.” Those same drivers push females—who will need protection and resources in order to successfully carry and raise a child—toward powerful men. (Which, he states wryly, “contributes to the apparent sex appeal of such less-than-stunning physical specimens as Kissinger, Woody Allen and Bill Clinton.”)

So, maybe Barash is right, and with a little bit of biology education the Puritanical public wouldn’t expect politicians to exhibit “sexual restraint.” I’m appalled at the weight of the scandal in media outlets throughout the world. Spitzer has been on the homepage of BBC Russia, of all places, for two days straight. OK, so the governor of New York hired prostitutes. Often. Is that really the newsiest thing Russia could come up with?

All that said, let’s back the determinism truck up for a second. Spitzer was guilty of more than infidelity. He didn’t just have a mistress, or 12. He paid women ($4,300 to Kristen, and at least $80,000 in total) for sex, thus breaking the same federal laws that he enforced so gleefully in his days as a prosecutor.

Even Barash concedes: “People have the unique capacity to act contrary to their biologically given inclinations. Maybe, in fact, it is what makes us human.” Spitzer, as not only a human, but a husband, a father of three teenaged girls, a member of the Bar Association, and governor of one of the most powerful states in the country, arguably felt much more moral (or “cultural,” if you prefer) pressure to reject these “biologically given inclinations” than the average cheatin’ man. Good riddance.

(Hat Tip: Jonah)

:: :: ::

My friends often hear me bemoan our lack of real science heroes today. I think Richard Feynman (d. 1988) was our last one (Richard Dawkins is close…but a little too controversial. Actually—did Feynman have the evangelicals after him, too?)

The Nobel Prize-winning physicist was known for his work in quantum electrodynamics, his tremendously popular books, juggling, pranks, and bongo playing. Below, an odd and entertaining video of Feynman enjoying this last activity, via Sean: