follow CCP

Recent blog entries
popular papers

Science Curiosity and Political Information Processing

What Is the "Science of Science Communication"?

Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem

Ideology, Motivated Cognition, and Cognitive Reflection: An Experimental Study

'Ideology' or 'Situation Sense'? An Experimental Investigation of Motivated Reasoning and Professional Judgment

A Risky Science Communication Environment for Vaccines

Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government

Making Climate Science Communication Evidence-based—All the Way Down 

Neutral Principles, Motivated Cognition, and Some Problems for Constitutional Law 

Cultural Cognition of Scientific Consensus

The Tragedy of the Risk-Perception Commons: Science Literacy and Climate Change

"They Saw a Protest": Cognitive Illiberalism and the Speech-Conduct Distinction 

Geoengineering and the Science Communication Environment: a Cross-Cultural Experiment

Fixing the Communications Failure

Why We Are Poles Apart on Climate Change

The Cognitively Illiberal State 

Who Fears the HPV Vaccine, Who Doesn't, and Why? An Experimental Study

Cultural Cognition of the Risks and Benefits of Nanotechnology

Whose Eyes Are You Going to Believe? An Empirical Examination of Scott v. Harris

Cultural Cognition and Public Policy

Culture, Cognition, and Consent: Who Perceives What, and Why, in "Acquaintance Rape" Cases

Culture and Identity-Protective Cognition: Explaining the White Male Effect

Fear of Democracy: A Cultural Evaluation of Sunstein on Risk

Cultural Cognition as a Conception of the Cultural Theory of Risk

« MAPKIA "answers" episode2: There is no meaningful cultural conflict over vaccine risks, & the tea party doesn't look very "libertarian" to me! | Main | MAPKIA! episode 2: what do alpha, beta, gamma & delta think about childhood vaccine risks? And where's the tea party?! »

MAPKIA! extra credit question

The contest is being waged with feroicity in the lastest MAPKIA!

Indeed, I'm worried about the possibility of a tie.  Hence, I'm adding this question for extra credit: 

Which interpretive community does Pat belong to?  And for extra extra credit: Is Pat in the Tea Party?!


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (16)

Oh dear. I am at a disadvantage. I don't know much of anything about Pat.

Can you offer some dispositional traits? Voting habits? Hat size?


December 6, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterIsabel Penraeth

My money's on Jen, not the least because she's a fairly heavy favorite with the Las Vegas bookies, but in the interest of fair play I think that I might be able to help anyone who's playing but might not know much about Pat.

Pat happens to be an old acquaintance, and I can tell you that Pat and Pat's former love interest, Chris, are both of mixed-race, and politically moderate. They are average income earners who are undecided about evolution, have average science comprehension, don't like to discuss their religious beliefs, and at various times have expressed various views about the risks of gun ownership, pollution, climate change, fracking, and nuclear waste.

December 6, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJoshua

LOL - I would say Pat is in the center, and at various times has expressed various views regarding the Tea Party.

December 7, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterFrankL


You've told me which quadrant you think Pat is in but you haven't help me come to any conclusions for myself.


December 7, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterIsabel Penraeth


It's a slightly unfair test. 'Pat' appeared in one of Dan's earlier posts - so if you've been reading the blog for a while, you stand a far better chance.

I think FrankL may have followed the hint I gave a couple of threads back. Or maybe he found it on his own. Anyway, I expect Dan is just testing to see if anyone is paying attention to what he's been writing all this while. With fifteen billion regular readers, someone must be.

December 7, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterNiV


I'm waiting to hear something from someone that I can relate to something in the real world, either data- or observationally-driven. As it stands, there's no fun in it for me. Nothing to hang my hat on.

You'll be glad to hear that I don't automatically assume that either you or Joshua have any particular expertise in answering this MAPKIA.


December 7, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterIsabel Penraeth


It's not a question you can answer by reasoning it out. It basically depends on whether you remember seeing the picture here:

Frankly, I thought it was a bit of an odd question to ask. Possibly Dan had a clever point he was trying to make, although I'm not going to try to speculate.
As I said, it's a bit unfair on anyone who hasn't been reading here for a long time, (or who has gone back through the archives). I shouldn't worry about it.

December 7, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterNiV

NiV -

Where was the previous mention of Pat?

I assumed it was a reflection of Dan' sense of humor.

You guys do know who Pat is, don't you?

December 7, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJoshua


Never seen it!

And I understand Dan's joke now. Thanks!

December 8, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterNiV

I do know who Pat is. I didn't get what was funny about the SNL sketches and I haven't found much resonance with his use of the character I his blog discussions. since he uses the characterization quite specifically in his discussion of CCR, I was waiting to see how he would use the characterization with IC. Not apples to apples here, and I'm interested in understanding the joke. But I'm not going to pretend I get the joke just so I can seem cool (or nerdy-cool as the case may be).

December 8, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterIsabel Penraeth

Isabel -

Obviously, Dan can clear this up quickly - but I took it to be a joke in that it isn't actually possible to know anything about Pat except that s/he is gender indecipherable, and so then since we don't actually know anything about Pat, it would be impossible to try to locate him/her according to IC. I assumed that the joke is that in reality, even if there were to be a tie, the question was of a nature that there really could be no answer that would un-tie the contest.

Thus, the "humor" (if you will) of my response was that none of the information that I offered about Pat would change that situation one bit. The point of my response was specifically to offer information about Pat that would be useless with respect to locating Pat on the grid.

So if it turns out that my understanding of Dan's joke was wrong, does that mean that I'm actually un-cool?

December 8, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJoshua

Oh no! I wish I had seen this Friday. Hope it's not too late to chime in. I do think this is mostly meant to be humorous, but I also like the use of Pat to illustrate the nature of this kind of research in general- we can pull apart the extreme tendencies and develop personas that are essentially caricatures- as far as they might be useful for our understanding- but extremes are just that- and most people are a combination of values and world views that end up balancing out to something very moderate and near the mean so that it can be hard to really see specific tendencies- like Pat. Just as Dan has written about in the past, it's important to remember these are not archetypes or a typology, but a mechanism being observed as it manifests in different ways.

That said, my best guess about Pat (as a person representative of some kind of average persona) is that they tend to fall somewhere in the middle in terms of balanced concern for public safety and social deviance. Try as I might, I can't really mentally justify a reason for Pat to have a particular amount of concern- so it may be high concern for both (beta) or low concern for both (gamma) or maybe somewhere in be middle. Maybe our Pats would just be a scatter of points in a rough line from gamma to beta, slope = 1? I'm sure there are some Pats in the tea party- if they consider themselves to be go higher than average science comprehension. :)

December 8, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJen


I just think Pat is cool!

We used Pat (w/ permission of SNL & NBC) as a "heuristic" devicein a paper in which we used statistical models to simulate what prospective "jurors" of various recognizable cultural outooks or styles would "see" in a video of a high-speed car chase that the U.S. S Ct said "no reasonable juror" could watch w/o concluding that the driver was the risk-equivalent of a dirty bomb or an ebola outbreak--somethign to be terminated for sure w/ extreme prejudice. In that study, Pat was the "population mean," of course-- which by definition was the "average" view but which in fact didn't seem to characterize *anyone*!

I think Pat was very funny. Pat showed how disorienting it is for us to interact w/ someone w/o being able to put them into categories -- gender, most obviously, but others too. It was a great way to teach people this point about how they interact with each other. What to make of it ... well, that's another great thing about the sketch: I don't think people had to agree about that to find it provocative, not to mention funny (actually humor is a great way to get people to reflect critically on themselves; think how hard it might be to get someone w/ a particular style to acknowledge that they really can't even interact w/ someone w/o the orienting cue of the other's gender -- but if that person laughed at Pat, he or she would get the point. And then ponder, perhaps, how to address this in him- or herself & others...)

December 8, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterdmk38

One more little bit of auto-biography or some-such. The montage dates back to 2010. At the time I created it -- why? I dunno; for the same reason, I suppose, that it occurred to me how wonderful it would be to have a "Bumblebee-- My first drone!," i.e., the alternative was grading exams-- the nation was howling at laughter at Delaware Republican Senate candidate Christine O'Donnel, whose Checker's Speech moment came when she had to explain footage of a some sort of community tv talk show she had hosted yrs earlier for people who practice witchcraft. The tagline: "I'm not a witch ... I am you!" Hey, she's in the tea party!

December 8, 2013 | Registered CommenterDan Kahan


The layers upon layers of thinking you are mapping here are much more interesting to me than the actual original SNL sketches, but to each his/her own :)


December 8, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterIsabel Penraeth

Dan -

Thanks for linking that paper. Very interesting reading.

December 8, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJoshua

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>