The Best Time To Make A Decision Is... When You Have To Pee Really Badly?

from the ah,-science dept

Via Notcot, we learn of some recent studies on decision making that suggest all sorts of things will distract you from making a good decision (sexual arousal, touch, sleep deprivation, etc.), but what will help you make a good decision? Apparently, having a really full bladder.

A full bladder, apparently, helps us take more rational, long-term decisions. At least that was the finding of a study carried out by Mirjam Tuk, a professor at the University of Twente in the Netherlands. In an experiment, Tuk tested two sets of participants. The first was told to drink five cups of water; the second to take just five sips. After 40 minutes, they were tested on their decision-making abilities. Tuk says that the group who were, by now, crossing their legs, were better able to exercise self-control and hold out for larger rewards.

Honestly, it sounds like the study's applicability may be limited, but just to be safe, I think my new corporate management philosophy is going to involve forcing everyone to drink a lot, but keeping the bathrooms locked up for "cleaning" most of the time... It's foolproof.

Filed Under: decision making

Crowdfunding Makes Sense... But Does Crowd Creative Decision Making?

from the ick dept

I'm all for interesting experiments involving compelling ways to connect with fans and give them a reason to buy, and I love finding out about platforms that enable such things. However, I have to admit that I'm pretty skeptical about the basic concept behind Crowdbands, which not only lets you "fund" an artist, but also vote on the creative decisions they make. The platform does lots of similar (and useful things) that other platforms do: allowing you to support an artist via a "membership fee" of sorts, in exchange for which you get access to the musicians, the artist's music at no extra charge... and a chance to vote on the creative decisions the artist makes.

I understand why they did this, in terms of getting greater fan buy-in, and trying to differentiate from the competitors out there. However, as much as I like crowdfunding of things, that doesn't mean creative decisions should all be crowd decided. I can see it work in some cases, but making creative decision by committee is difficult enough. In this case, the creative decisions are being made based on the popular vote, with apparently little actual input from the artist.

Years ago, in discussing "crowdsourced" efforts, I noted that they were especially good at digging out factual information. When it comes to things that involve insight, analysis or opinion, crowdsourcing tends not to work that well. This isn't all that surprising. However, moving the fans directly into the decision making process seems like a disaster waiting to happen. I should be clear: I'm all for fans having ways to participate, and have their voices heard, but that doesn't mean that artists should have to follow their suggestions. It seems likely that the design-by-mass-internet-committee will serve mainly to make weaker, less inspired decisions.

Filed Under: creativity, crowdsourcing, decision making, music
Companies: crowdbands