Ike Silver
Assistant Professor of Marketing at University of Southern California.
I study spaces where morality, politics, and marketing collide.
- Sam is one of the most thoughtful scholars of dishonesty around. His latest on the topic - disentangling cheating from lying - is required reading!👇
- 💢New paper alert💢 Dishonesty is everywhere — but it’s not all the same. My new solo-authored paper in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General disentangles cheating and lying as distinct forms of dishonesty. Link to paper: doi.org/10.1037/xge0... A thread 🧵👇
- What makes people feel entitled to rewards? Check out Corey’s paper for a provocative new take…
- What makes people feel entitled to rewards—the effort they put into their work or the outcomes they achieve? Out now in PNAS; with Jin Kim and Jared Wong: Achievement. Effort seems to matter very little (if at all). www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
- [Not loaded yet]
- We think a broader version of the hypothesis - that people avoid scaling down outrage from relevant reference points - is a big part of it. We are currently working on follow-ups that explore a preference for escalation from *others’* judgments and finding evidence for that prediction!
- Really proud of this new work out @psychscience.bsky.social. Led by the amazing but bluesky-less Amanda Geiser and with @deborahsmall.bsky.social. We show that when comparing moral wrongs, people are (much) more willing to “scale up” than to “scale down” condemnation and punishment…
-
View full threadDirection of comparison matters because scaling down condemnation (saying B is less bad than A) leaves ambiguity as to whether one is “downplaying.” Does scaling down mean I am not taking this seriously enough? This moral character threat is not present when scaling up (saying A is worse than B).
- The paper contains a number of cool extensions that explore conditions under which people become more or less sensitive to harm and severity when making moral comparisons. Check it out (open access) here: journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
- While people readily say that bad act A is worse and deserves more punishment than bad act B, they are reluctant to say that B is less bad and deserves less punishment than A. When asked which of two acts is less bad, many opt to say both are equally bad (even when one is quite transparently worse!)
- I, for one, think Apple’s new AI-powered summary tool is great.
- ✨New preprint✨How does repeated exposure to transgressions online shape moral judgment? Results show two competing processes: 💠We get desensitized = ⬇️ wrong 💠Transgression seems more infamous =⬆️wrong Relative strength of each may predict outrage to viral transgressions w/ @danieleffron.bsky.social
- Ah this is so cool!
- If everyone puts a drop in the bucket…
- Call your congresspersons's office. Or better yet, show up to their local office and put pressure on their staff. Find your reps here. www.usa.gov/elected-offi....
- New work out in JEP:Gen with @erikakirgios.bsky.social and Edward Chang! How do historically marginalized job applicants respond to concrete, quantified diversity commitments in job ads? We conducted a large, preregistered field experiment to find out…
- How do job seekers react when orgs quantify their diversity commitments? In a 🚨new paper🚨 with @ikesilver.bsky.social & Edward Chang, we explore competing predictions about how women and racial minorities react to measurable goals vs. vague, values-focused commitments.
- [Not loaded yet]
- Thank you!!!
- 🚨 New paper alert 🚨 The explosion of consumer-facing AI raise questions about who is more likely to adopt it. We examined how people’s knowledge of AI impact AI receptivity. Against most people’s expectations, it's not tech experts! And not for the reason you may be thinking🧵
- Super cool work! Congrats!
- Looking for a honeymoon beach read. What are your recent favorites? Looking for salacious intrigue, breezy hijinx, etc. Best if compatible with a fried attention span!
- [Not loaded yet]
- Incredible thank you @katymilkman.bsky.social !!!
- Cool little write-up today from #KelloggInsight about our work on moral judgments of whistleblowing among coworkers, led by newly minted prof @zberry.bsky.social. Do snitches get stitches? Read on to find out... insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/are-...
- [Not loaded yet]
- Thanks for sharing our work! It’s especially cool to be curated by a feed with such great taste :)
- People strongly condemn plagiarizers who steal credit for ideas, even when the theft in question does not appear to harm anyone onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.... These negative reactions are driven by people's aversion toward agents who attempt to falsely improve their reputations
- [Not loaded yet]
- Love the phantom rules paper! Accuser motives might also impact priors on whether the agent is *falsely* signaling or really does have the underlying talents they claim... i.e., could they have produced the ideas themselves without copying?
- Why condemn seemingly harmless cases of plagiarism? In my first ever paper, we argued that concerns about false reputation - agents claiming credit for traits they lack - were the culprit. Of course back then we didn't consider how accuser motives might impact this situation...
- People strongly condemn plagiarizers who steal credit for ideas, even when the theft in question does not appear to harm anyone onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.... These negative reactions are driven by people's aversion toward agents who attempt to falsely improve their reputations
- Methinks the robot doth protest too much.
- [Not loaded yet]
- Super cool!
- Hold the Mariah Carey, it’s still spooky season in my household:
- For creatures that usually struggle to remain principled and consistent across different situations ourselves, we sure do seem to expect/demand a great deal of moral consistency from others…
- [Not loaded yet]
- What’s your take on Ann Sather’s!‽?
- Is this thing on? 🎤🌤️
