Just like TV, adds at least 10 lbs.
Thread: I'm scared!......are you?
People Carrying Guns May Appear Bigger Than They Are
Researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles, asked hundreds of people to guess the size and muscularity of four men simply by looking at photos of the men's hands holding a number of easily recognizable objects: a caulking gun, an electric drill, a large saw or a handgun.
The hands of the four men in the photos were the same size and had no distinguishing features, such as tattoos or scars. Even so, the study participants consistently estimated men holding guns to be taller and stronger than men holding the other objects.
"There's nothing about the knowledge that gun powder makes lead bullets fly through the air at damage-causing speeds that should make you think that a gun-bearer is bigger or stronger, yet you do," study author Daniel Fessler, an associate professor of anthropology, said in a university new release.
"Danger really does loom large -- in our minds," he added.
The findings suggest that, like other animals, humans have an unconscious ability to gauge a potential adversary and decide whether they would win or lose a physical confrontation, the researchers said.
"We've isolated a capacity to assess threats in a simple way," study co-author Colin Holbrook, a postdoctoral scholar in anthropology, said in the news release. "Though this capacity is very efficient, it can misguide us."
The study, published Wednesday in the journal PLoS One, is part of a larger project funded by the U.S. Air Force Office of Scientific Research to learn about how people make decisions in potentially violent situations.
The findings could prove useful for law enforcement, prison guards and the military, the researchers said.
Just like TV, adds at least 10 lbs.
What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?
I'm already a fairly big guy but when I get in bed with my wife tonight, I'm going to be carrying a gun!
The study cited may have limited value, but on first glance an experienced researcher sees obvious study design bias that all but guarantees the outcome. A caulking gun, electric drill, and electric saw are all building tools and are not generally perceived by the average individual to be weapons of deadly force. The handgun is readily recognized as being capable of allowing the use of deadly force and the mind recognizes this and attaches a "danger flag" to the observation thus resulting in the study outcome due to design bias.
Thus, the study would have had more validity if the identical hands held a handgun, a switchblade knife, a sword, and a baseball bat. Other possible candidates might include a taser, a billy club or law enforcement baton, a spear, or a razor blade box cutter.
Yellow Cat Out-
My cats support the Second Amendment. NRA Life Member, NRA Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, & Personal Protection - NRA Certified Range Safety Officer, Utah BCI Certified Concealed Firearm Permit Instructor.
"Permission Slips" from Utah, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona, and Florida. _ Verily, thou shalt not fiddle with thine firearm whilst in the bathroom stall, lest thine spouse seek condolences from thine friends.
I think their design was intentional. The intent, I believe, was to compare "non-weapons" (in quotes because we all know anything can be used as a weapon) versus weapons as an indicator of size of the person wielding it.
It would be interesting to see the same study using all the traditional weapons listed to see which ones seem to come accross as stronger or bigger people.
Last edited by Brendon .45; 04-12-2012 at 09:54 PM.
Guns don't kill people. Drivers on cell phones do.
There are two sources of data for validation of a new hypothesis, "convenient" and "purposeful." Purposeful data is derived from a new test written to acquire data for the hypothesis validation. Convenient data has already been acquired for some other reason/test.
The first criticism of purposeful data is of bias in testing. The first criticism of convenient data is that misses some vital nuance. Compare this test of antagonist formidability and its purposeful data with the huge conveniently existing data set of More Guns, Less Crime.
If it was easy everyone would do it.
Personally, I am a falsificationist after Karl Popper and N.N. Taleb.
Last edited by Herr Heckler Koch; 04-13-2012 at 06:27 AM.
I just wonder who picked up the tab on this one? All I see in this is a total waste of money, and a fast buck for someone with a PhD tacked onto his/her name. My biggest fear is that someone in government is also being paid, just to hand out more of my/our money.
IF YOU WANT TO BURN OUR AMERICAN FLAG, PLEASE WRAP YOURSELF UP IN IT FIRST...
So, yes, you are scared.
Do you have any idea of the debt load a new post-doc carries, credit that he has contributed to the education establishment?