The Stupidity Of Government Anti-Smoking Campaigns
Because of the way our minds work, exposure to "no smoking" signs may increase smokers' desire to have a ciggy.
The finding is from research by Oxford experimental psychologist and ethicist Brian David Earp and his colleagues, published in 2013, in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology. The abstract:
The unconscious mind tends to disregard negations in its processing of semantic meaning. Therefore, messages containing negated concepts can ironically prime mental representations and evaluations that are opposite to those intended. We hypothesized that the subtle presentation of a negated concept (e.g., "no smoking") would activate ironic motivational orientations as well. We tested this hypothesis in a public health context. Smokers viewed photographs in which "no smoking" signs were either inconspicuously embedded (prime condition) or edited out (control condition). Primed smokers showed amplified automatic approach tendencies toward smoking-related stimuli, but not toward smoking-unrelated stimuli: an ironic motivational response to exposure to the signs. Since passive priming effects generally serve to facilitate forms of action, not inhibit them, antismoking and other public health campaigns may ironically increase the very behaviors they seek to reduce.
There's a perfect illustration of this, that has been around forever: "Don't THINK of an apple."
And then, there's that feminist rant that women tell each other, "You don't NEED a man!" A client of mine used to tell her best friend that, until she finally realized it was useless. She started telling her friend "You NEED a man"... me.
jefe at August 4, 2016 5:07 PM
What you're describing is a little different from what Brian and his colleagues are talking about.
There's a researcher, the late Daniel Wegner, who studied this -- suppression -- with "Don't think of a white bear." Your mind sweeps around to see how you're doing, and, in that, you're thinking of the white bear, and you've failed.
Emotional or thought suppression is also very stressful to us. What makes more sense -- per Forster and Liberman -- is to say it's HARD to not do something/think of something, but you'll do your best.
Amy Alkon at August 4, 2016 5:15 PM
Yet again I'm reminded of this Cosh cite of Judith Martin discussing the paradoxical meanings of street signs.
Crid at August 4, 2016 6:05 PM
The government can stop smoking immediately.
Ban tobacco.
Done. Next problem? oh, right all those naughty smokers who possess or will attempt to possess tobacco. Well, seize it and fine them.
Done. Wut?
I R A Darth Aggie at August 5, 2016 6:47 AM
I've heard a similar explanation for why diets usually don't work. Dieters are often encouraged to do things like plan meals and keep eating journals. Trouble is, all of those things (as well as just the self-reminder that one is on a diet) make the dieter think about food.
Cousin Dave at August 5, 2016 7:09 AM
I remember in college reading a study that my roommate had to read and one of its points -- the ones I remembering -- is that the concepts of zero and "not" or negation are relatively recent developments.
The Former Banker at August 5, 2016 8:05 PM
Pete Seeger knew this a long time ago: "Beans in your ears"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjx3wG7Kg58
markm at August 19, 2016 11:26 AM
Leave a comment