“Bad artists copy; great artists steal” – Pablo PicassoKanye West is many things; Rapper, clothes designer, self-proclaimed genius, future president, God etc. But perhaps his greatest work has come in his role as a producer, where he gained fame for his distinctive style of taking small sections of old soul songs by artists including Smokey Robinson, Marvin Gaye and Otis Redding, speeding them up and looping them to create a beat to rap over. This style of “stealing” classic artwork and reworking them into new expressions has been done by artists for centuries.
A perfect example of Kanye’s sampling genius appears in his song Famous, from The Life of Pablo. In this song, he employees Rhianna to sing the hook originally from Nina Simone’s “Do What You Gotta Do” and loops sections of Sister Nancy’s “Bam Bam”. Combining these two hits with a now infamous line regarding Taylor Swift has seen Famous played over 160 million times on Spotify alone, more than “Do What You Gotta Do” and “Bam Bam” have combined, despite both tracks experiencing significant surges in the number of listens after the song was released.Even the music video for the song was a reinterpretation of a painting titled “Sleep”. Upon seeing Kanye’s remodelling the original artist, Vincent Desiderio, said his painting “had been sampled, or “spliced,” into a new format and taken to a brilliant and daring extreme!”
Vincent Desiderio’s “Sleep”
Kanye West’s “Famous” The list of artists that have benefited from being featured on a Kanye song is extensive. From renowned stars such as Michael Jackson (P.Y.T. is sampled in Good Life), to film scores (the Imperial March from Star Wars provides the baseline for Hell of a Life), diversity of artists is impressive. But sampling doesn’t always work out well. Hungary’s most successful rock group Omega tried to sue Kanye for his use of their song Gyöngyhajú Lány at the end of New Slaves. Similar controversy can be seen in many different artistic fields. High street fashion retailer Zara is regularly accused of stealing designs from other brands or independent creators. Samsung currently owe Apple almost $120 million for various infringements on patents Apple owns, including swipe to unlock and autocorrect. It appears there is a fine line between artistic theft and illegal copying, and that line is incredibly subjective. Funnily enough, the quote that started this article has been adapted and reworded so many times it’s hard to know who said it first. The time line of the quotes has been traced, and offers up what essentially becomes a game of Chinese whispers spanning across centuries. The earliest quotation comes in 1892, where W. H. Davenport Adams says “that great poets imitate and improve, whereas small ones steal and spoil”. Since reworking’s of the general sentiment have been attributed to T. S. Elliot, Igor Stravinsky, Steve Jobs and Pablo Picasso. With that level of endorsement, its pretty clear how to advance in this world; Be a classy thief. References Kanye West- FamousPlaylist of songs Kanye has sampledDesiderio’s reaction to “Famous”Zara accused of stealing designsApple vs Samsung lawsuitTracing the origins of “Good Artists Copy; Great Artists Steal”
The Problem of Lie Detection
Somewhat unsurprisingly, the movies have painted a highly inaccurate picture of the power of polygraphs, or so-called lie-detector tests. While many crime dramas showcase a seemingly miraculous technology for distinguishing truths from lies, this portrayal, itself, is far from true.
However, a new study published in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry suggests that polygraph tests may yet have a role to play, alongside MRI machines and brain scans.
Subjects were asked to write down numbers and then lie to researchers about what they had written down. While being interrogated, each participant was subjected to both an MRI scan and a polygraph test, and the researchers attempted to evaluate when they were being lied to.
While the MRI test proved to be about 24 percent more effective than the polygraph, both tests employed in tandem were able to determine deception in almost every case: a remarkable achievement.
Previous studies on MRI testing found them to be up to 90 percent accurate, while the accuracy of polygraph tests ranged wildly from perfectly accurate to completely unreliable. Even 90 percent accuracy falls short of being reliable enough for criminal proceedings. However, with this study, the doors have opened towards justifying more research into lie detection testing.
As Dr. Daniel Langleben, a study author, said: “While the jury remains out on whether fMRI will ever become a forensic tool, these data certainly justify further investigation of its potential.”
In order to appreciate the significance of this study, it is important to understand the limitations that both MRI machines and polygraph tests face in detecting deception.
MRI machines generate images of the subjects’ brains. These images allow researchers to see any physical abnormalities or changes in blood flow, revealing which parts of the brain are currently active. Some of the earliest studies on MRIs as lie detectors had subjects select playing cards and then lie about which ones they had picked. This helped narrow down which parts of the brain light up when a person is being deceitful.
However, there may be confounding factors, as these MRI images often just reveal when the subject has to think quickly about how best to respond. While this does detect lies, it may also indicate uncertainty, or it could be easily misled by a well-rehearsed story that took no effort to recite.
Based on this uncertainty, every attempt to introduce MRI-based lie detection as evidence in court proceedings has failed. In fact, they often show false signs of deception, which would be a major flaw in court proceedings.
Polygraph tests, on the other hand, work by tracking the subject’s heart rate, blood pressure, respiration, and other physiological responses. Law enforcement personnel ask “control” questions that are only tangentially related to the investigation at hand, as well as “relevant” questions which probe for details on the subject’s involvement in the crime.
If the subject shows a higher heart rate when asked the “relevant” questions, this indicates that they are attempting to conceal their guilt. However, there are significant underlying problems with this approach. In fact, there is little evidence to show that these physiological responses are even unique to the practice of deception.
Between the theoretical flaws and the fact that polygraphs can be outsmarted, it is understandable that they are currently not admissible in court proceedings.
For more information on polygraph tests, read our blog here. Also, check out this post to learn how you can be a better lie-detector.
“Eww how gross” – How fear and disgust facilitate persuasion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaE7WuNEYocA few months ago my Mum and I were largely ignoring the adverts on our TV when suddenly, one caught our eye. The video (see link above) depicted a somewhat horrible image of an individual’s teeth falling out, before then showing them spit blood after cleaning their teeth. Mum and I both commented on the strangeness of this advert. However, despite our initial reservations it is clear why this advert works: It utilises disgust and fear. According to the Yale Attitude Change Approach (Hovland, Janis & Kelley, 1953) this emotional factor serves as a message variable which helps to change people’s attitudes towards the product. This method is effective because it prompts people to be persuaded via the peripheral route, as described in the elaboration-likelihood model (Petty, & Cacioppo, 1979). When taking this route, individuals are not persuaded by scrutinising the material, but rather by a simple cue such as attractiveness, or in this case emotion. 
Figure 1: Elaboration-Likelihood Model (Petty & Cacioppo, 1979)Indeed, the specific emotions of disgust and fear have been shown as effective in behaviour change through numerous studies covering several domains. For example, Evans et al. (1970) presented junior high school students with persuasive appeals regarding teeth cleaning. They received one of five types of persuasive appeal: High fear, lower fear and positive were all followed by specific recommendations; the fourth involved only specific recommendations and the fifth involved an elaboration of the specific recommendations. It was found that although positive communication resulted in greater information retention, high and low fear groups reported stronger intentions to behave than the positive and elaboration groups. In addition, the high fear appeal group showed greatest reported behaviour change, measured by reported tooth brushing behaviour. However, when assessing actual behaviour change, fear appeals were less effective. Therefore, fear is effective in altering reported behaviour change but not actual behaviour change. 
Figure 2 – Reported behaviour change scores (Evans et al., 1970). HF = High fear; LF = Low fear; POS = Positive; RO = Recommendation only; ER = Elaborated recommendation The effectiveness of fear appeals has been further supported through a meta-analysis of over 100 studies (Witte & Allen, 2000). They found that the stronger the fear appeal, the greater attitude, intention and behaviour change. In addition, the greater the severity of the fear message, the greater the persuasion. Perhaps most notably, Witte and Allen found that individual differences did not influence the extent to which the fear appeal was persuasive, hence suggesting when viewing an advert using fear, individuals will use the peripheral route regardless of personality.Finally, the effect of disgust visuals on attitudes towards animal experimentation was investigated by Nabi (1998). Participants were shown a counterargument and rebuttal of either: low disgust/low affect, low disgust/high affect, high disgust/low affect or high disgust/high affect advert, where low disgust showed a monkey lying on a lab table and high disgust showed a monkey being inflicted with severe head injuries. In addition, low affect refers to showing a talking head, whilst high affect involves showing sick babies who might benefit from animal research. It was found that as the level of disgust increased, level of support for animal experimentation decreased, thus suggesting that disgust is an effective way to change attitudes and hence perhaps behaviour. In conclusion, although being subjected to a Corsodyl advert while watching your favourite television show is far from pleasant, it is an effective way of implementing both attitude and behaviour change. An advert such as this utilises emotions like fear and disgust resulting in an individual being persuaded to go out and buy Corsodyl via the peripheral route.ReferencesEvans, R. I., Rozelle, R. M., Lasater, T. M., Dembroski, T. M., & Allen, B. P. (1970). Fear arousal, persuasion and actual versus implied behavioural change: new perspective utilizing a real-life dental hygiene program. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 220-227.Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven: Yale University Press. Nabi, R. L. (2009). The effect of disgust-eliciting visuals on attitudes toward animal experimentation. Communication Quarterly, 46, 572-484.Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1915-1926. Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health, Education and Behaviour, 27, 591-615.Charlotte Cartwright
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- …
- 559
- Next Page »