akbogert's forum posts

#1 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

@etragedy said:

Yes, that's what I meant. (Believe me, I know it's not a behavior I spent 5 long years getting a psych degree) It was a quick reply. I was just saying that cognitive dissonance is not the right term for what you were ascribing to the reason for the behavior of voting down a review because it doesn't conform with their opinion.

Ah. Well, I didn't intend to say that; in fact I said this, which I think is the opposite of that, haha:

However in terms of the actual voting process, refusing to recommend something just because you disagreed with its conclusion has nothing to do with dissonance; it has to do with you not wanting an opposing view to be seen as valid (note that cognitive dissonance is a disparity between your own beliefs and actions, not your beliefs and someone else's actions).

But if I came across as implying what you said, then by all means I'm glad to have misinformation dispelled.

I honestly have no idea why people down-vote negative reviews more frequently (as you say you've observed; again, I think it would be nice to actually see data on it -- for all we know your personal experience has just been an anomaly). If we assume that people who click "not recommended" tend to do so more because they disagree with your opinion than because the review was poor, then the question is: how do your tastes align with popular tastes? Do you routinely have a less optimistic view of something which a majority of people like? If so, your pool of people who would disagree with the negative review (and thus feel inclined to negatively assess said review) is larger.

#2 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

I loved that moment, and I haven't even read AvX.

Hey , I want your thoughts on this (like I said, I thought this issue was great, but I didn't know pre-NOW Emma).

#3 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis: The cable should be here in a little over a week. Hopefully you'll have opened the shrink wrap by then :P

@RedQueen: Haha. This still doesn't explain why an entire nation's curriculum is at odds with its own scientific facts...

#4 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

I'd be interested in a meetup sometime before I move out to Columbus, but I'll be at PAX East this weekend, so that date's definitely out (and actually money will be tight for another month or so anyway). But if one should happen in, say, May, I'd be down.

#5 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

@etragedy: Is cognitive dissonance even a behavior? I have thought of it as a cause or factor of behavior; something which people act (often in a self-deceptive way) to try to mitigate, confirmation bias simply explaining a typical path towards said mitigation.

As for the question, like I said, sure, I think it gets used that way. But it just as often does not. I don't know if any of us could even know how often it's used one way or the other, especially since a lot of people don't even look at user reviews, let alone rate them (and it is, as has been pointed out, sort of hard to find them for anyone who doesn't know how to do so).

#6 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

@RedQueen: Well that's not really fair. If it's spelled Aluminum, then it's pronounced that way. And if it's spelled Aluminium, then it's pronounced that way.

I tend to come across it as foil, and major companies (like Reynolds) call it Aluminum. So that's what I've grown up calling it. But the first periodic table I found when I just googled the periodic table...it said Aluminium. That's...that's just not fair.

@lykopis: I feel like playing Tomb Raider is going to be more interesting all of a sudden, if you're apt to be mispronouncing stuff left and right :P

(side note: I love how Firefox unites us)

#7 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

@etragedy: Sure, confirmation bias also plays a role. That's why I try to find the positive reviews of things I hate (more than negative reviews of things I love, but sometimes those too) -- but that doesn't really have anything to do with writing or rating reviews, haha.

Like I said, there are definitely factors which may lead to a review being bad quality-wise -- poor writing, inaccuracies, misinterpretations of things -- and it just happens to be that a badly-written review can sometimes be bad because the writer's bias shows through; cognitive dissonance is one of a handful of things that could lead to such a thing. So I'm not saying there's never a good reason to "not recommend." I just believe the system is in place to recommend reviews, not opinions.

#8 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

@Ren_: Site's looking pretty smooth, though I did spend just long enough there to realize I never need to read another review again, haha.

#9 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

@CTG: Here is my question to you. If all the first death did was set the stage and establish a real penalty, then why couldn't Hopeless have created a character just to kill for that purpose? It would have been just as shocking to the kids (who didn't all know each other anyway), and it wouldn't have required killing a character that many readers cared about.

Likewise, if the only purpose of the issue two death was to establish another parameter, then why couldn't Hopeless have created a character just to kill for that purpose?

The two previously-existing characters who have died were killed for in-book reasons which could easily have been satisfied by not killing an established character (in the case of the first one, with a decent fanbase, especially considering that the first issue directly followed the last issue of his book).

The first actually meaningful (I won't say necessary because I find the entire series' premise unnecessary, but "necessary" based on the premise) death happens to a Hopeless-created character after two non-Hopeless-created characters have been killed to prove basic points. Seems rather ridiculous to me.

#10 Posted by akbogert (3193 posts) - - Show Bio

@SC said:

I like looking for comics where I know the fans will be split down the middle like Uncanny X-Men #500 and Batman #17 just to see the reviews and reaction to reviews. In general I just recommend reviews I think were well thought out and presented well and fairly. Actually I'll even recommend sometimes if the reviewer looked like they put effort in, just to encourage them to keep reviewing since I think this sites set up can actually mean people tend to miss the great review work of their peers. It also created this bizarre trend of some posters making reviews in forum threads - since threads are far more visible getting more reactions and praise/criticism. Anyway aforementioned reasoning behind recommending means I will often come across reviews that disagree with my personal take on an issue, both in being too positive for a book I disliked or for being too negative for I book I liked, and still recommending them. I am not there to affirm myself emotionally or mentally. Oh I actually sort of wish we could have the option to see who gives out negative recommendations. I wouldn't have a problem with knowing who gave me a negative rating nor would I hold a grudge and I would totally be okay with explaining my reasoning behind giving out a negative recommendation (that is if I were ever to actually give one, which I haven't save for that CV Quest thing)

QFT. Cognitive dissonance exploration in the spoiler:

Someone mentioned cognitive dissonance earlier and just to clarify, while it's a concept that may play a role in reviewing, it has nothing to do with rating a review. Cognitive dissonance deals with our latent desire not to be hypocrites or, more basically, not to be wrong. When reality and our expectations do not align, we sometimes try to trick ourselves into thinking they're closer than they really are, because we know (there's your cognitive part) that something's not matching up (dissonance). So when I buy something that I expect to really love, and it lets me down, I may actively try to convince myself that it was better than it actually was. So, say, someone who loves Scott Snyder, and was really looking forward to the end of Death of the Family, might have felt let down but because of, say, how they kept bragging about how it was going to be the best thing ever, they feel compelled to save face and try to come up with excuses and defense for their prior position. They can't allow themselves to accept that they were let down, so they find "proof" that they weren't let down at all. They thus write a five-star review in which they talk about all the great things Snyder did even though in reality they didn't love it. This is easier for some people than to just acknowledge that they were wrong in their expectations.

Similar things are seen whenever someone is heavily invested in anything, either emotionally/mentally or financially. For example, if you spend a lot of money on something, you're more likely to downplay the flaws in it because it's hard to acknowledge that you wasted so much money. Anyone who has ever spent months saving up for something which turned out to be crap can probably relate; you usually pretend it isn't crap but at some point in your future you look back and you know you weren't kidding anyone but yourself. Happens a lot in debates in general: when a person knows they're losing an argument, but they can't accept that, they may begin to make more extreme points than they actually agree with in an attempt to maintain a hold on the situation. Most religious debates I've seen tend to involve a lot of actual and perceived cognitive dissonance because the ramifications of actually changing sides in an argument like that are so extreme that it's incredibly difficult to accept the other side's points, no matter how well they're made. It's not even necessarily an intentional copout; it's the brain shielding itself against a set of implications it does not feel prepared to handle.

When it comes to writing reviews, sure, some reviews may seem absurdly positive or negative because a person either expected more than what they got but won't accept it, or was genuinely impressed by something they expected to hate and tried to find petty reasons why they couldn't have actually liked it. To the extent that these traits might lead to a bad review, perhaps it makes sense that people will give them negative votes. However in terms of the actual voting process, refusing to recommend something just because you disagreed with its conclusion has nothing to do with dissonance; it has to do with you not wanting an opposing view to be seen as valid (note that cognitive dissonance is a disparity between your own beliefs and actions, not your beliefs and someone else's actions). I always believed the system was in place so that you could call out people who had done a good job (or at least put in a good effort) of evaluating the material and making some form of recommendation based on that analysis -- for recommending the review as worth considering because it raised valid points and isn't a waste of time. This should include reviews which appreciate something more or less than you do; in fact, if you really think about it, a lot of people read reviews to decide whether it's worth buying something. So you shouldn't even have an opinion when reading the review, and your recommendation should simply be whether or not you found the review helpful in contributing to your own buy or pass decision. If you've read the book, fine, but you should still be able to appraise the general quality of the information being conveyed.

Anyway like I said, that's what I saw as the purpose of that system. That some people abuse it and just vote based on their opinion on the verdict rather than the content is undeniable; but I think that's petty, especially when you downvote a person who put a lot of time and effort into their work and it makes it look bad to other people.