InDecision is a blog run by early career researchers and practitioners in judgment and decision making. We want to give younger scholars a voice, reach a wider audience with their work, and give everyone a chance to see what happens inside decision-making science.
I wanted to pursue an academic career in this field because… I thought that pursuing an academic career would yield a stimulating yet leisurely intellectual life. (I was half right.) While researching grad programs, I read Tom Gilovich’s book: How We Know What Isn’t So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life. By the end of chapter 2, I was hooked on the idea of studying judgment and decision making.
I find the inspiration for my research mostly from… Entrepreneurs and artists. Scientists don’t often think of their research as a creative endeavor that is important to share broadly with the world. I believe that the process of creating and disseminating scientific insights is enhanced by emulating people who have a different perspective and a broader array of tools. Also, behaving like an artist or an entrepreneur is much more fun than just trying to please peer reviewers.
When people ask me what I do, I say…. I study what makes things funny.
The best research project I have worked on during my career… In the summer of 2008, Caleb Warren and I set out to answer the question of why people laugh at moral violations. That project changed my life, as it spurred a quest to crack the humor code (something that behavioral decision theory’s “emotional revolution” had overlooked). The resulting paper, which published in Psychological Science in 2010, brought together my two main research areas at the time: moral judgment and mixed emotions. Caleb and I introduce the benign violation theory of humor and showed that moral violations can be a source of pleasure (something every good comic knows).
Everything came together just right; the paper was accepted with no requested changes – something that I never expect to happen again.
The paper that has most influenced me is… When Caleb and I were examining the research on humor, the theories didn’t seem quite right. Fortunately, we found a little-cited paper published by a linguist named of Thomas Veatch. To us, it was a huge advance over existing theories. Veatch’s work served as the foundation for the benign violation theory, which in turn, serves as the foundation for the research conducted in the Humor Research Lab.
If I wasn’t doing this, I would be… Starting some sort of business.
The most important quality for a researcher to have is… Perseverance. Repeat after me, “They can slow us down, but they can’t stop us.”
The biggest challenge for our field in the next 10 years… Finding a way speed the peer-review process.
My advice for young researchers at the start of their career is… Write every day. Start today – and purchase the book: How to Write A Lot.
The one thing I’ve found most challenging is… Staying asleep until my alarm goes off. The work academics do is highly evaluative and uncertain – two conditions that contribute to anxiety. And anxiety gets me out of bed early. On the other hand, it has a silver lining. I believe that every day is a big day and should be lived with a sense of urgency. And big days rarely start with the snooze button.
For more information on Peter McGraw visit his page: http://www.petermcgraw.org/
For more information on his book see: http://humorcode.com/
- Viewpoint: Why I’m Leaving Academia
- Viewpoint: A Great Research Paper Explains A Lot, Not Everything
- Derek Rucker – Shaky Camera Interview on Doctoral Consortiums
- Viewpoint: How Scientists Can Get the Media’s Attention
- Viewpoint: Never Say “Isn’t That Just Cognitive Dissonance?”
- Outside The Matrix: Paul Picciano
- In The Wild: Tom Wein
- Happy New Year from InDecision!
- Research Heroes: Shlomo Benartzi