Research articles

  1. Baader-Meinhof Effect

It has got a typical name and that is for sure. Even if you have never heard of it, the probability is that you have experienced this fascinating phenomenon, otherwise you will soon experience it.

If to be stated in one line, Baader-Meinhof phenomenon is a frequency bias. If you see  something new, at least it is new to you. It might be a word, a breed of dog, a particular sort of house or simply it can be anything. You might notice that you are conscious of that thing everywhere you go.

In reality, there’s no increase in occurrence of that thing. It’s just that you have started to notice it more.

We have all been there. You heard a song for the primary time just the opposite day. Now you are hearing it everywhere you are going. In fact, you can’t seem to escape it. Just ask yourself whether it is the song or is it you. If the song just hits your favorite on the charts and is getting tons of play, it is sensible that you are hearing it many times . But if it is an old song and you have only recently become conscious of it, you will be within the grasp of the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon.

It is actually the difference between something  happening a lot and something you have started to detect a lot.

Baader-Meinhof phenomenon, or Baader-Meinhof effect, is when your consciousness of something increases. This leads you to believe it is actually happening more whether that is not the case.

It is also known as:-

  • Frequency illusion
  • Recency illusion
  • Selective attention bias


You might also hear it is called red car syndrome. Last week you decided that you are going to buy a red car to stand out from the crowd. Now every time you pull into a parking lot, you are surrounded by red cars.

There are no more red cars this week than there were last week. Strangers didn’t run out and buy red cars to gaslight you. It is just that since you made the decision, your brain is drawn to more and more red cars.

Baader-Meinhof phenomenon in medical diagnosing

You always want your doctor to have lots of experience so they can easily interpret symptoms and test results. Pattern recognition is vital to a lot of diagnoses but frequency bias can cause you to see a pattern where it is not there..

Baader-Meinhof in marketing

You have seen many ads in your social media account. They keep on popping up while you are surfing . Going viral is many marketing guru’s dreams.

Seeing some ad appear again and again can lead to the assumption that it is more advantageous or more popular than it is. Maybe it actually is a new trend and lots of people are buying the product or it could just seem that way.

  1. Bystander Effect

The term bystander effect mentions the phenomenon during which the larger the amount of individuals present, the less likely people are to help an individual in distress. When a crisis situation occurs, observers are more likely to need action if there are few or no other witnesses. Being a part of an outsized crowd makes it so no single person has got to take responsibility for an action (or inaction).

If you saw somebody else in trouble, would you merely walk on? That depends totally on what percentage people are around. The more folks that are present, the less inclined you will be to make reactions. This is the bystander effect, discovered by psychologists Bibb Latané and John Darley following the 1964 Kitty Genovese murder in Newyork City.

Genovese was stabbed to death outside her apartment and  none of the neighbours reacted regardless of  being fully aware of what was happening . one of the neighbors called the police while others did not react too much. One of the neighbors wife stopped him to call the police. She just said someone else would have called him.

Some experiments by Latané and Darley disclosed that the time taken by the person present over there in the room depends upon the reaction of the other person present. Studies also suggested that while 70 per cent would help a lady in pain once they were the sole witness and only about 40 per cent offered help when other people were present.

The 2 main factors come under bystander effect-

  1. The diffusion of responsibility which means with many persons present in the situation, the responsibility will be divided among the group of persons and no one will feel that it is down to them to do anything in the situation. 
  2. The other is our desire to develop and follow the actions of others. When nobody else does anything, it is easier to feel that it isn’t necessary or maybe appropriate  to require action. Emergency situations are often unclear or chaotic and that we tend to seem to others to make a decision on the right action.
  3.  Mcgurk effect

McGurk effect may be a cross-modal effect and illusion that results from conflicting information coming from different senses, namely sight and hearing.

The effect was discovered by Harry McGurk and John MacDonald, and was published in Nature in 1976. The illusion can be observed when one is asked to watch a video of lip movements alongside listening to sounds uttered, apparently by the same person whose lip movements one is watching. If the lip movements and sounds don’t match.Example, if the lip movements indicate a “ba-ba” sound, whereas the auditory information is that of “ga-ga”,one will typically experience an illusory third sound “da-da”. McGurk and MacDonald hypothesise that the effect is thanks to the very fact that the brain is trying to form a “best guess”, given the knowledge that’s coming from different senses is contradictory. The effect is reported to be particularly salient when the standard of auditory information is poor, during which case the visual information trumps the auditory information (Massaro & Cohen 2000).

McGurk effect is philosophically interesting because it highlights the difficulties surrounding the question of the way to individuate sensory modalities. The traditional view, attributed to Aristotle, and taught to just about every schoolchild in early years of education, is that humans have five senses: sight, hearing, smell, touch and taste. The traditional view has often been amid the view that these senses work separately and may be studied in isolation, as they process distinct sorts of sensory information. Both of these views are now largely overturned. See Macpherson (2011a) for a philosophical discussion of what sensory modalities there are and how they can be individualized or distinguished from one another, although alternative perspectives are given in Nudds (2004) and Richardson (2013). The existence (and abundance) of cross-modal illusions and cross-modal effects on perceptual experience puts pressure on the view that the senses work separately and can be studied in isolation. Much work has been administered on this subject of psychology. See for instance, Stein (2012). Likewise, philosophers also are considering what this suggests for brooding about the kinds of experience that there are often . See, for example, Macpherson (2011b) and Richardson (2014).

How general is the McGurk effect?

  1. The effect works on perceivers with all language backgrounds
  2. The effect works on young infants.
  3. The effect works when the visual and auditory components are from speakers of various genders.
  4. The effect works with highly reduced face images.
  5. The effect works when observers are unaware that they’re watching a face.
  6. The effect works when observers touch rather than look at the face.
  7. The effect works less well with vowels than consonants.
  8. The effect works less well with nonspeech pluck & bow stimuli.
  9. The effect works better with some consonant combinations than others.

4) Reverse psychology

It is commonly making a person do something by telling them that they are doing the opposite.A common sort of reverse psychology is to forbid an action. For example saying a person that you are doing the thing wrong but actually you know that you want him to do right by telling the opposite.If they claim they are going to do something, you will express doubt that they are going to do that . They then need to claim they are going to roll in the hay (and then actually do it) to prove you wrong.

If the opposite person is probably going to believe you will use reverse psychology, you will choose a reverse-reverse effect by suggesting what you would like them to try to do , but perhaps in a slant and non-obvious way.


  • A father tells his son that he cannot buy a present for his sister. The son went and bought a beautiful present for his sister.
  • A person who is fed up with his friend who never helps him. He decided to tell him that he didn’t help me. The friend helps him.
  • A shy guy is provoked into asking a woman out when a lover suggests he’s just not curious about girls.


  • Reverse psychology is more likely to achieve success with people that have a high need for control. Disobedient teenagers who naturally do the other of what their parents say are classic targets, as are people with narcissistic or maybe psychopathic tendencies.
  • Doing a reversal also can be used as an intentional stimulation to wake the opposite person up to their obstructive stance. This requires them to think about what is said, which is quite different to the normal provocation of reactance which works best when they are in an emotional, unthinking state.
  • When the opposite person may guess reverse psychology is getting used, then reversing the reverse could also be useful.It can help if it seems that you simply don’t care what decision they really make.
  • There is a danger of reverse psychology backfiring, like when the person realizes that you simply try to control them and deliberately follows your suggestion as indefinite revenge. Even if they believe you, they will also judge you as bad for not making good decisions.
  • Another danger is that there is often more than one alternative to what you are suggesting and the person chooses just something else rather than the ‘opposite’ that you intend.
  • Rather than cause reactance, you will give indication that you simply aren’t forcing their decision, but still implant the suggestion during a self-reversing denial.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s