"Here on ET we have a bunch of people that, on average, can't wrap their heads around simple bond calculations, option theory or probability. However, they feel qualified to argue economic theory or experimental psychology" it is obvious that either you wasted time in logic 101 or statistics 101 or never took a course in either or its equivalent. average qualities of respondents to ET are irrelevant in determining the validity of any particular response. even your hypothesis is unproven.
So, in short, you did not read the paper beyond the abstract (i.e. you did not see the actual experiments/studies and the data) but do feel qualified to argue about it. It was a general statement about the tendencies among ET posters - this is not the first time I see ignorance breeding overconfidence. Why, do you feel that you are an outlier to the general set of ET members? Regarding the hypothesis, it's pretty intuitive. Stress impedes cognitive function. It's a natural effect - at the limit, fight or flight reaction does not really allow for deep thoughts. Kaneman has shown this, among many other people, in humans. It has also been very well demonstrated in animals. It's not a far reaching extension to hypothesize that poverty induces stress by increasing uncertainty about "immediate sustenance". I need to read the paper to get a better sense of what experiments/studies they have done to prove this hypothesis. I doubt the paper has anything to do with liberal/conservative views - from my perspective it's a fairly interesting direction for behavioral fiance/economics.
sle : remember this is "social" research. There is a reason why "social" researchers fight very hard to try to put the adjectif sciences around. Ask yourself why. One important point : have they done the same study in Asia. I am sure you know that India is very much different from China for instance in many aspects. Could very different conclusions be found ?
"Why, do you feel that you are an outlier to the general set of ET members?" my response to you is proof in itself. "Regarding the hypothesis, it's pretty intuitive. Stress impedes cognitive function. It's a natural effect " really. perhaps it is like wine. 2 glass of wines daily are life prolonging but more wine has diminishing to negative effects. perhaps some stress is necessary for optimal performance. your crude characterization of people on ET is informative and does not put u among the elite.
Ok, it's good to know that you think you are exceptional! Let's just hope you have the knowledge to prove it. I don't see how sympathetic nervious system responce can be positive for optimal cognitive performance and SNS responce is one of the main effects of stress. Stress might force you to work harder, sure, but it will have negative effect on the cognitive function. The paper is talking about cognitive ability, not about hard work or motivation. If you have different hypothesis, why don't you do some research and publish it in Science or maybe Nature? Otherwise, your argument is nothing more then hand-waving, while my statement is suppored by solid research. I am a simple guy that is trying to make money day in and day out, the only thing that differentiates me from an average retail trader is a slightly better education/experience and larger sizes of capital/risk. Never been a part of the "elite" and never will.
pretty much. live long enuf, read a lot of research, you will get the drift. usually, research is another way of promoting an agenda, usually with data manipulation and twisted facts. research could contradict each other. today, research will say one thing. 10 years later, it might say the opposite.
I agree with you. I didn't bother saying what you have well said. I just said that it's probably something else than poverty that impedes cog. function. So, it's not poverty per se that impedes c.f. It's stress. The research title is misleading. It's like saying that if you live in USA, you will be overweight. (2/3 of people in USA are at least overweight.)
Lost a lil bit of confidence in research. Researcher fired: Think tank fires Syria researcher cited by Kerry, McCain Researcher fired: A non-partisan think tank has fired researcher Elizabeth O'Bagy for misrepresenting her academic record, but they stand by her research, the group said. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest...-fires-Syria-researcher-cited-by-Kerry-McCain
SLE - some posts in this thread appear to support the hypothesis. Nitro - Correlation doesn't imply causation. There could be other factors like the quality of food or quality of friends for example. Interestingly enough, IMO, the reverse statement is also true.