It was nighttime, a soft summer night, and I was standing onEighty-second Street and Second Avenue, in Manhattan, with my wife andanother couple. We were in the midst of saying goodbye on the smallisland between the bike lane and the avenue when a bike whooshed by,soundless and very fast. I had been back in New York for only a week. Asis always the case when I arrive after a period of months away, I wastuned to any change in the citys ambient hum. When that bike flew past,I felt a shift in the familiar rhythm of the city as I had known it. Iwatched the guy as he travelled on the green bike path. He was speedingdown the hill, but he wasnt pedalling and showed no sign of exertion.For a moment, the disjunction between effort and velocity confused me.Then it dawned on me that he was riding an electric bike.

Like most of the guys you see with electric bikes in New York, he was afood-delivery guy. Their electric bikes tend to have giant batteries,capable of tremendous torque and horsepower. They are the vanguard, thevisible part of the iceberg, but they are not indicative of what is tocome. Their bikes are so conspicuously something other than a bike, forone thing. For another, the utility of having a battery speed up yourdelivery is so straightforward that it forecloses discussion. What liesahead is more ambiguous. The electric bikes for sale around the city now havebatteries that are slender, barely visible. The priority is not speed somuch as assisted living.

I grew up as a bike rider in Manhattan, and I also worked as a bikemessenger, where I absorbed the spartan, libertarian,every-man-for-himself ethos: you need to get somewhere asfast as possible, and you did what you had to do in order to get there.The momentum you give is the momentum you get. Bike messengers were oncefaddish for their look, but its this feeling of solitude andself-reliance that is, along with the cult of momentum, the essentialelement of that profession. The citywith its dedicated lanes andgreenwaysis a bicycle nirvana compared with what it once was, and I havehad to struggle to remake my bicycle life in this new world of goodcitizenship. And yet, immediately, there was something about electricbikes that offended me. On a bike, velocity is all. That guy on theelectric bike speeding through the night was probably going to have tobreak hard at some point soon. If he wanted to pedal that fast to attaintop speed on the Second Avenue hill that sloped down from the highEighties, then it was his right to squander it. But he hadnt worked togo that fast. And, after he brakedfor a car, or a pedestrian, or aturnhe wouldnt have to work to pick up speed again.

Its a cheat! my friend Rob Kotch, the owner of Breakaway CourierSystems, said, when I got him on the phone and asked him about electricbikes. Everyone cheats now. They see Lance Armstrong do it. They seethese one-percenters making a ton of money without doing anything. Sothey think, why do I have to work hard? So now its O.K. for everyone tocheat. Everyone does it. It took me a few minutes to realize thatKotchs indignation on the subject of electric bikes was not coming fromhis point of view as a courier-system owneralthough there is plenty ofthat. (He no longer employs bike messengers as a result of the cost ofworkers compensation and the competition from UberEATS, which doesnthave to pay workers comp.) Kotchs strong feelings were drivenso tospeakby his experience as someone who commutes twenty-three miles on a bicycle eachday, between his home in New Jersey and his Manhattan office. Hehas been doing this ride for more than twenty years.

There is this one hill just before the G. W. Bridge that is a goodsix-degree grade, and it goes for half a mile, he told me. If youcommute to Manhattan on your bike, you have to find a way to get up thathill. A lot of people are just not willing to commit to that muchexercise on their way to work.

Recently, though, he has noticed a lot of people cruising effortlesslyup the hill on electric bikes.

Its a purely pragmatic decision for them, he said. Its just a muchcheaper and faster way of getting to work than a car. So they use anelectric bike.

He described a guy on one of those one-wheeled, Segway-like things.

He passed me going up that hill, then took the long way around to thebridge. I use a shortcut. I thought I got rid of him, but when I got tothe bridge, there he washe was going that fast!

I laughed and told him about a ride I took across the Manhattan Bridgethe previous night, where several electric bikes flew by me. It was not,I insisted, an ego thing about who is going faster. Lots of people whoflew by me on the bridge were on regular bikes. It was a rhythm thing, Isaid. On a bike, you know where the hills are, you know how to time thelights, you calibrate for the movement of cars in traffic, other bikes,pedestrians. The electric bike was a new velocity on the streets.

And yet, for all our shared sense that something was wrong with electricbikes, we agreed that, by any rational measure, they are a force forgood.

The engines are efficient, they reduce congestion, he said.

Fewer cars, more bikes, I said.

We proceeded to list a few other Goo-Goo virtues. (I first encounteredthis phraseshort for good-government typesin Robert Caros The PowerBroker,about Robert Moses, the man who built New York for the automobile.)

If its such a good thing, why do we have this resentment? I asked.

He wasnt sure, he said. He confessed that he had recently tried a friends electric bike and found the experience appealing to thepoint of corruption.

Its only a matter of time before I get one, he said ruefully. Andthen Ill probably never get on a real bike again.

In some ways, the bike-ification of New York City can be seen as theultimate middle finger raised to Robert Moses, a hero for building somany parks who then became a crazed highway builder who wanted todemolish part of Greenwich Village to make room for a freeway. But areall the bikes a triumph for his nemesis, Jane Jacobs, and her vision ofcohesive neighborhoods anchored by street life, by which she meant theworld of pedestrians on the sidewalk?

The revolution under Bloomberg was to see the city as a place wherepedestrians come first, a longtime city bike rider and advocate I know,who didnt wish to be named, said. This electric phenomenonundermines this development. The great thing about bikes in the city isthat, aesthetically and philosophically, you have to be present and awareof where you are, and where others are. When you keep introducing moreand more power and speed into that equation, it goes against thephilosophy of slowing cars downof traffic calmingin order to makethings more livable, he said.

Some bicycle-advocacy groups are cautiously optimistic about electricbikes, or even cautiously ecstatic. E-bikes have the potential todemocratize bikes for millions of Americans, Paul Steely White, theexecutive director of Transportation Alternatives, said, adding that hewas bullish on e-bikes, though it has to be done right. I get hislogic. Think of all the people who will be drawn onto bicycles by thepromise of an assist when going uphill. The most important factor forbike safety, more than bikes lanes or helmets or lights, is the numberof cyclists on the streets. The more people who ride bikes, the saferthe conditions for everyone on a bike. (Hence the name of the bikeadvocacy group Critical Mass.) In this equation, bikes are the rarespecies that can be introduced into an urban ecosystem for the purposeof discouraging cars.

I went into a bike shop and asked about the electric bikes for sale: twothousand and change each.

We dont call them electric, the salesman said. We call it pedalassist.

I asked if he had tried one. He gave me a huge smile. He had, and heloved it.

Why? I asked.

It looks like youre pedalling, but you are not doing nothing.

A few weeks after this exchange, Iwas in Paris. There are bikes everywhere, often in the lanereserved for buses, and cars proceed with great civility toward peopleon two wheels or two feet, at least compared to New York. The other day,while pedalling down Boulevard Saint-Germain on a Vlibthe Parisversion of a Citi Bikea woman in a dress with short blond hair cruisedpast me, her stylish bag flung over her shoulder. I immediately thoughtof that sense of joyous stealth or imposture implied by the bikesalesman in New York. She was pedalling, but there was no question thather speed and momentum derived from something other than her effort. Westopped together at a red light. When it turned green, she placidlysailed ahead and out of sight.

I immediately searched out an electric bike to rent. I found a store onthe Rue des coles that sold stately Holland bikes, both electric andregular. The guy agreed to rent one to me, and I began sailing aroundtown. I found the effect narcotic and delightful: on a flat road, Imoved faster than I did on a normal bike, with less exertion. Downhillswere no different than a normal bike. Uphill, I maintained speed, withjust a tiny bit more exertion. Now and then I could feel the happy bumpof electric power. Assisted living was so pleasant! The only problem wasthat, like some mouse in a cognitive-behavior experiment, I began tocrave that bump. It was the effect of the assist I wanted; it was thefeeling of being assisted.

This is an issue of shared values and perspectives, my bike-advocatefriend said. This whole thing is about attentiveness. How do you dealwith technology and the frailties of being a human being? Bicycles aremechanical augmentation of walking, really. It gets pretty etherealwhyis it bad to have a motor when you are already using gears? Who gives ashit if you are using a motor?

But, I feel there is a clear line between human power and non-humanpower, he added. I think there should be a very simple classification:human-powered or not human-powered. And if you are not human-powered,you should not be using human-powered infrastructure. You should be inthe street. E-bikes being licensed as motorized vehicles is good.E-bikes being in human-powered infrastructure is no good. . . .

At which point we arrive at the insidious genius of our iPhone, Google,A.I. era, in which the distinction between human behavior that is andisnt assisted becomes almost impossible to detect, and thereforeto enforce.

This parallel found expression one afternoon in Paris, while I was on the electricbike in route along the Seine, way at the edge of town. The road wasmostly deserted, the riverfront lined with shrubs and trash. I took outmy phone to take a picture of the scene as I cruised along and then,creature of my era, I pressed the little icon that brought my own faceonto the screen. I took a selfie. When I lowered the phone, I saw anolder man walking along the river, waving at me in a strange way.

He had white hair, wore a rumpled suit, and held his waving hand in apeculiar position that I now realize is how one would hold a pocketmirror if you were trying to make it reflect a beam of light. At thetime, I only noticed that there was something patronizing about his bodylanguage and wave, like he was trying to get the attention of a child.Before I had to time to even consider waving back, he turned his palmtoward himself. With impeccably expressive poise, he mimed an orangutanstaring sadly at his own reflection. I sailed onward, chastised andfrozen-faced, moving a bit faster than I otherwise would have. I didnthave time to react. He is still vivid to me in this pose, his bodylanguage and mopey face indelible. You always remember the picture youdidnt get to takebecause its preservation in memory depends entirelyon you.

View post:
The Electric-Bike Conundrum - The New Yorker

Glamping with goats and the eclipse. Pet safety and the eclipse. Have you reached peak eclipse yet? If your answer is Nope! well, weve got some more pertinent eclipse information for the animal lovers in the audience.

Zoos across the country have been curiously preparing for Aug. 21. These wildlife sanctuaries all agree that the eclipse will be a learning opportunity, and many are enthusiastically opening their gates and inviting the public to watch the solar event.Most are unsure how their wards will react to the phenomenon, but some have offered predictions about which animals may exhibit the most unusual behavior.

According to the Little Rock Zoo in Arkansas, some drama may ensue among five species in particular. Education Curator Katie Holloway tells THV11 they include barn owls, armadillos, sloths, elephants and chimps. PEOPLE rounded out the list with five more compelling species.

1. Barn Owls (and other birds, especially song birds)

Although theyre usually asleep in the afternoon, these nocturnal birds might awaken and start looking for food. The Wausau Daily Herald says nocturnal birds, including a variety of owls and nighthawks, have reportedly become active, taken flight or called out during total eclipses. Starlings and other birds may return to their evening roosts, as will fowl and pigeons.

2. Three Ringed (or Three Band) Armadillos

The Little Rock Zoos expert says these armadillos can jump up to three or four feet vertically and its likely to occur!

3. Sloths

Good morning!

A post shared by Krista (@yellowkray) on Jun 19, 2016 at 6:22am PDT

These slow-moving sweethearts might get hungry and go on a feeding frenzy, although it will take up to 30 days for sloths to digest whatever they happen to eat during the eclipse. (We suggest watching the eclipse along with them at Oregons Zoological Wildlife Conservation Center.)

4. Chimps (and other primates)

The Little Rock Zoo says that chimps (and primates in general) are capable of overreacting to all kinds of things, so it expects these guys to go bananas. However, Sean Putney, the Senior Director of Zoological Operations at the Kansas City Zoo,predicts the more intelligent and intellectual animals will respond in ways that are more human-like: Will they be smart enough to know that this is going to be over in a couple of minutes? Or will they start to move towards their evening quarters as well thinking its time for bed? Itll be interesting to see.

The Mother Nature Network recounts a story about chimps who climbed to the top of their structure and turned their heads skyward during a 1984 eclipse.

5. Elephants

Our countdown to the New Year continues with Nos. 4, 3 and 2 of our #Top10 Best of 2016 list. Landing at No. 4, the opening of #AlaskanAdventure back in June. The splashgrounds 18-foot-tall humpback whale, 75 bronze sculptures, including jumping salmon, puffins, orcas and brown bears, and 200-plus misters and water spray nozzles were one of the highlights of our summer AND yours! The critically endangered #SaltCreektigerbeetle, one of #NorthAmericas most endangered insects, finds itself at No. 3. Our Butterfly and Insect Pavilion crew have been helping this local since 2011, working with the @usfws, the @negameandparks and other partners to collect adult #beetles in the wild, shepherd them through the egg-laying process at the Zoo and fish their newly hatched larvae from tiny burrows in a custom sand mixture. Our crew produced 27 larvae for reintroduction into the wild at the start of the project. Numbers have since soared to more than 1,300 larvae, enough to boost reintroduction numbers and establish a Zoo-based assurance colony. At No. 2, the most highly anticipated animal arrival at the Zoo, probably ever: the arrival of six African #elephants in Omaha. On March 11, the world watched as 17 African elephants flew across the globe to the United States in a joint mission to rescue the animals from drought-stricken Swaziland. One male and five females call the African Grasslands at our Zoo home, six at Wichitas @sedgwickcountyzoo and five at @dallaszoo. Just look at them now! #OmahaZoo #2016

A post shared by Omaha's Zoo & Aquarium (@theomahazoo) on Dec 30, 2016 at 3:13pm PST

The Little Rock Zoo predicts that elephants will make the most noise during the eclipse. They tend to trumpet when things are out of the ordinary, so they may sound off on Monday. Dan Cassidy, the general curator at Omahas Henry Doorly Zoo and Aquarium, suggests watching the elephants as well. He says if its dark enough, they may go back into their barns. Dr. Joel Parrott, president and CEO of the Oakland Zoo, seems to agree. He says that the smarter animals, like elephants, will be more interesting to watch. Dr. Don Moore of the Oregon Zoo is on board with this, too. He says the pachyderms mightthink its dinnertime and start looking for food.

6. Giraffes

The Henry Doorly Zoo and Aquarium in Omaha says the giraffes may behave similarly to elephants and head back to their barns, thinking that nighttime has descended.

7. Whales and 8. Dolphins

Once again, the Henry Doorly Zoo and Aquarium predicts unusual behavior, this time amongst sea mammals like whales and dolphins. To test the waters, so to speak, Tradewinds Charters out of Depoe Bay, Oregon (known for its year-round pod of gray whales), is offering a two-hour whale-watching tour during the eclipse. And according to Time, Dr. Douglas Duncan of the Fiske Planetarium at the University of Colorado says he witnessed whales and dolphins act strangely in the Galapagos during a 1998 eclipse. He told Time thatas the sky darkened, about 20 of the marine mammals surfaced, arching in and out of the water.

9. Llamas

#llamasofinstagram

A post shared by Derek Verzuh (@derek_verzuh) on Jun 14, 2017 at 7:02pm PDT

Dr. Duncan also told Time that hes witnessed llamas act strangely during a 1994 total solar eclipse in Bolivia. He says a pack of llamas suddenly seemed to show interest in the sky, claiming that there were none of the animals around while a group of people observed the event, when out of nowhere, about 15 llamas gathered around them during the partial phase of the eclipse and gazed at the sky along with the humans during the totality of it. For the life of me, I cant tell you where they came from, he said. When the total eclipse ended, the llamas kind of got themselves into a rough line and they marched away.

10. Lions (and other big cats)

Dr. Don Moore of the Oregon Zoo thinks that during the eclipse, lions may act more predatory or start looking to be fed. Then again, lions and tigers spend up to 18 hours a day sleeping, so they may never even notice.

In general, many zoos are inviting people to visit during the eclipse and just see what happens.Nashville Zoo invites visitors to watch its new rhinos in particular, using the #NashvilleZoo or #NZooEclipse hashtags. According to WKRN,the rhinos are the zoos newest animals and they have a schedule they go by, coming out of their barn at 9 a.m. and returning at 6 p.m. Before they came here, they were in Africa in a reserve where they spent most of their time outside day and night, so does that change with their behavior? Does it change with light level? Or are they going to be affected by this kind of experience or are they not? Itll be really interesting to see, said Jim Bartoo, the zoos marketing director.

Finally,Jeff Bullock, Director of the Greenville Zoo says this,[The eclipse] just throws everybody off. Animals that are on a diurnal structure will go to bed (during the eclipse). Animals that are used to being up at night will get more active We get a lot of owls, bats, rats and possums, he said of the local wildlife. We may see some of those that we dont usually see when the sun is out.

The rest is here:
Zoo Animals - PEOPLE.com

Californias plan to cut energy consumption by 80 percent by 2050 cannot be achieved with current proposed policy changes because most solutions focus on changing technologies rather than changing behavior, a new UC Davis study suggests.

With all the advances in building more energy-efficient air conditioners, better-insulated homes and cars that run on less or no fuel, consumers actually have increased their energy consumption. The expected energy savings have been outweighed by people living in larger homes with more appliances.

Add to this the phenomenon of a population that has shifted from non-users or people who used fans and open windows to cool their homes, for example to users. Those are the consumers enticed by marketing of high-efficiency air conditioners with consumer rebates, the study said.

What is needed is policy that focuses on reducing the overall consumption of energy, according to the study. To do this requires more sociological research that focuses on consumer behavior.

The average person doesnt think about how many kilowatts or the unit price of energy theyre consuming when they turn on the lights or heat up the stove, said Bridget Clark, a UCD doctoral candidate in sociology and author of the study. For most people energy is essentially invisible, just as people are essentially invisible in most energy research.

Clark presented her paper, Getting to 80 Percent: Mobilizing Feedback, Lifestyles, and Social Practices Research to Shape Residential Energy Consumption at the American Sociological Association annual meeting in Montreal on Tuesday.

In her paper, Clark looked at the goals of recently passed legislation mandating that the state cut its greenhouse-gas emissions by 40 percent of 1990 levels by 2030, and a further reduction to 80 percent by 2050.

Along with these cuts are authorizations for policy changes, technology improvements and other measures, such as rebates and upgrades in the electrical grid, that would help California achieve its goals.

But policy changes and technology improvements wont work, she argues, mostly because people still desire to be comfortable in a cool (or warm) room, have convenient ways to cook food, and have lighting in their homes they consider to be warm and pleasing.

Instead, Californians should consider interventions similar to those undertaken elsewhere, such as in Japan, the paper suggests. In 2005, as a means to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, the Japanese government mandated that all government buildings could not be heated or cooled when temperatures are between 20 and 28 degrees Celsius (68-82 F).

But, the government also changed employee dress codes. Marketing consultants were hired to create campaigns to transform the meaning of smart and appropriate work attire to encourage more layering in the winter and lighter fabrics in the summer. Within two years of implementation, the so-called Cool Biz program led to an estimated 1.14 million-ton reduction in emissions.

While current solutions that seek to increase energy efficiency of various technologies, invest in renewables and regulate emissions are important first steps these current strategies will be insufficient to make the deeps cut that the state is mandating, the author concluded. Instead, using social practice research, the government should take steps to better implement policy solutions that incentivize and change human behavior.

It is time to stop treating the end-use consumer as just a barrier to energy-efficiency measures, Clarke said. Through deeper examinations of the ways in which energy consumption is socially and culturally determined we can begin to construct more holistic policies that take into account why and how people actually consume energy.

UC Davis News

See original here:
'Getting to 80 percent' on energy cutbacks requires behavior change - Davis Enterprise

Executive Summary

Many people have asserted that biological differences can explain the gender gap in math, engineering, and science. To address these claims, we need to examine three interrelated questions: Are there gender differences in outcomes achieved by men and women? If so, is there evidence that they are due to biological differences? Is there stronger evidence that they are due to bias? A review of research finds that the evidence on biological differences is too thin to explain the large gender gaps in leadership roles and STEM careers, while the evidence for gender bias driving career outcomes is much stronger.

Former Google engineer James Damore was hardly the first person to argue that biological differences between men and women determine career outcomes. Many people even smart, science-minded ones have asserted that biological differences can explain the gender gap in math, engineering, and science. A 2005 Gallup pollfound that 21% of Americans believed men were better than women in terms of their math and science abilities (though 68% believed men and women were about the same). The fact that this argument keeps coming up means that we need to engage with it and clarify which claims are supported by evidence and which are not.

To address these claims, we need to examine three interrelated questions: Are there gender differences in outcomes achieved by men and women? If so, is there evidence that they are due to biological differences? Is there stronger evidence that they are due to bias?

To answer the first question: Yes, there are gender differences in the participation of men and women in some STEM fields among college students, and these differences do contribute to the underrepresentation of women in STEM professions. Women are also significantly underrepresented in top leadership positions.

But are these outcome differences due to biological differences? While there are (of course) biological differences between the sexes, social science has shown that men and women are more similar than different on a wide range of characteristics, from personality to ability to attitude and that these factors have a larger effect on career outcomes than biology does.

My former colleague Janet Hyde, a developmental psychologist and an authority on gender differences, reviewed 46 meta-analyses that had been conducted on psychological gender differences from1984 to2004. (A meta-analysis examines the results from a large number of individual studies and averages their effects to get the closest approximation ofthe true effect size.) Hydes review spanned studies looking at differences between men and women in cognitive abilities, communication, personality traits, measures of well-being, motor skills, and moral reasoning.

She found that 78% of the studies in her sample revealed little to no difference in these measures between menand women; this supports her gender similarities hypothesis, which states that men and women are far more similar than they are different. The only large differences she found related to girls being better than boys in spelling and language, and testinghigher than boys on the personality variable of agreeableness/tendermindedness; boys tested higher than girls on motor performance, certain measures of sexuality (masturbation, casual attitudes about sex), and aggression. So there are some gender differences, but most are small to nonexistent.

But can these differences truly be classified as biological? Or are they due to differences in socialization? Its the old nature/nurture debate a debate that can be a false one because most human behavior involves complex interactions between genetic, environmental, and epigenetic influences. For example, one study that Damore cited did find gender differences in personality across cultures,but the researchers described the differences as relatively small to moderate and concluded that human developmentlong and healthy life, access to education, and economic wealthis a primary correlate of the gap between men and women in their personality traits.

And a review of studies on levels of prenatal exposure to testosterone found resultant differences in empathy, aggression, and toy preference between males and females, but found no significant differences in dominance/assertiveness or ability. Unless all of the differences in mens representation in STEM and leadership are the result of their lack of empathy, high levels of aggression, or toy preferences, there is little evidence that biological differences affect work-related outcomes. In fact, based on the research on leadership, we would expect to see that a lack of empathy and high levels of aggression would hurt a persons chances of becoming a successful leader, not help them.

On the other hand, there is a great deal of evidence to support the impact that environment has on gender differences in society. For example, a review of research on gender differences in math test scores shows that the already small effects have declined over time and tend to be greater in countries with less gender equality. In terms of behavior, a study by economists showed that in cultures where women are dominant, theytend to be more competitive than men. Meta-analytic evidence on gender differences in leadership aspirations showed that differences are decreasing over time women are closing the gap in terms of wanting to be leaders suggesting that the gap is more due to society than to biology.

Other data also contradicts the idea that women are biologically predisposed to lower levels of leadership. One meta-analysis of 95 studies found that female leaders tend to be rated by others as significantly more effective than male leaders, and this effect is stronger after 1996. (On the flip side, men rated themselves as significantly better leaders than women, particularly before 1982.) But thisdata does tell us something about the impact of gender roles (as women tend to rate themselves as less effective leaders) and societal changes (since the effects are diminishing over time).

If the evidence on biological differences is too thin to explain the large gender gaps in leadership roles and STEM careers, is the evidence on gender bias any stronger?

Several studies have shown that employers do discriminate against women and minorities. One robust vein of research uses rsums to test how people respond to different candidates with identical qualifications. For example, in one study, professors rated the identical applications of fictional male or female students. When a male name was used, faculty members rated them as significantly more competent and hirable than the female applicant, and they offered the male applicant a higher starting salary and more career mentoring. The reason for this was that women were perceived as less competent by the faculty members; faculty who had greater bias against women rated female students worse. The effect sizes here were moderate to large, unlike those shown in sex-differences studies. And numerous other studies have hadsimilar results, not just in hiring but in promotion rates, performance evaluations, getting credit for good work, and project assignments.

This body of research also shows why advocating for a pure meritocracy rather than explicitly pursuing diversity doesnt help companies overcome bias. In fact, companies that highlight meritocracy may actually cause greater bias against women: Experimental studies show that when an organization is referred to as a meritocracy, individuals in managerial positions favor male employees over equally qualified female employees and give them larger rewards. The author theorizes that calling the organization a meritocracy may create moral credentialing (when ones track record as egalitarian makes them feel justified in making nonequalitarian decisions) or greater self-perceived objectivity, giving them license to discriminate against women.

Calling for a meritocracy and denying that workplace inequality stillexists captures what scientists refer to as modern sexism.Modern sexism is characterized by beliefs that discrimination against women is a thing of the past, antagonism towards women who are making political and economic demands, and resentment about special favors for women. Notably, individuals espousing such views do not regard these notions as sexist or unfair andconclude that, given the even playing field upon which the two sexes now compete, the continuing under-representation of women in certain roles (e.g., management positions) must be a result of womens own choices or inferiority as opposed to discrimination.

In his memo, Damore wrote, We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism, and that we should assume people have good intentions. But the gender gap in the workforce can be explained by sexism, just as the race gap can be explained by racism. When workplace practices aim to support underrepresented groups, that does not mean they are unfairly biased against overrepresented groups. It just means that we need more than good intentions to change biased behavior.

We all want systems that are fair. But we need to consider how to make them fair for everyone.

Read the original post:
What the Science Actually Says About Gender Gaps in the Workplace - Harvard Business Review

A Chow pup ran frightened under a shed and could not be coaxed out, reads an observation recordedduring a total solar eclipse in 1932. The observation is one of hundreds collected during the eclipse that year on the behavior of animals during the rare event. When day suddenly turns to night during the total solar eclipse on Aug. 21, most animalsaside from humans wont have any idea what is transpiring. Some animals, primarily those that reside outside, will notice the change but pets that live indoors likely wont even notice the eclipse.

Once the moon moves between the sun and Earth and briefly blocks the suns light from reaching anything in the path of totality those animals and people in the path will experience night-like conditions. Animals that live outdoors might exhibit slightly different behavior than usual during the eclipse, but its hard to know what to expect.

I think its gonna vary between I would say animal to animal, organism to organism, with the larger animals or larger organisms, except for humans, not really being that affected, Sergio Arispe, an animal biologist and assistant professor at the Oregon State University extension service in eastern Oregon, told International Business Times.

Large grazing animals like cows will likely act normally during the eclipse. Photo: Nicolas Vigier/Flickr

The eclipse will cross14 states in the continental United States, first in Oregon cutting right across the country to South Carolina before it heads out into the Atlantic. The states it will be crossing are full of open space and farmland where livestock and wild animals are staples, but Arispe doesnt think the eclipse will impact them much. When it comes to larger animals, cattle, horses, livestock, sheep, deer Some of these animals are dependent on the sun from a reproductive standpoint, Arispe said, But thats not gonna be detrimental or effected in two minutes. Its gonna be so acute, so miniscule in the life of that animal that its not gonna affect those processes.

But smaller animals might present some out of the ordinary behaviors. In 1932, the United States saw a total solar eclipse just like the one expected next week. But the 1932 eclipse covered parts of the Northeast like Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusetts. During that eclipse the public, game wardens and naturalists all recorded observations about animals and their surroundings and submitted them for a journal article, said Arispe. This journal articlewas published in 1935 entitled Observations on the Behavior of Animals during the Total Solar Eclipse of August 31, 1932, and it can still be accessed online.

The moon eclipses the sun shortly before sunset. Photo: NASA/Bill Ingalls Multiple observations recorded during the eclipse note cricket activity, several observers even said the cricket noises were all they could hear during the eclipse, according to thearticle. Other observers including some beekeepers who noted that as the darkness increased and totality came closer their bees returned to their hives in larger groups and more and more rapidly than usual as if preparing for night time.

Household dogs were reported to exhibit all sorts of different behavior, one person reported that the dog seemed quieter than usual while another observer said their dog acted as it does when its time to turn in at night. The behavior of the dogs was so variable that it doesnt point to one specific behavior. House cats didnt exhibit any odd behavior either, In general no very obvious reaction appears that seems directly attributable to the eclipse, says thearticle.

While the observations are interesting to read through, theyre not exactly any indication of how animals will act this time around, These were individual observations and definitely not science, said Arispe. But if they were observed once, theres a chance they could occur again. I would say these are a few observations but they were observed. So theres a chance they could happen again... Arispe explained, I wouldnt dismiss what has been reported in the past.

But overall theres no particular behavior Arispe is on the lookout for. Honestly, theres no expectation that theres gonna be any behavior that could be measured, Arispe said.

The behaviors of some animals are unpredictable, but there is one species sure to alter its behavior drastically during the eclipse, that species being humans. Its the people thats gonna be effected, this is gonna be unprecedented in the number of people who will be observing and recording, he told IBT.

Safety glasses or a filter should be used to view the solar eclipse directly. Photo: National Parks Service/Flickr

Millions of people are expected to flock to the states where the eclipse will be visible in its totality, some are even spending hundreds or thousands of dollar on flights. That alone is an out-of-the-ordinary behavior. But some of those people also have certain activities planned for during the event. A group of people who believe in a connection between Christianity and marijuana are planning to burn oil in the countrys largest Roman Catholic Church in Washington, D.C., during the eclipse, reported U.S News and World Report. The oil will have THC, or the compound responsible for the high marijuana offers, in it.

Other religious groups like one in South Carolina will hold day-long rituals to relieve themselves of burdens from the past and bless the future. Using the eclipse as a way to sort of cleanse oneself. And guides for eclipse meditation or cleansing have been popping up online in preparation.

Some states in the path of totality have issuedwarnings that smoking marijuana is still illegal during the eclipse. The Wyoming Association of Sheriffs and Chiefs of Police posted a press release online warning that Wyomings laws around marijuana would be strongly enforced during the eclipse. Meanwhile smoke shops in Oregon, where the drug is legal, are gearing up for a spike in marijuana sales, according to Oregon Public Broadcasting.

Some people are planning activities a bit more eccentric than smoking while viewing the eclipse. Last week, an ad on Craigslist appeared in the Activity Partners section of the site posted by a self-identifying 40-year-old man. He was seeking a woman to conceive with during the eclipse but the ad has since been removed from the site.

All of these acts are far more out of the ordinary than a dog barking or hiding, crickets chirping or bees rushing to their hives. When it comes to animal behavior during the eclipse, humans are actually most likely to to go the extra mile, sometimes literally, and act different than usual.

See original here:
Will The Solar Eclipse Cause Strange Changes In Animal, Human Behavior? - International Business Times

Photo: Photos.com

Q. Im fascinated to see studies (such as Horses Ask Humans for Help With Unsolvable Tasks,) on horses possibly trying to communicate with humansits rather like scientists trying to tell us the world is flat when we can see perfectly well it isnt!

Most of the problem equine behaviors result from blinkered or ignorant humans not understanding what horses are desperately trying to tell them. For instance, Im bucking because the saddle pinches, Im kicking because you havent noticed Im saying youre hurting me, Im chewing my stable because Im sick to death of being cooped up, etc. My very hairy Minis push their heads at me only when they need their eyes cleaned; they and my horse vocally communicate using the same intonations as humans do; they complain if I dont feed them at the usual time. And my horse understands pointing directions to a fair extent.

My last horse got put in a different stable for a day, where the water basin was filled with rotting months-old crud. When I found him and opened the door, he grabbed the shoulder of my jacket and dragged me over to the corner in front of the basin to show me and indicate he was disgusted, very annoyed, and desperately thirsty. He drank nearly two buckets of fresh water when I offered it. How can any sensible person suggest that horses might be trying to tell us things?

All creatures who evolved to live in social groups must have the ability to communicate and often, if not always, between species. Prey animals know when predators are not interested in hunting them, they learn other species predatory calls, and many species will adopt and raise different species young and manage to communicate well enough. The more I see of this kind of scientific research, the less respect I have for the researchers, who must not be very observant or animal-orientated to doubt the obvious.

Gill Evans, via e-mail

A. I certainly can relate to your exasperation with researchers investigating a question that, to you, seems so obviously already known to anyone paying attention. Over my long career in horse research, I very often have been similarly frustrated when asked, wheres the scientific evidence? on topics in horse management and behavior that seemed to be obvious facts requiring no peer-reviewed scientific research to back them up. And there have been times it led to research that demonstrated the exact opposite of what I thought was the no-brainer interpretation.

The way scientific knowledge advances is to actually start with what seems like the most basic questions, formulate and then test hypotheses such as this, and report the results for further scientific scrutiny and refinement. In the case of interpreting animal behavior in terms of communication and the underlying cognitive processes, I can guarantee you that, as you say, not everyone sees the same thing, and the interpretations that seem just as obvious to individual observers vary widely. And without scientific knowledge, there is no way to know which interpretation among the many is correct. These different interpretations in scientific terms are essentially untested conflicting hypotheses.

I personally have come to realize that it is becoming more and more important to better understand equine cognition, particularly as it relates to horse-horse and horse-human behavioral interactions. Its not just trivial information, since our interpretation of a horses behavior and complexity of cognition and motivation often has welfare/safety implications both for the animal and for us. So these basic studies on equine cognition and communication, as silly as they may seem to you, really do need to be done. And the results need to be carefully scrutinized and scientifically refined for decades to come. I am looking forward to reading the full scientific report from the study you mentioned when it comes out. No doubt it will generate a lot of discussion among behavioral scientists, with most likely disagreement concerning the adequacy of the methods, the interpretation of results, and the validity of the conclusion. This is especially the case for a very new science such as this. That discussion/disagreement will hopefully stimulate further research.

Sue M. McDonnell, PhD, is a certified applied animal behaviorist and the founding head of the equine behavior program at the University of Pennsylvania's School of Veterinary Medicine. She is also the author of numerous books and articles about horse behavior and management.

The rest is here:
Studying the Obvious - TheHorse.com

The number one reason you should deal with that toxic person at work? Counterintuitively, says Joseph Grenny, business social scientist at VitalSmarts, you should do it because you deserve it. While some think confronting a toxic person is about sacrificing for the team or the greater cause, Grenny says its really about being responsible for your wellbeing and emotional health.

Being around people who are dysfunctional is a huge drain on our quality of life, says Grenny.

Grenny, co-author of Crucial Conversations, has seen it all when it comes to toxic co-workers: the conniving team member, the boss who bullies employees, the co-worker who always plays the victim.

If you have never worked with a toxic person, Grenny says to consider yourself lucky. While theres not a clinical definition for a toxic person, it could be someone who bullies, spreads gossip or is consistently negative. When someones behavior creates misery for others at work, chances are that person is toxic.

Group dysfunction

The problem usually isnt the toxic person, though. The problem often stems from the dozen people around the toxic person who enable the behavior to continue. Basically, toxic behavior continues in the workplace when theres active cooperation from people who think theyre victimsbut who are actually enablers.

The most important thing to remember is that youre responsible for your own boundaries, Grenny says. You have to decide what the effect is on you.

Sometimes toxicity is a passive-aggressive boss, for example. Grenny says he once sat down with a CEO for a coaching session. The CEO started going through his employee list. When he got to certain names, he told Grenny he wished he could fire them based on poor performance.

It struck me as oddbecause he can do that, Grenny says.

And yet, the CEO hadnt taken action. He spent years only wishing he could fire these employees, and instead punished them in other ways: He wouldnt make eye contact with themin meetings. He often cut them off when they spoke. Or he rolled his eyes while the employees had the floor.

This passive-aggressive approach sent a message in the team that created enormous conflict, says Grenny. Its surprising how many CEOs Ive worked with who run incredibly functional teams, but who dont deal with accountability.

Were all broken

Some people act out their drama on other people but arent self-aware enough to notice. The first thing you can do is increase their realization by providing a high-accountability environment in the office. The second thing? Admit we all need help sometimes.

All of us are broken. All of us are toxic at different times in different relationships. The best we can do where others will address their own brokenness is to hold boundaries with them, and also work on our own brokenness.

Grenny says the ideal workplace is an environment of vulnerable self-improvement. Being around emotionally healthy people offers rewards because everyone is constantly practicing personal reflection.

Its intoxicating, he says. It inspires everyone around them.

One of the most influential things Grenny learned in the last 30 years is this: The vast majority of human behavior problems dont stem from ability or motivation problems. Thats a huge insight, he says, because we tend to tell ourselves that someone knows what theyre doing when they misbehave. But its usually because the person doesnt possess the skill set to improve.

Most of us dont realize we need additional skills and cant fathom what they would be. High-accountability environments help people learn boundaries.

Speaking up

Grennys watched this boundary situation play out dozens of times, and he says when someone in a subordinate position holds their toxic boss accountable, they arent fired as often as you think.

It works far more often that it fails and it is remarkable to watch.

He once saw a doctor say something abusive to a nurse. Later, the nurse approached the doctor and asked if he had time to talk. She quoted his words and said she felt disrespected. She then asked for the doctors commitment that he wouldnt do it again. The nurse wasnt angry or hostile, just firm and clear.

And he looked like a whooped schoolboy. Rather than puffing up and invoking his position, he muttered an apology, and I never saw him behave impatiently toward [the nurse] again. Interestingly, he continued to behave inappropriately with other nurses who didnt hold boundaries around him, says Grenny.

Overall, if a toxic work situation doesnt improve, its time to reassess.

You have to make a decision. Whats more important: a steady paycheck or the quality of your life?

Im interviewing for a new job. How can I tell if a toxic culture exists at a company?Ask inappropriate questions to find out if its a good trust environment. I might say: What is one of the biggest growth areas for your boss? What do you have to do around here to get fired? When someone gets let down with someone else, what happens here? Ask about personally uncomfortable things. Poke the culture a little bit and see their reaction. Do they smile and answer easily? Or do they shift their eyes right and left before they answer? Joseph Grenny, VitalSmarts

Read the original post:
Finding the Antidote: How to neutralize the toxic member of your team - Utah Business

This trash was spread around a driveway on Galveston Street in the early morning hours, Aug. 9. A few other homes in the neighborhood also had their trash disturbed recently. Photo/Angela Denning

But the bears are just doing what comes natural, according to Rich Lowell, a biologist with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Bears naturally search for food and with over a thousand trash bins in town people are giving bears a lot of free meals.

KFSK reporter, Angela Denning, sat down with Lowell to talk about the bears. He says its human behavior that needs to change.

The local ADF&G office along with the Petersburg Police Department are running a live bear trap in town to try and relocate some bears. Lowell says if you see the trap in your neighborhood to keep pets and children away from it because the door is spring loaded and potentially dangerous. But, he adds, that it wont matter if bears are relocated if residents dont change their behavior. There will be more bears that come along and do the same thing.

This bear was sighted in Seversons Subdivision this month. Photo/Shauna Pitta-Rosse.

For information on electric fences for bears, check out this ADF&G webpage.

For more information about coexisting with bears, visit http://www.alaskabears.alaska.gov.

Link:
Bears in Petersburg trash a human problem to solve - KFSK

Alice H. Eagly, Northwestern University

(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.)

Alice H. Eagly, Northwestern University

(THE CONVERSATION) Its no secret that Silicon Valley employs many more men than womenin tech jobs. Whats much harder to agree on is why.

The recent anti-diversity memo by a now former Google engineer has pushed this topic into the spotlight. The writer argued there are ways to explain the gender gap in tech that dont rely on bias and discrimination specifically, biological sex differences. Setting aside how this assertion would affect questions about how to move toward greater equity in tech fields, how well does his wrap-up represent what researchers know about the science of sex and gender?

As a social scientist whos been conducting psychological research about sex and gender for almost 50 years, I agree that biological differences between the sexes likely are part of the reason we see fewer women than men in the ranks of Silicon Valleys tech workers. But the road between biology and employment is long and bumpy, and any causal connection does not rule out the relevance of nonbiological causes. Heres what the research actually says.

There is no direct causal evidence that biology causes the lack of women in tech jobs. But many, if not most, psychologists do give credence to the general idea that prenatal and early postnatal exposure to hormones such as testosterone and other androgens affect human psychology. In humans, testosterone is ordinarily elevated in males from about weeks eight to 24 of gestation and also during early postnatal development.

Ethical restraints obviously preclude experimenting on human fetuses and babies to understand the effects of this greater exposure of males to testosterone. Instead, researchers have studied individuals exposed to hormonal environments that are abnormal because of unusual genetic conditions or hormonally active drugs prescribed to pregnant women. Such studies have suggested that early androgen exposure does have masculinizing effects on girls juvenile play preferences and behavior, aggression, sexual orientation and gender identity and possibly on spatial ability and responsiveness to cues that certain behaviors are culturally female-appropriate.

Early hormonal exposure is only one part of a complex of biological processes that contribute to sexual differentiation. Driven by both direct and roundabout messages from the X and Y chromosomes, the effects of these processes on human psychology are largely unknown, given the early stage of the relevant science.

Other studies inform the nature-nurture question by comparing the behaviors of boys and girls who are so young that socialization has not exerted its full influence.

Early sex differences emerge mainly on broad dimensions of temperament. One such dimension is what psychologists call surgency; its greater in boys and manifests in motor activity, impulsivity and experiencing pleasure from high-intensity activities. The other dimension is in what we term effortful control; its greater in girls and emerges in the self-regulatory skills of greater attention span, ability to focus and shift attention and inhibitory control. This aspect of temperament also includes greater perceptual sensitivity and experience of pleasure from low-intensity activities.

This research on temperament does suggest that nature instills some psychological sex differences. But scientists dont fully understand the pathways from these aspects of child temperament to adult personality and abilities.

Another approach to the women-in-tech question involves comparing the sexes on traits thought most relevant to participation in tech. In this case, it doesnt matter whether these traits follow from nature or nurture. The usual suspects include mathematical and spatial abilities.

The sex difference in average mathematical ability that once favored males has disappeared in the general U.S. population. There is also a decline in the preponderance of males among the very top scorers on demanding math tests. Yet, males tend to score higher on most tests of spatial abilities, especially tests of mentally rotating three-dimensional objects, and these skills appear to be helpful in STEM fields.

Of course people choose occupations based on their interests as well as their abilities. So the robust and large sex difference on measures of people-oriented versus thing-oriented interests deserves consideration.

Research shows that, in general, women are more interested in people compared with men, who are more interested in things. To the extent that tech occupations are concerned more with things than people, men would on average be more attracted to them. For example, positions such as computer systems engineer and network and database architect require extensive knowledge of electronics, mathematics, engineering principles and telecommunication systems. Success in such work is not as dependent on qualities such as social sensitivity and emotional intelligence as are positions in, for instance, early childhood education and retail sales.

Women and men also differ in their life goals, with women placing a higher priority than men on working with and helping people. Jobs in STEM are in general not viewed as providing much opportunity to satisfy these life goals. But technology does offer specializations that prioritize social and community goals (such as designing healthcare systems) or reward social skills (for instance, optimizing the interaction of people with machines and information). Such positions may, on average, be relatively appealing to women. More generally, womens overall superiority on readingand writing as well as social skillswould advantage them in many occupations.

Virtually all sex differences consist of overlapping distributions of women and men. For example, despite the quite large sex difference in average height, some women are taller than most men and some men are shorter than most women. Although psychological sex differences are statistically smaller than this height difference, some of the differences most relevant to tech are substantial, particularly interest in people versus things and spatial ability in mental rotations.

Given the absence of clear-cut evidence that tech-relevant abilities and interests flow mainly from biology, theres plenty of room to consider socialization and gender stereotyping.

Because humans are born undeveloped, parents and others provide extensive socialization, generally intended to promote personality traits and skills they think will help offspring in their future adult roles. To the extent that women and men have different adult lives, caregivers tend to promote sex-typical activities and interests in children dolls for girls, toy trucks for boys. Conventional socialization can set children on the route to conventional career choices.

Even very young children form gender stereotypes as they observe women and men enacting their societys division of labor. They automatically learn about gender from what they see adults doing in the home and at work. Eventually, to explain the differences they see in what men and women do and how they do it, children draw the conclusion that the sexes to some extent have different underlying traits. Divided labor thus conveys the message that males and females have different attributes.

These gender stereotypes usually include beliefs that women excel in qualities such as warmth and concern for others, which psychologists label as communal. Stereotypes also suggest men have higher levels of qualities such as assertiveness and dominance, which psychologists label as agentic. These stereotypes are shared in cultures and shape individuals gender identities as well as societal norms about appropriate female and male behaviors.

Gender stereotypes set the stage for prejudice and discrimination directed toward those who deviate from gender norms. If, for example, people accept the stereotype that women are warm and emotional but not tough and rational, gatekeepers may close out women from many engineering and tech jobs, even those women who are atypical of their sex. In addition, women talented in tech may falter if they themselves internalize societal stereotypes about womens inferiority in tech-relevant attributes. Also, womens anxiety that they may confirm these negative stereotypes can lower their actual performance.

Its therefore not surprising that research provides evidence that women generally have to meet a higher standard to attain jobs and recognition in fields that are culturally masculine and dominated by men. However, there is some recent evidence of preferential hiring of women in STEM at U.S. research-intensive institutions. Qualified women who apply for such positions have a better chance of being interviewed and receiving offers than do male job candidates. Experimental simulation of hiring of STEM faculty yielded similar findings.

Many pundits make the mistake of assuming that scientific evidence favoring sociocultural causes for the dearth of women in tech invalidates biological causes, or vice versa. These assumptions are far too simplistic because most complex human behaviors reflect some mix of nature and nurture.

And the discourse is further compromised as the debate becomesmore politicized. Arguing for sociocultural causes seems the more progressive and politically correct stance today. Arguing for biological causes seems the more conservative and reactionary position. Fighting ideological wars distracts from figuring out what changes in organizational practices and cultures would foster the inclusion of women in tech and in the scientific workforce in general.

Politicizing such debates threatens scientific progress and doesnt help unravel what a fair and diverse organization is and how to create one. Unfortunately, well-meaning efforts of organizations to promote diversity and inclusion can be ineffective, often because they are too coercive and restrictive of managers autonomy. The outrage in James Damores manifesto suggests that Google might want to take a close look at its diversity initiatives.

At any rate, neither nature-oriented nor nurture-oriented science can fully account for the underrepresentation of women in tech jobs. A coherent and open-minded stance acknowledges the possibility of both biological and social influences on career interests and competencies.

Regardless of whether nature or nurture is more powerful for explaining the lack of women in tech careers, people should guard against acting on the assumption of a gender binary. It makes more sense to treat individuals of both sexes as located somewhere on a continuum of masculine and feminine interests and abilities. Treating people as individuals rather than merely stereotyping them as male or female is difficult, given how quickly our automatic stereotypes kick in. But working toward this goal would foster equity and diversity in tech and other sectors of the economy.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article here: http://theconversation.com/does-biology-explain-why-men-outnumber-women-in-tech-82479.

Read more:
Does biology explain why men outnumber women in tech? - San Francisco Chronicle

This post was written with Chris Kerlow and Craig Basinger.

The essence of money management can be encapsulated in searching for investments that are trading below their intrinsic value.

In theory, it works like this: Buying these companies low, and as the market comes around to realize their intrinsic value, the price moves higher and we sell for profits.

This is the activity of price discovery and makes for a healthy market as participants buy and sell in the attempt to profit from the return to intrinsic value, see chart. But there is a new big player in the market that doesnt care about price discovery, the Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) or other passive index investment strategies. A passive ETF is price agnostic. They need to buy the shares of the underlying basket of stocks that comprise the index, regardless of the price of those stocks. Their mandate is not to buy low, sell high; it is to buy quickly, minimizing tracking error, giving investors the exact exposure they are looking for. Most indices are based on market weight, and do not discriminate for liquidity.

With ETFs swelling in assets and active managers shrinking over the past years, the number of participants embarking upon the admirable task of price discovery is lower. All else equal, this suggests it will likely take longer for the true intrinsic value to be found. Meaning that the Warren Buffet style investors will need to wait longer for the tide to go out and show who is swimming naked, as the oracle from Omaha eloquently once said. This could be one of the reasons why active management has lagged for the past several years, as the bull market marches higher and passive funds pile more and more capital into the fastest growing stocks, with no regard to price or value.

Active managers typically classify their style into specific architypes. Value investors buy beaten down companies that are believed to have a larger gap between the current price and intrinsic value. Growth managers buy at higher levels, thinking that the market is underestimating the growth prospects. Top down managers make macro bets, focusing on sector allocation and picking the best solution to portray their view. Or, a manager might focus on specific factors like large cap, dividend companies which narrows their focus and inherently investment outcomes.

All things considered, most managers use a varying combination of different approaches. All are buying companies they believe to be below intrinsic value and selling those at or above intrinsic value. But with a weaker price discovery mechanism in the market, perhaps it is time for active managers to change their approach. We believe active managers can add the most value when the market is inefficient see chart below. And inefficiencies are often caused by human behavior.

Where do these inefficiencies stem from? The innate human behaviors that have helped us survive and work our way to the top of the food chain also come with flaws that are exhibited in investing. We are accumulating a variety of research on these biases and looking for investing opportunities that these repeating tendencies present. We will highlight several of these behavioral biases to help our readers try to avoid them in their own portfolios and potentially profit from taking advantage of others irrational behaviors.

Overreaction

Markets are largely efficient, some more than others, but it is undeniable that inefficiencies are present. Some inefficiencies take time to rectify themselves and some come and go quickly. These aberrations are highlighted by the markets reaction to earnings and brief periods of extreme volatility (flash crashes).

As an example, during the May 2010 flash crash, we saw the U.S. market lose a trillion dollars of market cap in 36 minutes, only to rebound quickly thereafter. It would be interesting to hear Eugene Fama explain how that is a characteristic of an efficient market. Regulations were put in place to avoid such an event from occurring again (LULD) but they proved to be inadequate. On August 24, 2015 we experienced another flash crash with many ETFs becoming unhinged from their implied value. The limit up, limit down (LULD) regulations put in place during the previous flash crash exacerbated the problem as market markers of ETFs were uncertain of the true value of the basket that investors were trying to buy / sell, so the market makers vanished.

We vividly remember sitting at our desks that Monday morning as the Dow fell 1,000 in just minutes. What caught our attention more than the massive fall in stock prices, was the dislocation between sector ETFs and the basket of stocks they were built to follow. IAK, the iShares insurance ETF was down 42% in the first 12 minutes of trading, while at the same time the largest underlying constituents like AIG and MetLife were down only 10%. The market makers had seemingly disappeared. Everything did come back to reality just a short while later as the ETF rallied 68% off the lows, as shown on the chart below.

Although this exact scenario may not happen again, over reaction to new information will. This stems from the availability heuristic where investors focus on the most recent information often ignoring the long term picture. Our Market Ethos on Earnings Overreaction, goes into detail on how high quality companies that see a share price slammed on a negative earnings report tend to make back the share price loss quickly, while low quality companies that gap up on earnings tend to give back the gains.

Confirmation Bias and Herding

Two weeks ago we wrote about the flaws in investing with the herd. Our innate tendency to follow the herd has been ingrained in us through Darwinism and is glaringly obvious in investing, but often ends poorly, especially for those late to the party. The next chart exemplifies what we are referring to. You can see when the herd, in this case speculators on the Canadian dollar, gets to extreme levels, it has been the exact time the momentum shifts in the other direction. Adding to this problem is a confirmation bias, when investors place more value on information that corroborates with their own opinion. The flaws are simply human nature and unlikely to go away anytime soon.

Understanding that, if you are able to get in early before the herd follows, you should be able to make some nice profits. To do so, you need to take a contrarian view, which conflicts with the comforting feelings you get from going with the herd. Back in April, we published a piece that outlined a strategy to take advantage of these biases. Best to be Unloved goes into greater detail but the idea is simple: companies that are largely unloved by the analyst community, but then start to get upgraded, have seen outsized gains versus companies that have mainly buy ratings, last chart. The premise is rather simple, these unloved companies could have depressed valuations because they do not have the herd supporting the stock. Then as analysts start to recognize a change in business fundamentals, they upgrade the stock. Often other analysts follow their peers, subsequently upgrading their rating of the stock. More upgrades tend to follow, giving investors confirmation and feeding the herding behaviour.

Conclusion

These are just a couple of examples of how our hardwired heuristics and bias show up in investment decisions. We are engulfed in the subject matter as we continue to research behavioral finance to help avoid pitfalls in our own investment process as well as find ways of exploiting these repeated flaws exhibited in the broad market. We look forward to sharing the findings with you, our readers, to help you avoid making behavioral mistakes.

Charts are sourced to Bloomberg unless otherwise noted.

Twitter:@sobata416 @ConnectedWealth

Any opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors, and do not in any way represent the views or opinions of any other person or entity.

See the rest here:
Uncovering Value: Price Discovery And Irrational Investing Behavior - See It Market (blog)