Slashdot Mirror


Rich People Pay Less Attention To Other People, Says Study (businessinsider.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Business Insider: In a small recent study, researchers from New York University found that those who considered themselves in higher classes looked at people who walked past them less than those who said they were in a lower class did. The results were published in the journal of the Association for Psychological Science. According to Pia Dietze, a social psychology doctoral student at NYU and a lead author of the study, previous research has shown that people from different social classes vary in how they tend to behave towards other people. So, she wanted to shed some light on where such behaviors could have originated. The research was divided into three separate studies. For the first, Dietze and NYU psychology lab director Professor Eric Knowles asked 61 volunteers to walk along the street for one block while wearing Google Glass to record everything they looked at. These people were also asked to identify themselves as from a particular social class: either poor, working class, middle class, upper middle class, or upper class. An independent group watched the recordings and made note of the various people and things each Glass wearer looked at and for how long. The results showed that class identification, or what class each person said they belonged to, had an impact on how long they looked at the people who walked past them. During Study 2, participants viewed street scenes while the team tracked their eye movements. Again, higher class was associated with reduced attention to people in the images. For the third and final study, the results suggested that this difference could stem from the way the brain works, rather than being a deliberate decision. Close to 400 participants took part in an online test where they had to look at alternating pairs of images, each containing a different face and five objects. Whereas higher class participants took longer to notice when the face was different in the alternate image compared to lower classes, the amount of time it took to detect the change of objects did not differ between them. The team reached the conclusion that faces seem to be more effective in grabbing the attention of individuals who come from relatively lower class backgrounds.

17 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new?

    1. Re: Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by thesupraman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually.. It's a case of the usual bs sociological broken rational.
      The study process nothing at all because...
      1. The amount of data collected is microscopic and therefore of zero statistical value.
      2. There are no controls at all.
      3. All the tests are uncorrelated as the situation is different for each.
      4. And most importantly.. Correlation is not causation! You would think 'researchers' would know this.. But apparently not.

      They would be so busy patting themselves on the back at discovering something they have preconceived (bad bad rich people!) That they have ignored the real requirements of such work.
      For example.. Perhaps what they are measuring is that more focus (and therefore less time spent being distracted by others around you) tends to lead to more personal wealth? Of course that is only one of hundreds of other possible reasons ( and their sample size is so microscopic nothing matters anyway).

      More garbage 'science' from the experts on this..

    2. Re: Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1. The amount of data collected is microscopic and therefore of zero statistical value.

      The study included over 400 people. That is more than enough to be statistically valid.

      2. There are no controls at all.

      They used non-rich people as controls.

      3. All the tests are uncorrelated as the situation is different for each.

      What? They are testing for the same hypothesis.

      4. And most importantly.. Correlation is not causation!

      The researchers never claim it is.

      discovering something they have preconceived (bad bad rich people!)

      They do not put a value on any behaviors. There is nothing inherently "bad" about not looking at other people. In fact, maybe it is the other way around, and excessive attention to other people is holding back the poor. Steve Jobs once remarked that mediocre people focus on other people, while smart people focus on ideas. Of course, smart is not the same as rich, but they are correlated.

    3. Re: Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by epyT-R · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, but the intent of the article and this 'research' is clear: to imply that being rich somehow implies less humanity.

    4. Re: Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by Sabriel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or maybe it's neither. A third possibility is that as rich people generally enjoy more insulation from physical hazards and risks in social situations, their biological instinct to assess random strangers for threat potential is duller than in poor people.

      Anyone want to guess a fourth?

    5. Re: Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, your bias isn't on the right track.

      Bias is irrelevant. The methodology is either valid or invalid in relation to the hypothesis and the results. Are the findings supported by the evidence?

      These are the only things that matter. The hypothesis is relevant only in relation to these concerns. What you're doing is something along the lines of poisoning the well or relying on ad hominem attacks. If there is bias, you can have a valid point if you show evidence for that bias in the study. And I'm very much open to the idea that there could be methodological flaws.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    6. Re: Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The study shows rich people are more focused, less easily distracted.

    7. Re: Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep, GP loses at bad-research bingo. Also, he missed the actual problem with this research: the subjects are divided into classes by self-reporting. So the headline should read, "People who consider themselves above other people pay less attention to others." It's not an un-interesting result, but it is not quite as interesting when you put it that way.

      I've worked with people of all classes, and anecdotally at least I've found that F. Scott Fitzgerald was right: the rich aren't like you and me; they have more money. Old money at least lives a little bit like the people you read about in Jane Austen books; a lot of their energy goes into socializing with others of their class. So it would be interesting to look at old money/new money this way. Another interesting confounding factor is urban/rural. Rural people tend to be poorer. Urban people actually get more human interaction per time while participating in less per person encountered.

      In most interesting social science research it's not the first and obvious way of dividing up people that draws your attention (e.g. rich/poor, young/old, male/female); it's the second cut. That's because most of our pop-psych deals in the first cuts (men are from Mars, women from Venus); the second cut tells us the ways our intuitions are limited.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re: Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by amiga3D · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Rich = Bad
      Poor = Good
      This is how you justify a Robin Hood mentality.

    9. Re: Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't know about all of the US but in my neck of the woods funding is not a problem with public schools. Spending per student is far above what it was decades ago even adjusted for inflation. I remember going to school to discuss problems with my daughter when she was in the 5th grade. After the meeting my daughter's teacher thanked me profusely for coming. It kind of surprised me and I asked her why in the world wouldn't I have come. She told me she had 7 meetings scheduled that week and I was the only parent to show up. It had never occurred to me that anyone wouldn't be interested in their child's education but as I started looking around I noticed more and more over the years that students that did well had parents that were involved and a lot of parents were not involved at all. A friend of mine's wife is a teacher and he has told me many horror stories about children who basically are raising themselves. This is not in the ghetto but a generally working class environment. In my almost 6 decades I've seen a lot of changes, some for the better but the breakdown of the US family structure is not a positive thing and it's accelerating.

    10. Re:Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps to them all of us peasants look the same?

      ON the other hand, perhaps those folks' attention is more often in thought of how to be successful and planning their next step in life, rather than just idle people watching all the time.

      I'm not wealthy, but I do alright.

      And don't get me wrong, there ARE times I like to kinda just sit and people watch, especially since I live in New Orleans, and man...we have some real characters here.

      But that's on relaxing days off. During the work week, however, I'm usually lost in thought on what to do, what I want to do, what I need to do....and I likely don't notice people while I'm out and about either. I'm focused on goals and what I need to do to make a buck, or enhance my pleasure in life.

      So, it may not just be elite-ism....it's just that successful (and often wealthy) people have on their minds what it actually takes to be successful, and aren't spending as much time day dreaming about other peoples' lives.

      I don't really see that as a bad thing...?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    11. Re:Sociopaths gonna sociopath. What's new? by OzoneLad · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Not all wealthy people are successful. Some are just related to successful people.

  2. Rich people are self absorbed.... by iCEBaLM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... News at 11.

    1. Re: Rich people are self absorbed.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Whilst most unemployed people are poor, most people who are poor work, sometimes multiple jobs, and have less free time than some wealthy people.

  3. Re:"I Don't Want Your Money" by hughbar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well done. My friend and I (we're both 'old') have constant debates about this. We live in London, where there's (obviously) quite a lot of begging. Both our families have also been affected by addiction problems. So we tend to give/buy food rather than give cash, when we do. One regular likes sausage rolls, really unhealthy, but on the street one needs carbs etc. Very often, people also just like to be acknowledged as fellow human beings, eye-contact, good morning.

    But, of course, there are also scammers and begging 'organisations', so the only guide is intuition. Better to be sometimes wrong than do nothing though.

    --
    On y va, qui mal y pense!
  4. Expectations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This outcome may possibly arise from a lifetime of interactions where people treat you like you owe them something. I remember I was sitting outside a church waiting for my wedding to begin when a man approached me and asked me for some money for the bus or for gas. I didn't have any cash on me, and when I told him this he became irritated and belligerently responded "can't you just walk to the gas station and use the ATM?!". I've had countless interactions with people who take eye contact as an invitation to stop you on the street to try and sell something, for a survey, to beg, or in some way impede you. If I'm out an about, its because I have places to be, so I keep my head down and keep to myself.

  5. Re:Another Faulty Study by Sabriel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It certainly wasn't the researchers who jumped to any SJW conclusions. The researchers found self-described rich people took less attention to random strangers. That's all. Attention is not the same as empathy.