# How seriously should picture studies in psychology and sociology be taken? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 12, 2015, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-seriously-should-picture-studies-in-psychology-and-sociology-be-taken/719887 "2015-05-12T21:01:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![grude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47774/32.png) [@grude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grude)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2015, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-seriously-should-picture-studies-in-psychology-and-sociology-be-taken/719887/1 "2015-05-12T21:01:21Z")
These studies are done usually by flashing pictures and then asking the subjects questions, sometimes the images are flashed subliminally etc. Then the media will trumpet “science proves X!”, and [cracked.com](http://cracked.com) gets fodder for some more articles 🙂 How seriously are these studies viewed within the psychology community? What are the major criticisms? The first one that occurs to me is “this is not a pipe” that a picture doesn’t necessarily elicit the same reaction as the object it represents. Here is one from a recent thread: > **[Study demonstrates sexual attraction to those who resemble our parents,...](https://medicalxpress.com/news/2010-07-sexual-resemble-parents.html)** > > (PhysOrg.com) -- Researchers reporting in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin last week say people are drawn to others who resemble their parents or themselves. This may explain why incest taboos are found in many cultures - to counter a... And it has the courtesy to include an obvious alternate theory > [@](#): > > Another explanation for the results is that our brains can simply process familiar images more easily, and Fraley said further experiments are needed to test this idea. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2015, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-seriously-should-picture-studies-in-psychology-and-sociology-be-taken/719887/2 "2015-05-12T21:12:41Z")
You may want to read [this article](http://www.psmag.com/books-and-culture/joe-henrich-weird-ultimatum-game-shaking-up-psychology-economics-53135): **We Aren’t the World** _Joe Henrich and his colleagues are shaking the foundations of psychology and economics—and hoping to change the way social scientists think about human behavior and culture._ ---
**Author:** ![grude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47774/32.png) [@grude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grude)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2015, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-seriously-should-picture-studies-in-psychology-and-sociology-be-taken/719887/3 "2015-05-12T21:22:31Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > You may want to read [this article](http://www.psmag.com/books-and-culture/joe-henrich-weird-ultimatum-game-shaking-up-psychology-economics-53135): > > **We Aren’t the World** > _Joe Henrich and his colleagues are shaking the foundations of psychology and economics—and hoping to change the way social scientists think about human behavior and culture._ Thanks for that, interesting article. FWIW assuming the game won’t be repeated with the players reversed I’d take any offer even a dollar, it would be illogical to punish the splitter by refusing money if the punishment is meaningless. In a scenario where the game is repeated only then does punishment by refusing become logical. ---
**Author:** ![Claverhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/13edae/32.png) [@Claverhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Claverhouse)\ **Post date:** [May 12, 2015, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-seriously-should-picture-studies-in-psychology-and-sociology-be-taken/719887/4 "2015-05-12T21:23:45Z")
They should be taken as seriously as any other parts of the fields of psychology and sociology.