22 February 2009

If It's Hard To Say, It Must Be Risky

I can quite believe this: though it should also be said that it may seem really shallow, however it's intriguing. Write-up is here: If It's Hard To Say, It Must Be Risky Basic outcome of research is this: "...results show that people consistently classify difficult to pronounce items as risky, and this is the case for both undesirable risks (such as getting sick on a roller coaster or hazardous food additive) as well as desirable risks (such as an adventurous amusement park ride). These findings also suggest that risk perception may be influenced by the way the items are presented - if they are difficult to process (such as hard to pronounce names), they will be viewed as being inherently riskier"
I'm guessing that this is why the cleaning product formerly known as 'Jif' has for the last handful of years been promoted as 'Cif'. I'm guessing that either 'Jif' is hard to pronounce in a number of languages (and it certainly is for a number of phonological systems in the sense that the sound is not present) or the 'licit' pronunciation of the graphemes according to the local language rules results in dysphonious or downright rude results.

But I'm also thinking: does this have an angle that relates to naming the animals in Genesis 2? Is there, after all, an element of 'control' in naming; somehow naming something can have the effect of reducing the perceived risk in it? That may be a bit of a stretch in terms of the evidence here, but it would link with another piece of recent research about naming and feelings which I flagged up here a few days back.

No comments:

Christian England? Maybe not...

I've just read an interesting blog article from Paul Kingsnorth . I've responded to it elsewhere with regard to its consideration of...