From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon psychology.svg

This psychology related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


There is a techinical term for specifically seeing faces in everything. is that the same as pareidolia? or is it a different term? and either way, if we find the term, it should be included. Pink mowse.pngEn attendant Godot 17:52, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Not sure. Will go and kiss Google's ass for a minute. ADK...I'll annihilate your deviant! 18:08, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Not that I can tell. See the Wikipedia article on Face perception. but generally it's all pareidolia. ADK...I'll reward your wizard! 18:15, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. it's still amazing to me that the brain will necessarily make two dots and a line under them always appear as a face. the "meme" page linked is a riot, but you can see these emotions in sinks, cups, fruit... even though there is no emotion in a sink. maybe in a fruit.Pink mowse.pngEn attendant Godot 18:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
This one is my favourite as you can see even the ship is shocked and embarrassed by the movie. ADK...I'll negate your pool table! 11:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Birds are pretty good for this. My favorites are the shit-eating grin birds and birds flipping the bird. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 03:56, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm immediately reminded of Smug Kookaburras. There's a smug Dawkins lookalike on there somewhere. ADK...I'll duel your alcohol! 14:03, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Audio pareidolia[edit]

I swear i'm hearing non distinct voices chattering when there is cacophony, as if there are people in another room. I also "hear" English words, when listening to chaotic or frenetic conversations of people who are speaking languages i do not know. is this the same phenomena?Pink mowse.pngEn attendant Godot 03:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Could be. I've heard similar things in busy polyglot environments. Speech and electrical atmospheric noise have enough differences that they could be processed in different parts of the brain. I do not know, but I suspect one is more likely to project some meaning onto strange speech than onto faint imagined beeps. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 03:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
I imagine it's exactly the same thing at play. You can very easily be alerted if someone says something important to you in a crowd, the usual example is your own name (visually analogues of this being familiar faces, letters or words). Your brain constantly cross-references sensory input with what it knows and expects to be important. It discards the unimportant stuff. "Hearing things" is undoubtedly a side-effect of this as it tries to compare the noise with existing phenomena and generates false positives. ADK...I'll refill your fiddle! 15:37, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, this is basically how backmasking works. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 18:43, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
Paul is dead.Pink mowse.pngGodotThe Peyote God awaits 16:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I think that one is just reading too much into things. ADK...I'll defenestrate your aviator! 18:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
LOL - goo goo ga juoo, goo goo goo.Pink mowse.pngGodotThe Peyote God awaits 18:06, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Regarding audio pareidolia in amatuer radio - "hearing voices" is a common side-effect of listening for quiet signals amongst the noise. Likewise, with CW - it is not uncommon to experience a similar phenomenon with patterns in the noise (weak-signal morse doesn't sound like a tone - it sounds like a rhythmic changing in the noise itself - for instance noise-high/noise-low - or noise-on/noise off).

Similarly, when on the wrong radio mode (i.e single side band (SSB) trying to listen to an Audio-Modulated or Frequency Modulated (AM/FM) signal), you can hear distorted, noisy parables of human voices (and music) - this contributes to the common woo of "listening to dead through the radio" - chances are you're just hearing a ham radio operator a few miles (or even a few hundred miles) away - more likely you're hearing the edge of a radio station and just ascribing your own words to the distorted speech-rhythm of noise.

You can easily find threads on the subject on forums such as "QRZ" and "radioforums" Cprobertson1 (talk) 14:47, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

To whoever added the Big Bang Theory joke[edit]

You are awesome. Wehpudicabok (talk) 08:07, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

What was it (as it has gone)? (talk) 17:48, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Bayes' Theorem[edit]

Is the listed version of Bayes' theorem a correct alternative? It appears to be missing a few terms.. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

If you're talking about how you could expand the denominator into a summation, then that's not missing terms, that is just a different way to write the same thing. Nullahnung (talk) 19:05, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
p(B) == p(B|A) * p(A) + p(B|~A) * p(~A)? — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs
Ah... yeah it does doesn't it. Is the form I was thinking of usually used when you know the consequent probability given either A or not A, and the listed version when you have two priors and one consequent? — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs
They are mathematically the same thing, so ... just switch between them at your convenience I guess. Nullahnung (talk) 20:39, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
I think I added that section a while ago. I'm no longer that happy with it... might just kill it. Scarlet A.pngpathetic 15:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Critters on the underground[edit]

Does [1] fit in here? (talk) 15:00, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Here is a current link - there are others. Anna Livia (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

The mystery of the Mona Lisa is "solved".[edit]

I doubt there is one, but I haven't seen an interpretation more ridiculous AND pompous than that of a certain artist who claims he solved the Mona Lisa mystery with help of the "hidden messages", which are, in fact, heads of different animals he spotted (also present on any painting he looks at), similar to the practice of cloudspotting. Also,"the proof is obvious", as he states - proof being some images with highlighted silhouettes where "one can clearly see the head of a reptile – perhaps a serpent or crocodile...". The punchline of the whole thing is: "Not sure why he didn’t put a crocodile in this one...." To undermine such a brilliant discovery, no doubt.

Pictures that will make you do a double-take[edit]

Time to tease your brain (here's some more). Anyway, as you do precisely that, contemplate that this is the pattern recognition "software" that people who claim to have seen ghosts and aliens and other things that go bump in the night all blindly rely on. Facepalm.png Now, get cracking! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 16:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Why pareidolia works[edit]

  • School dinners, school dinners
  • Burnt baked beans, burnt baked beans
  • Soggy semolina, soggy semolina
  • Water quick, I feel sick.

What's the tune? (talk) 17:53, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Frère Jacques scans for me. Daev (talk) 08:58, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes. (Someone created/repeated it at school.) (talk) 14:40, 30 June 2017 (UTC)


Where would [2] and the 'dog's head on the duck's beak' and similar be classified? Anna Livia (talk) 14:41, 7 September 2018 (UTC)