IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mgt/youmng/v14y2019i1p33-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Pseudo-Profound Statements

Author

Listed:
  • Igor Riznar

    (University of Primorska, Slovenia)

  • Jana Suklan

    (Newcastle University, United Kingdom)

Abstract

After examining a rather small body of research on bullshit, we focus on the bullshit receptivity of Slovenian and Finnish teachers and students. Finnish higher education system and management schools were ranked substantially higher by the Global Economic Forum in 2015. Out of 144 countries, Slovenian higher education system is ranked 48th (scoring 4.1 on a scale from 1–7), Finnish second (5.9), with Finnish management schools taking tenth place (5.6) and Slovenian 74th. Being teachers ourselves, we thought it would be interesting to see if there are any substantial differences in recognizing bullshit statements between Slovenian and Finnish educators and students. We asked respondents to assess the level of profoundness in a set of 15 statements, of which only three were meaningful. Prior to this, the respondents were requested to complete the 18-item Need for Cognition (NFC) scale and the 16-item Faith in Intuition (FI) scale to see if those with higher nfc/fi scores are better or worse at recognizing bullshit. With an average score of 1.54 on the NFC scale, our respondents were not very likely to engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activities. On the other hand, with the score as low as 1.27 on the FI scale, our respondents were also unlikely to trust their feelings and intuition. As for the pseudo-profound statements, they were rather keen on giving high scores (average 2.94) to sentences lacking any meaning. Our research proved that there is a negative correlation between the Need for Cognition and pseudo-profound statements for the whole sample. On the other hand, this is not statistically significant for the subsample of Finnish teachers and students, for the subsample of both Finnish and Slovenian students, where it is neither present nor statistically significant, and for the subsample of teachers (Slovenian and Finnish) where the correlation is negative, but not statistically significant. As for the Faith in Intuition and pseudo-profound statements, a positive correlation does not exist, except for the subsample of Slovenian and Finnish teachers. Finally, our research proved that the correlation between Need for Cognition and Faith in Intuition is strong, positive and statistically significant. Faced with the esoteric bullshit statements, participants might not want to endure the struggle to grasp the meaning of the statements and simply rated vacuous statements as profound either due to the lack of motivation to engage in cognitive activities or because they simply assumed, in a face-saving fashion, that the statements must have been somewhat meaningful. The results of our research revealed that our respondents considered many bullshit statements as substantially more profound than the three statements by Voltaire, Einstein and Robinson.

Suggested Citation

  • Igor Riznar & Jana Suklan, 2019. "Understanding Pseudo-Profound Statements," Management, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 14(1), pages 33-57.
  • Handle: RePEc:mgt:youmng:v:14:y:2019:i:1:p:33-57
    DOI: 10.26493/1854-4231.14.34-57
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hippocampus.si/ISSN/1854-4231/14.33-57.pdf
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26493/1854-4231.14.34-57?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Venkatraman, Meera P. & Price, Linda L., 1990. "Differentiating between cognitive and sensory innovativeness : Concepts, measurement, and implications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 293-315, June.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:121-122 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Quandt, Richard E., 2007. "On Wine Bullshit: Some New Software?," Journal of Wine Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 129-135, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Huang, Youlin & Qian, Lixian, 2021. "Consumer adoption of electric vehicles in alternative business models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Catherine Viot & Caroline Bayart & Agnes Lancini, 2017. "The Consumer Intention to Adopt Smart Connected-Products: Does the Category Matter?," Post-Print hal-01991186, HAL.
    3. Anita Gärling & John Thøgersen, 2001. "Marketing of electric vehicles," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 53-65, January.
    4. Osama Sohaib & Kyeong Kang & Mohammad Nurunnabi, 2018. "Gender-Based iTrust in E-Commerce: The Moderating Role of Cognitive Innovativeness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Chen, Natalie & Juvenal, Luciana, 2018. "Quality and the Great Trade Collapse," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 59-76.
    6. Lalicic, Lidija & Dickinger, Astrid, 2019. "An assessment of user-driven innovativeness in a mobile computing travel platform," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 233-241.
    7. Victor Ginsburgh, 2016. "On Judging Art and Wine," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2016-21, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    8. Schuitema, Geertje & Anable, Jillian & Skippon, Stephen & Kinnear, Neale, 2013. "The role of instrumental, hedonic and symbolic attributes in the intention to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 39-49.
    9. Gao, Tao (Tony) & Rohm, Andrew J. & Sultan, Fareena & Pagani, Margherita, 2013. "Consumers un-tethered: A three-market empirical study of consumers' mobile marketing acceptance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2536-2544.
    10. Kayhan Tajeddini & Stephen Mueller, 2009. "Entrepreneurial characteristics in Switzerland and the UK: A comparative study of techno-entrepreneurs," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-25, March.
    11. Salzberger, Thomas & Koller, Monika, 2013. "Towards a new paradigm of measurement in marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1307-1317.
    12. Andreas Strebinger & Horst Treiblmaier, 2022. "Profiling early adopters of blockchain-based hotel booking applications: demographic, psychographic, and service-related factors," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1-30, March.
    13. Keane, Matthew & Eastman, Jacqueline K. & Iyer, Rajesh, 2020. "Predicting adventure seeking of young adults: The role of risk, innovativeness and status consumption," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 952-963.
    14. Domina, Tanya & Lee, Seung-Eun & MacGillivray, Maureen, 2012. "Understanding factors affecting consumer intention to shop in a virtual world," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 613-620.
    15. Ingrid Moons & Patrick De Pelsmacker, 2015. "An Extended Decomposed Theory of Planned Behaviour to Predict the Usage Intention of the Electric Car: A Multi-Group Comparison," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-34, May.
    16. Heidenreich, Sven & Kraemer, Tobias, 2015. "Passive innovation resistance: The curse of innovation? Investigating consequences for innovative consumer behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 134-151.
    17. Frambach, Ruud T. & Schillewaert, Niels, 2002. "Organizational innovation adoption: a multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 163-176, February.
    18. Chen, Natalie & Juvenal, Luciana, 2016. "Quality, trade, and exchange rate pass-through," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 61-80.
    19. Erevelles, Sunil, 1998. "The Role of Affect in Marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 199-215, July.
    20. Avornyo, Philip & Fang, Jiaming & Antwi, Collins Opoku & Aboagye, Michael Osei & Boadi, Evans Asante, 2019. "Are customers still with us? The influence of optimum stimulation level and IT-specific traits on mobile banking discontinuous usage intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 348-360.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mgt:youmng:v:14:y:2019:i:1:p:33-57. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alen Jezovnik (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmkupsi.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.