Re: Style v. Substance

Bias can be very complex and not well organised imho
(work to be done)
looks like what you point to is perceptual.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 3:56 AM Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> wrote:

> I haven't checked CEBM's catalog of biases
> <https://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#COB> to see if it includes this
> one -- https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Style_over_substance -- but it seems
> highly relevant to the work of the AIKR CG.
>
> Wikipedia's listing of cognitive biases --
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases -- doesn't seem to
> reference it directly.  However, attractiveness is referenced in these
> biases:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheerleader_effect
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect
>
> I also discovered a separate article on bias, which includes this one:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias#Lookism
>
> Owen
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: IPTC draft credibility guidelines released for feedback
> Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 15:19:22 -0400
> From: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
> To: public-credibility@w3.org
>
> This is very good news, Brendan.
>
> The NewsCode Scheme is now available in StratML Part 1, Strategic Plan,
> format at https://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#NCS
>
> Here are some comments, for whatever they may be worth:
>
>    1. While we must deal with reality as it currently exists, we should
>    also pursue continuous improvement.
>    2. We already have far too much "policy" in narrative format and far
>    too few actual performance plans and reports, in open, standard,
>    machine-readable format.
>    3. While "short cuts" (like stories) are essential in the routine of
>    everyday life, they exclude information (i.e., reliable data) that may be
>    critical for consideration when risks may be high.
>    4. HTML is a shortcut enabling the presentation of data.
>    https://stratml.us/references/FlashyVIntelligentWeb.pdf
>    5. The incumbents whose business cases and competitive advantages are
>    based upon legacy data formats and the inefficiency of others should not be
>    allowed to stand in the way of innovation and progress.
>    6. We should aim for more mature business processes.
>    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine-readable_document
>
> I take this reference as further confirmation of my bias toward the
> importance of the character of the content versus the style of the
> presentation:  https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Style_over_substance
>
> I wonder if Miki paid Google to make this their top hit on "bias toward
> style versus substance":
> https://www.megumimiki.com/blog/bias-towards-style-over-substance-is-keeping-your-real-talent-hidden
>
> Surely, there must be an evolutionary basis for our often irrational
> attraction to attractiveness, commonly to the exclusion of factors more
> relevant to the achievement of our objectives.
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/artificial-ignorance-owen-ambur/
>
> See, for example,
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0162309595000682
>
> With reference to credibility "signals," this reference also uses that
> term:
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312719482_Evolutionary_Basis_of_Attraction
>
> Just some thoughts ... for whatever they might be worth.
>
> Owen
> On 4/21/2020 5:06 AM, Brendan Quinn wrote:
>
> Hi Sandro and all,
>
> I have something to share: we've released the first public draft of our
> "Expressing Trust and Credibility in IPTC Standards" document, as discussed
> in a CredWeb call back in November.
>
> Here's our news item about it:
>
> https://iptc.org/news/public-draft-for-comment-expressing-trust-and-credibility-information-in-iptc-standards/
>
> All comments and feedback are gratefully accepted!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Brendan.
>
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 23:49, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:
>
>> Let's skip this week.
>>
>> Stay safe, and feel free to send the group email about interesting &
>> relevant topics.
>>
>>        -- Sandro
>>
>>
>>