Pronouns and Individualism

Researchers hypothesized that pronoun usage reflects increasing individualism in American culture. Their research found that for American books from 1960-2008, use of, "first person plural pronouns (e.g., we, us) decreased 10% first person singular pronouns (I, me) increased 42%, and second person pronouns (you, your) quadrupled."

Happiness: USA v. Other Countries

Researchers analyzed happiness' definitions in dictionaries from 30 nations and in Webster’s dictionaries from 1850 to today. Researchers also coded the State of the Union address from 1790 to 2010 and investigated the usage of happy nation vs. happy person (1800-2008). 

"Across cultures and time, happiness was most frequently defined as good luck and favorable external conditions. However, in American English, this definition was replaced by definitions focused on favorable internal feeling states."

Wikipedia vs. Encyclopedia Britannica

A study examined content-framing of encyclopedia entries of top Fortune companies in Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica in 2006, 2008, and 2010. While  Britannica was predominantly neutral, "Wikipedia entries were significantly longer, were more positively and negatively framed, and focused more on corporate social responsibilities and legal and ethical issues ... The findings stress that the knowledge-generation processes in society appear to be fundamentally shifting because of the use of social media collaboration."

Got Beef? Better Make Sure It Ain't Mutual

Research finds that 3rd parties most likely intervene in fights when drunk men are mutually aggressive, and were more than twice as likely to intervene in a non-aggressive manner. The most frequent aggressive incident (male pursuing a female), or 1-sided aggression between men, triggered few interventions.

Researchers think mutual aggression triggers the most intervention because other research shows that bystanders intervene more when the situation seems more dangerous. But its also possible that avoiding embarrassment compels.

Weak Arguments for Weak Minds

Research argues that providing someone with weak arguments for a cause they believe in is more powerful than providing strong arguments.

Research found that people were more likely to persuade others to vote for their cause if provided with weak arguments because it fooled them into thinking they could also contribute. Weak arguments were found to inspire people if their self-belief was relatively low. Weak arguments against one's position also increased participation. So, to increase participation, advocacy groups may want to show their supporters weak arguments for and against their position!