Designing Better Energy Metrics for Consumers
Access to the original article
Larrick, R. P., Soll, J. B., & Keeney, R. L. (2015). Designing better energy metrics for consumers. Behavioral Science and Policy, 1, 63-75. (link to pdf) email
- TEDx Duke 2017: Forget MPG: Making smarter decisions about car fuel efficiency
- Fuqua Faculty Conversations video: Nudging better consumer decisions: Provice useful information (not more information)
- Behavioral Science and Policy Association summary: Providing better (not more) information
- A modified version appears as Chapter 4 in D. Willis, W. W. Braham, K. Muramoto, & D. A. Barber (Eds.) (2017). Energy accounts: Architectural representations of energy, climate, and the future (pp. 29-41). New York: Routledge.
- WSJ
When Power Makes Others Speechless: The Negative Impact of Leader Power on Team Performance
Access to the original article
Tost, L. P., Gino, F. , & Larrick, R. P. (2013). When power makes others speechless: The negative impact of leader power on team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 1465-1486. email
Research summaries
-
-
- Press release from the Academy of Management and Summary from the Fuqua School of Business
-
Political Ideology Affects Energy Efficiency Attitudes and Choices
Access to the original article
Gromet, D. M., Kunreuther, H., & Larrick, R. P. (2013). Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 9314-9319. email
° Additional commentary by Dietz, Leshko, and McCright.
Research summaries
-
-
- Press Release from the Fuqua School of Business
-
-
-
- Fast Company, National Geographic, European Commission Science for Environmental Policy, Scientific American, Smithsonian, Christian Science Monitor, New York Times, The Guardian, New Statesman, Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic, CNBC, Wired UK, Mother Jones, OPower, Grist, Times of India, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, San Diego Free Press, Baltimore Sun, Washington Examiner, Philadelphia Inquirer, MSN Money, Huffington Post, Greentechmedia, The Dish, ThinkProgress, The Hill, Treehugger, Environmental Defense Fund, Independent Australia, Daily Kos, The Conversation, Live Science, AMA Marketing News, Mother Nature Network, Conservation, RTCC, Ars Technica, Opposing Views, Policy Mic, Slash Gear, Threeworlds, Inhabitat,
-
-
-
- The Colbert Report and the Harper’s Index
-
Temper, Temperature, and Temptation: Heat-Related Retaliation in Baseball
Access to the original article
Larrick, R. P., Timmerman, T. A., & Carton, A. M., & Abrevaya, J. (2011). Temper, temperature, and temptation: Heat-related retaliation in baseball. Psychological Science, 22, 423-428. DOI available from author
Research summaries
-
-
- Press releases from the Association for Psychological Science and the Fuqua School of Business.
- Slate’s Hang Up and Listen podcast (approximately minute 57:30)
- Yale Climate Connections
- New York Times, The Atlantic, Smithsonian, NPR, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, Boston Globe, Scientific American, Wall Street Journal, Huffington Post, Audobon, Minds on the Road (APS), ThinkProgress, Science 2.0,US News (Health Day), Science Daily, UPI
-
Research Background
This summary provides a brief overview of the research–it is not the published article in Psychological Science. Please click on the links above to go to the published article.
How Common is Being Hit By A Pitch in Major League Baseball?
The probability of a batter being hit by a pitch in a Major League Baseball (MLB) game is low. Each time a batter steps to the plate, there is a little under a 1% chance that he will be hit by a pitch.
Although the chances of being hit by a pitch are low in any given plate appearance, there are a lot of plate appearances in a season. This yields a large number of hit batters every year.
Specifically, there are about 80 plate appearances in an average MLB game, and about 2,400 games played per year, yielding roughly 190,000 plate appearances during a major league season.
As a result, in recent seasons, about 1,550 batters have been hit by a pitch during the season.
How Is Temperature Related to the Number of Batters Hit by a Pitch?
For every increase of one degree of temperature (F), the number of batters hit per game increases by .002. The average game is played at roughly 75 degrees. Last season about 1,550 batters were hit by a pitch.
To illustrate the relationship between temperature and the number of hit batters, it is useful to consider, statistically, how the number of hit batters might change if all games were played at very cool temperatures, such as 55 degrees, or at very hot temperatures, such as 95 degrees:
If all games were played at 55 degrees, the number of hit batters would be expected to drop by roughly 100 batters (20 x .002 x 2,430), to about 1,450batters.
If all games were played at 95 degrees, the number of hit batters would be expected to increase by roughly 100 batters (20 x .002 x 2,430), to about1,650 batters.
Why Are Batters Hit by Pitches?
Most batters are hit by accident. It is costly to hit an opposing batter because the batter is awarded first base. This prolongs an inning and makes it more likely that the opposing team will score.
Baseball is full of lore, however, about when pitchers should intentionally hit a batter with a pitch. There is a long-standing tradition of retributive justice in baseball that states that, if a teammate is hit by a pitch, a player on the opposing team must be hit in return (Turbow & Duca, 2010). This Hammurabi code of a “batter for a batter” (Bissinger, 2005, p. 112) serves both to restore justice and to deter future harm. Previous research has found empirical support for retaliatory behavior in baseball (Timmerman, 2007).
Why Is Temperature Related to the Number of Batters Hit by a Pitch?
Research in social psychology has shown that aggression increases with temperature(see research by Craig Anderson for an overview). These patterns have been found in field tests of violent crime patterns and in controlled laboratory settings where people are randomly assigned to levels of temperature. Laboratory research has shown that the discomfort caused by higher temperatures increases anger and negative affect, which makes aggression more likely.
In the paper “Temper, Temperature, and Temptation: Heat-Related Retaliation in Baseball,” (Larrick, Timmerman, Carton, & Abrevaya, Psychological Science, 2011), we propose that hitting a batter in baseball is also an act of aggression. We argue that heat changes how pitchers respond when their own teammates have been hit by a pitch. The same ambiguous act—a hit teammate—is interpreted as a more hostile action at hot temperatures; and, at hot temperatures, pitchers have lower inhibitions for being aggressive. We propose that the rule of a “batter for a batter” is enforced more at hot temperatures than at cold temperatures. Heat increases retaliation.
We analyzed 57,293 MLB games played between 1952 and 2009 (which had 4,566,468 plate appearances). We used logistic regression to predict the probability that a pitcher would hit a batter with a pitch in a given plate appearance as a function of temperature and the number of pitcher’s teammates who had been hit earlier in the game. In our regression analysis, we controlled for variables that may be correlated with the likelihood of hitting a batter, such as year, attendance, the use of a DH, and the inning, as well as variables that proxy for pitcher inaccuracy, such as walks, wild pitchers, and errors (to address a “sweaty hand” explanation).
The following figure summarizes the results from the regression (used with permission from Psychological Science):
There are about 190,000 plate appearances during the MLB season. In a typical plate appearance, batters have less than a 1% chance of being hit by a pitch (which is .01 when stated as a probability). This figure shows how the probability that a pitcher will hit an opposing batter changes as a function of temperature and hit teammates.
When no teammates have been hit, the likelihood that a pitcher will hit a batter is low for all temperatures (around .7%).
Temperature is more strongly related to a pitcher hitting a batter if a teammate has been hit.
If one teammate has been hit, there is a .7% chance that a pitcher will hit a batter during games played below 60 degrees; this likelihood increases to .9% in games played above 90 degrees.
If two teammates have been hit, the likelihood of hitting a batter climbs from .7% below 60 degrees to more than 1% above 90 degrees.
The table below gives the predicted percentages that a batter will be hit by a pitch during a plate appearance for games played below 60 degrees and for games played at 90 degrees or above:
Temperature |
||
Number of Hit Teammates |
<60 degrees |
90+ degrees |
0 |
0.68% |
0.73% |
1 |
0.71% |
0.89% |
2 |
0.74% |
1.05% |
3 or more |
0.78% |
1.15% |
Consider 1,000 plate appearances in which two of a pitcher’s teammates have been hit by a pitch earlier in the game. If the temperature is below 60, we’d expect the pitchers to hit 7.4 opposing batters with a pitch; if the temperature is above 90, we’d expect pitchers to hit 10.5 opposing batters with a pitch. Three more batters are expected to be hit as a result of the increase in temperature.
The MPG Illusion
Original article (free) and online supplement
Larrick, R. P., & Soll, J. B. (2008). The MPG illusion. Science, 320, 1593-1594. (subscription free)
Here is the standard subscription-only link to the article. Supporting Online Materialspublished by Science can be found here (with additional examples, descriptions of GPM, and more on research methods and results). This requires no subscription.
Brief summaries of the MPG illusion argument
http://mpgillusion.com/, Duke press release, Quiz, Video, and Science podcast
We provide a calculator that converts MPG to GPM at this website. The calculator also allows you to compare different levels of MPG to see gas and cost savings.
Additional tools for converting MPG to gallons per mile (GPM) can be found here, including printable tables and excel-based calculators.
More background on the MPG Illusion and the use of “GPM”
The Small Pie Bias in Negotiation
Link to original aticle
Larrick, R. P., & Wu, G. (2007). Claiming a large slice of a small pie: Asymmetric disconfirmation in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 212-233. Press Release OVID DOI available from author
Research summaries
Article in University of Chicago’s “Capital Ideas”
Harvard Program on Negotiation, Prevention Magazine, LA Times, Businessweek, US News, TheStreet.Com, Raleigh News & Observer
Articles for General Outlets
Raising the bar on goals – Chicago GSB Magazine
Cash for clunkers? Do the math before trading – Atlanta Journal Constitution
You know more than you think – ScientificAmerican.com Mind Matters