As always, I would also like to thank Susan Ginsburg, my agent, friend, critic, advocate, and cheerleader extraordinaire, and my editor Edward Kastenmeier for his steady guidance, patience, and clear view of the book’s vision. And to their colleagues, Dan Frank, Stacy Testa, Emily Giglierano, and Tim O’Connell, for their advice, support, and problem-solving skills. I’d also like to thank my wonderful copy editor, Bonnie Thompson, for keeping me in line. Finally, thanks to those who read and commented on parts of the book. To Donna Scott, my wife and in-house editor, who read version after version and always provided honest and very perceptive input, and never threw the manuscript at me, no matter how many drafts I asked her to read; to Beth Rashbaum, whose sage editorial advice I also treasure; to Ralph Adolphs, who over many a beer gave profound input regarding the scientific content; and to all those other friends and colleagues who read part or all of the manuscript and provided useful suggestions and input. They include: Christof, Ralph, Antonio, Mike, Michael Hill, Mili Milosavljevic, Dan Simons, Tom Lyon, Seth Roberts, Kara Witt, Heather Berlin, Mark Hillery, Cynthia Harrington, Rosemary Macedo, Fred Rose, Todd Doersch, Natalie Roberge, Alexei Mlodinow, Jerry Webman, Tracey Alderson, Martin Smith, Richard Cheverton, Catherine Keefe, and Patricia McFall. And finally to my family, for their love and support, and for all the times they held dinner an extra hour or two until I got home.
Notes
PROLOGUE
1. Joseph W. Dauben, “Peirce and the History of Science,” in Peirce and Contemporary Thought, ed. Kenneth Laine Ketner (New York: Fordham University Press, 1995), 146–49.
2. Charles Sanders Peirce, “Guessing,” Hound and Horn 2 (1929): 271.
3. Ran R. Hassin et al., eds., The New Unconscious (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 77–78.
4. T. Sebeok with J. U. Sebeok, “You Know My Method,” in Thomas A. Sebeok, The Play of Musement (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981), 17–52.
5. Carl Jung, ed., Man and His Symbols (London: Aldus Books, 1964), 5.
6. Thomas Naselaris et al., “Bayesian Reconstruction of Natural Images from Human Brain Activity,” Neuron 63 (September 24, 2009): 902–15.
7. Kevin N. Ochsner and Matthew D. Lieberman, “The Emergence of Social Cognitive Neuroscience,” American Psychologist 56, no. 9 (September 2001): 717–28.
1. THE NEW UNCONSCIOUS
1. Yael Grosjean et al., “A Glial Amino-Acid Transporter Controls Synapse Strength and Homosexual Courtship in Drosophila,” Nature Neuroscience 1 (January 11, 2008): 54–61.
2. Ibid.
3. Boris Borisovich Shtonda and Leon Avery, “Dietary Choice in Caenorhabditis elegans,” Journal of Experimental Biology 209 (2006): 89–102.
4. S. Spinelli et al., “Early Life Stress Induces Long-Term Morphologic Changes in Primate Brain,” Archives of General Psychiatry 66, no. 6 (2009): 658–65; Stephen J. Suomi, “Early Determinants of Behavior: Evidence from Primate Studies,” British Medical Bulletin 53, no. 1 (1997): 170–84.
5. David Galbis-Reig, “Sigmund Freud, MD: Forgotten Contributions to Neurology, Neuropathology, and Anesthesia,” Internet Journal of Neurology 3, no. 1 (2004).
6. Timothy D. Wilson, Strangers to Ourselves: Discovering the Adaptive Unconscious (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2002), 5.
7. See “The Simplifier: A Conversation with John Bargh,” Edge, http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bargh09/bargh09_index.html.
8. John A. Bargh, ed., Social Psychology and the Unconscious: The Automaticity of Higher Mental Processes (New York: Psychology Press, 2007), 1.
9. Scientists have found little evidence of the Oedipus complex or penis envy.
10. Heather A. Berlin, “The Neural Basis of the Dynamic Unconscious,” Neuropsychoanalysis 13, no. 1 (2011): 5–31.
11. Daniel T. Gilbert, “Thinking Lightly About Others: Automatic Components of the Social Inference Process,” in Unintended Thought, ed. James S. Uleman and John A. Bargh (New York: Guilford, 1989), 192; Ran R. Hassin et al., eds., The New Unconscious (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 5–6.
12. John F. Kihlstrom et al., “The Psychological Unconscious: Found, Lost, and Regained,” American Psychologist 47, no. 6 (June 1992): 789.
13. John T. Jones et al., “How Do I Love Thee? Let Me Count the Js: Implicit Egotism and Interpersonal Attraction,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87, no. 5 (2004): 665–83. The particular states studied—Georgia, Tennessee, and Alabama—were chosen because of the unusual search capabilities provided by their statewide marriage databases.
14. N. J. Blackwood, “Self-Responsibility and the Self-Serving Bias: An fMRI Investigation of Causal Attributions,” Neuroimage 20 (2003): 1076–85.
15. Brian Wansink and Junyong Kim, “Bad Popcorn in Big Buckets: Portion Size Can Influence Intake as Much as Taste,” Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 37, no. 5 (September–October 2005): 242–45.
16. Brian Wansink, “Environmental Factors That Increase Food Intake and Consumption Volume of Unknowing Consumers,” Annual Review of Nutrition 24 (2004): 455–79.
17. Brian Wansink et al., “How Descriptive Food Names Bias Sensory Perceptions in Restaurants,” Food and Quality Preference 16, no. 5 (July 2005): 393–400; Brian Wansink et al., “Descriptive Menu Labels’ Effect on Sales,” Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administrative Quarterly 42, no. 6 (December 2001): 68–72.
18. Norbert Schwarz et al., “When Thinking Is Difficult: Metacognitive Experiences as Information,” in Social Psychology of Consumer Behavior, ed. Michaela Wänke (New York: Psychology Press, 2009), 201–23.
19. Benjamin Bushong et al., “Pavlovian Processes in Consumer Choice: The Physical Presence of a Good Increases Willingness-to-Pay,” American Economic Review 100, no. 4 (2010): 1556–71.
20. Vance Packard, The Hidden Persuaders (New York: David McKay, 1957), 16.
21. Adrian C. North et al., “In-Store Music Affects Product Choice,” Nature 390 (November 13, 1997): 132.
22. Donald A. Laird, “How the Consumer Estimates Quality by Subconscious Sensory Impressions,” Journal of Applied Psychology 16 (1932): 241–46.
23. Robin Goldstein et al., “Do More Expensive Wines Taste Better? Evidence from a Large Sample of Blind Tastings,” Journal of Wine Economics 3, no. 1 (Spring 2008): 1–9.