Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Riveted: The Science of Why Jokes Make Us Laugh, Movies Make Us Cry, and Religion Makes Us Feel One with the Universe
    Riveted: The Science of Why Jokes Make Us Laugh, Movies Make Us Cry, and Religion Makes Us Feel One with the Universe
    Riveted: The Science of Why Jokes Make Us Laugh, Movies Make Us Cry, and Religion Makes Us Feel One with the Universe
    Audiobook9 hours

    Riveted: The Science of Why Jokes Make Us Laugh, Movies Make Us Cry, and Religion Makes Us Feel One with the Universe

    Written by Jim Davies

    Narrated by Matthew Josdal

    3/5

    ()

    Switch to ebook

    About this audiobook

    Professor Jim Davies's fascinating and highly accessible book, Riveted, reveals the evolutionary underpinnings of why we find things compelling.

    What we like and don't like is almost always determined by subconscious forces, and when we try to consciously predict our own preferences we're often wrong. In one study of speed dating, people were asked what kinds of partners they found attractive. When the results came back, the participants' answers before the exercise had no correlation with who they actually found attractive in person! We are beginning to understand just how much the brain makes our decisions for us: we are rewarded with a rush of pleasure when we detect patterns, as the brain thinks we've discovered something significant; the mind urges us to linger on the news channel or rubberneck an accident in case it might pick up important survival information; it even pushes us to pick up People magazine in order to find out about changes in the social structure.

    Drawing on work from philosophy, anthropology, religious studies, psychology, economics, computer science, and biology, Davies offers a comprehensive explanation to show that in spite of the differences between the many things that we find compelling, they have similar effects on our minds and brains.
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherTantor Media, Inc
    Release dateAug 15, 2017
    ISBN9781541480247

    Related to Riveted

    Related audiobooks

    Psychology For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Emotional Intelligence Needs a Rewrite

      Aug 3, 2017

      You’ve probably met people who are experts at mastering their emotions and understanding the emotions of others. When all hell breaks loose, somehow these individuals remain calm. They know what to say and do when their boss is moody or their lover i

      9 min read

    • Article

      Emotional Intelligence Needs a Rewrite

      Mar 12, 2020

      You’ve probably met people who are experts at mastering their emotions and understanding the emotions of others. When all hell breaks loose, somehow these individuals remain calm. They know what to say and do when their boss is moody or their lover i

      9 min read

    • Article

      Consciousness Is Just a Feeling

      Mar 3, 2021

      When he was a boy, Mark Solms obsessed over big existential questions. What happens when I die? What makes me who I am? He went on to study neuroscience but soon discovered that neuropsychology had no patience for such open-ended questions about the

      12 min read

    • Article

      Emotional Rescue

      Mar 1, 2020

      The classical view of how emotions work is straightforward: we’re born with a set of circuits in our brain, one for anger, one for sadness, one for fear and so on. When we see a threat, our fear circuit triggers, we make a scared face, our heart spee

      7 min read

    • Article

      Daydreamer

      Oct 9, 2019

      Daydreamer
      7 min read

    • Article

      The Things Science Has Taught Me

      Mar 11, 2020

      The Things Science Has Taught Me
      6 min read

    • Article

      This Man Says the Mind Has No Depths

      Jul 26, 2018

      A whole lot of books on the brain are published these days and you can read yourself into a coma trying to make sense of their various messages. So it was with my usual low-burn curiosity that I starting reading The Mind Is Flat by British behavioral

      12 min read

    • Article

      Antonio Damasio Tells Us Why Pain Is Necessary

      Jan 18, 2018

      Following Oliver Sacks, Antonio Damasio may be the neuroscientist whose popular books have done the most to inform readers about the biological machinery in our heads, how it generates thoughts and emotions, creates a self to cling to, and a sense of

      12 min read

    • Article

      When Not To Trust Your Gut

      Jan 26, 2022

      When Not To Trust Your Gut
      3 min read

    • Article

      When Not To Trust Your Gut

      Jan 26, 2022

      When Not To Trust Your Gut
      3 min read

    • Article

      Forget What You Think You Know About Emotions

      Jun 9, 2023

      Every few months, a family friend pays a visit, and I must be reminded to let her conspiracy theorizing pass unchallenged. “Don’t get drawn in,” I’m told. “Just say, ‘Oh, really? That’s interesting,’ and wait for the friend to lose steam and shift th

      2 min read

    • Article

      Your Brain in Love

      Jul 22, 2020

      Helen Fisher first appeared in Nautilus in 2015 with her article, “Casual Sex May Be Improving America’s Marriages.” Since then we’ve interviewed the biological anthropologist a host of times, anxious to hear her insights into the ties that bind and

      8 min read

    • Article

      The Teenage Brain: A WORK IN PROGRESS

      Aug 15, 2018

      In 2012, Sarah Jayne Blakemore, a professor of cognitive neuroscience at the University of London, spoke at the TEDGlobal conference on “the mysterious workings of the adolescent brain.” In her talk, she compared the prefrontal cortex in teens with t

      3 min read

    • Article

      Perceptual Triggers

      Nov 7, 2020

      Perceptual Triggers
      20 min read

    • Article

      Learn The Science Of Love

      Apr 8, 2022

      Learn The Science Of Love
      8 min read

    • Article

      Human Emotions Are Personal Narratives

      Aug 29, 2019

      For his next book, Joseph LeDoux knew he had to go deep. He had to go back in time, way back, 3.5 billion years ago. The author of the seminal The Emotional Brain, followed by Synaptic Self and Anxious, sensed a missing element in those books on how

      10 min read

    • Article

      From The Editor

      May 11, 2023

      Your brain is a tough nut to crack. Psychologists have been trying to understand what's inside our heads for over a century (which actually isn't very long, as science goes), and there are still gaping cavities at the roots of our models. We have a p

      1 min read

    • Article

      Lost And Found: Bewilderment As An Invitation To Transformation

      Nov 10, 2021

      — When I get lost while driving in the Hudson Valley — which is often — I usually welcome seeing a new place. When one of my two young daughters asks me a thought-stopping question (“Papa, are we indigenous people anywhere on the planet?” “Papa, do o

      8 min read

    • Article

      How to Be Self-Aware

      Oct 5, 2021

      How to Be Self-Aware
      8 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for Riveted

    3/5

    49 ratings20 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 3/5
      I had high expectations when I read the blurb on the dust jacket … in which another author writes, "Jim Davies could be the next Malcolm Gladwell.” My first thought was that we didn’t need a “next” Malcolm Gladwell, as the current one is alive, well and still writing as far as I know. My final thought, after finishing Riveted, was, “Jim Davies is no Malcolm Gladwell."Whereas, Riveted seems to me like a thousand factoids in search of an idea, Mr. Gladwell’s books involve actual storytelling … and building a coherent case that non-expert readers can understand along with the author. I’m sure Mr. Davies is a brilliant person, and Riveted is for other brilliant people who share his vocabulary, not us mere mortals. I’m not saying Riveted is a terrible book because it gave me few aha moments along the way. I’m just saying that I was NOT riveted by Riveted.Review based on publisher-provided copy of Riveted.
    • 1/5
      I found it ironic that a book called Riveted was so incredibly dry and boring. I tried to be interested - I really did. But the tiny font, lack of story or cohesive organization was too much. He could have easily added stories, jokes and anecdotes, taking a page from his own research. If a book on writing is poorly written, it hurts the author's credibility because they haven't applied what they teach. The same is true here, and it's difficult to ignore.I don't deny there may be some grains of knowledge here that are worth learning, but it's a sparse harvest.
    • 3/5
      So unfortunately I waited too long and forgot to take good notes on this book. But I'm going to do my best. The big idea of Riveted is to ask why some things are captivating and others are not. Why some get sucked into a song that leaves others cold. The basic foundational principals Jim Davies uses to construct his argument are the assumption that humans are interested in other humans, we give special interest to facts we hope or fear, humans are pattern seeking, which in turn means we are compelled by incongruity, the structure of our senses is fundamental to our reaction to the world, and there are core psychological structures built into the structure of our brain that shape what we are inclined to believe or disbelieve.The question of compellingness is itself rather compelling. Marketers spend a lot of time wondering about how to manipulate it. Each person spends a decent amount of time considering what they find compelling when making a large purchase, and ultimately we spend time trying to pick from the myriad of possibilities in our daily life what we think will ultimately be most compelling in the long term.At least based on what stood out to me I'd say the strongest case for what will be compelling is made for items that encourage us to find a pattern and that which disrupts an expected pattern. Repetition in games feeds the desire to observe regularity. But a misplaced object can cause a unquenchable disease even if a person doesn't quite understand what is causing it. The other dimensions all are given a good case too but these seem to touch on some of the most fundamental reasons why something would be compelling. There are some questionable claims that a reader would have to dive into to figure out if are true. But that is pretty much a given for pop science books. The thesis is also a bit all over the place as far as ultimate unifying principal but overall Jim Davies does a good job presenting his concept and it was an enjoyable read. If you are interested in this sort of area I'd say give it a read.
    • 4/5
      This book is a study of what makes things interesting in art, sport and other subjects. Davies splits the book up into topics like patterns, biology and incongruity and then links them all up at some point to show relationships between topics and make sense of it all.
    • 3/5
      Riveted isn't bad work, per se, but it's disappointing. If Davies' thesis is the irrationality of religious faith, then there's too much other material in the book, and that material is distracting (not to mention the book cover and blurbs are misleading). That thesis would be more than enough to carry the book, and there's enough material here on that topic to fill an entire book. But Davies either didn't think that was sufficient or felt the need to be deliberately misleading. If his thesis is meant to be broader--to actually support this "compellingness foundations theory" that he puts forth--then he was himself seduced by the anti-religion argument and simply lets it run away with him. (I suspect the latter is the case.) The book is also extremely broken up and lacking in transitions. I've read a lot of academic scholarly work as well as a lot of academics writing for a general audience, and Davies needed an editor (or at least an English grad student) to make his work more palatable for the general public as his writing style is choppy in places and his tone inconsistent. Short story: if you want to read an erudite argument against theism, read Christopher Hitchens; if you want to read fascinating cultural analysis that synthesizes research from a number of different fields, read Malcolm Gladwell (or James Glick). Davies is too much of both and not enough of either.
    • 3/5
      I liked this book, probably because I really wanted to like this book, but it has a few problems. It reads like somebody's dissertation research that has been watered down for a general audience. I would have rather read the dissertation, because the author continually makes claims that need citations and don't have them. The author also relies on a few neuroscience concepts that were once widely believed and have since been disproven - the idea that the right side of the brain controls the left side of our bodies and vice versa, for example. (It's actually much, much more complicated than that.) So the book felt outdated in that regard - for a scientific book about the brain, I expect a more updated use of the science.That said, I liked the author's tone - he made me laugh out loud a few times. If you disagree with his biases, I could understand how you might be put off, but overall I thought it was an okay book. If you're really interested in the science, there are much better books to read, and more accurate ones to boot.
    • 3/5
      The introduction starts by introducing the functions of the "old brain" and the "new brain", and what they bring to the table. He then introduces his "Compellingness Foundations Theory" (not a particularly riveting name), which is composed of 6 aspects. These are the subjects of the first 6 chapters: People, Hope & Fear, Patterns, Incongruity, Biological Nature, and Psychological nature. The final, 7th chapter, pulls them together. At the end are the extensive footnotes. I admit, I had hoped to be more compelled by the book. It feels like a good first cut at the subject, but it is not itself riveting.
    • 4/5
      I suspect that there are a lot people don't like the author's voice in this book - it is a bit snarky, a bit condescending, especially towards religion. But once you get around the voice - you find an excellent book that explains how your brain uses information that it receives to make a view of the world. Also, there is a lot of discussion about how people are very much a thing of evolution, even down to how we create our landscaping. This can be quite disconcerting... even for somebody like me, who sees the hint of truth in it, but likes to believe that my choices are intentional. The author is skilled at taking complex ideas, and summing them up for a lay person. I think it helps to have a small understanding of the brain before going into this book. I like the idea of the old brain vs the new brain. All (as far as I can tell) sources are extensively cited, although he will add additional comments inside the source - which I found rather tedious - because I couldn't tell if reading a citation would add more to the story and because each chapter starts anew from citation number one, they were difficult to find quickly. It would have been better to put only citation in the back, and use the asterisk at the bottom of the page for additional comments.Overall - this is a book I will reread again - or maybe read later editions of the book if the author updates this book with newer information.To summarize - this book will make you question how you make decisions and what you believe. Even if you don't agree with everything in the book (and you won't) it will make you think.
    • 3/5
      I received this book through LibraryThing's early reviewer program, and found it an interesting read. The author's premise of a "compellingness foundations theory" is an interesting one, and he explores different aspects of his theory throughout the chapters. Some are readily believable, others less so, but all in all he raises some interesting questions. Unfortunately, the questions sometimes undermine the premise of his theory. The author acknowledges the lack of scientific study in some aspects of his theory, so this feels more like a starting place than a fully realized, thoughtfully tested theory. Perhaps hypothesis is the better term for the author's ideas, although they certainly merit further thought and research.
    • 2/5
      Interesting tidbits strung together in a haphazard way do not a riveting read make. I referred to the table of contents repeatedly to try to visualize a structure for Davies' thoughts, but what I read just didn't hold together. After about halfway I put it down for a few weeks, thinking it might be I wasn't in the proper mood. When I came back to it, I stopped blaming myself. The book's description and jacket blurbs sound like just the kind of reading I'd enjoy, but I had a hard time getting through this book. I can imagine telling friends about this or that interesting fact I learned from RIVETED, but I can't imagine a single person to whom I would recommend reading it all the way through. I received this book through Library Thing's Early Review program. I am grateful that this program exists, and that authors and publishers participate. I hope these comments do not work to the detriment of the program.
    • 4/5
      In Riveted, author and professor Jim Davies takes us on a journey through the mind, though not so much the chemical makeup of the mind, but rather seeing the mind manifest itself in every day human nature.
    • 2/5
      I was really looking forward to reading this. The book is about how the 'new brain' and the 'old brain' work together to create memories and emotions However I have been unable to complete it. I've started several times and each time I get bogged down, find myself re-reading and missing the comprehension. Personally, I found the writing style choppy. It didn't flow well. The information might be accurate, but I feel the author was writing more for a professional reader and not a lay reader. That's a shame because it was a fascinating topic. I don't lay books down easily. This one didn't work for me.
    • 4/5
      Some books are annoying because the author writes too much out of his own experience and doesn’t draw on science. This book doesn’t have that problem; Davies does the research. Oh my, yes, Davies has done the research. He quotes at least two studies on every page of this book. So that’s not the problem.I was annoyed by the loose organization at the book. I loved all the fascinating research Davies shares, but I was never very clear where he was going with his findings. My take: this would have been a much stronger book, a more (bear with me) riveting book, if you will, had Davies spent more time editing it.
    • 1/5
      Riveted I was not. While the premise of the book was very interesting, the book itself was just plain boring. It read like a science journal for a required science class I had no interest in taking. Each chapter was its own topic and could be read in no particular order if you wanted to. I also felt like a lot of what he was trying to prove never actually got proven.
    • 4/5
      This book made me very angry. That anger did not come from any of the particular points that were made, although there will be ideas that upset people with certain world views and mindsets. Rather, my anger was actually rooted in disappointment. I felt I was reading one of the best science/informational books I've read in long time. And everything – all the value, all the insights, all the really good stuff – was subverted by the occasional inclusion of content that did not match the high standards I saw everywhere else in the book. According to the book's cover, this is about "the science of why jokes make us laugh, movies make us cry, and religion makes us feel one with the universe." Davies fulfills that promise and more. The accomplishment of providing so much valuable information was why I wanted to like it so much. But throughout the book there were jarring moments where rigor seemed to take a backseat.And then there is the last chapter. But before explaining just what went wrong, let's talk about how good this book almost was.Riveted contains some of the most interesting information I have seen in a long time. Jim Davies has done an excellent job of pulling together an incredibly large and diverse group of sources to attempt an explanation for why humans react the way we do. All of this is in support of his "compellingness foundations theory". (And, if I may be allowed to foreshadow a little, that may be at the root of much of the problem – we seem to have a partially constructed theory here; one that is waiting for further proof.)He brings together the surprising commonalities that exist in areas and concepts such as art, religion, sports, superstitions – the plethora of life's aspects that we take for granted. However, by not taking them for granted – by questioning why it is we react the way we do – he provides insight into the basic makeup of our humanity. He is actually addressing a question as big as "what makes us human" and is able to put together answers that are understandable, insightful, and the type that should give every reader pause as he or she begins to look more closely at his or her own actions.It is easy to read, it is engaging, and it is revelatory. Which just made me that much madder. It is a book that deserves to be flawless or, at the very least, less prone to "flawfulness".I ran into my first issue with the book within the first chapter. And it continued throughout. I kept being brought up short as I stumbled across data, discussions, and conjectures that seemed to be made based on "non-rigorous" information. In some instances circumstantial evidence was used to support concepts. For example, to support the conjecture that people dominate artistic depiction, he reports the results from an art history student's review of the number of people depicted in each individual work of art found in a specific art history book. A wonderful start, but far from proof of anything, except that Davies either needed quick support for an idea or something easy for the reader to grasp. In another part of the book, he begins a description with the phrase "In an interesting but unscientific study..." How is the reader supposed to use this information?In some cases suppositions are made that I found questionable. As an example: "Science fiction, fairy tales, and fantasy genres tend to have less developed characters." Of course you can find lots of examples in these three different genres where character takes a back seat. But you can do the same for any genre. Sturgeon's Law states that 90% of anything stinks (paraphrasing). So it is not inconceivable that the majority of science fiction may come up short in the area of character. But, to indicate science fiction suffers from a disease not suffered elsewhere is to ignore the majority of all fiction that has similar limitations. Davies has made a broad-based statement that seems to be based on "feel" rather than rigorously vetted information.I also lost track of the number of times I read something to the effect of "My conjecture is..." or "My theory predicts that..." followed by the hope that, in the future, research will support what is about to follow. (Note that in some instances even this disclaimer was not included; instead, just stating that he thinks the following is true.) Again, what is the reader supposed to make of this? Is this a book about what is known or about what Davies hopes will be proven true?This book is well researched. Why does it have to be hamstrung by these lapses?I will note that Davies seems to acknowledge this particular issue. As he notes "the book is super lumpy", going on to indicate that he is describing "a possible research program". The result is a book that seems to be for scientists ("Hey, go look over here") and laymen ("Look at all this cool stuff") and, in the process, does not serve either particularly well.And now about that last chapter. Why is it that scientists seem to have this overpowering desire to speak up about religion? Throughout the book Davies includes discussions of religion and how we may be hardwire to accept it. I am fine with that; it is part of the entire discussion of why we appreciate art, etc. But then along comes the final chapter – "Why We Get Riveted" – which purports to be a summary of what has come before. Instead, after some warm up about celebrity worship (Davies' word choice) the chapter becomes devoted (an unintentionally ironic word choice on my part) to discussion on why we care about religion. Now, the chapter does not come right out and say that religion is a bad thing. But there is an underlying tone that implies that being a religious person is not necessarily the best choice.It is veiled, but it feels that there is a touch of proselytizing here. And it is a dirty thing to put at the end of a potentially excellent book.I have spent an inordinate amount of time, words, and pixels on this book. And a lot of it has been spent on lambasting it for the problems I saw. I am not a believer in criticizing just to throw more words out there. That kind of critical review is not worth the time. But, again, this book held so much promise that these shortcomings became even more glaring. Ultimately I am torn on whether this book should be recommended or not. I guess, because of the incredible value I found (it is a resource I know I will be returning to time and again), I would say it is worth having. Just know that such a recommendation comes with a caveat – that warning being all those words I've used above.
    • 1/5
      “Riveted” by Jim Davies, is supposed to be a popularization of a scientific theory. It may work for some people, but not for me. Its continual use of anecdotal “evidence”, post hoc proptor hoc arguments, and lists of probably unrelated studies takes the book out of the realm of scientific discourse. There are too many parts of his theory which need to be proved, lest it become the pseudo-science or myth-making he claims to oppose. He separates the brain in a two part division of the mind into the “old mind” [which he does not call the limbic system, although that is the accepted terminology] and the “new brain” [which he does not call the frontal lobes of the the neocortex, also accepted]. He ignores the rest of the brain and the known uses of the parts of the mind are nowhere near as clear-cut as he stipulates. From there we go to his “compellingness foundation” which appear to be totally anecdotal. I was actually offended by some of his arguments, and went to his sources, where possible. They did not always agree with him.When his writing is not confusing, it is simplistic and not convincing. His continual use of phrases such as “I created a concept” or “I conjecture that” show how baseless this book is. No straight hypothesis, just a bunch or random possibilities which might eventually add up to one. Or two or three hypotheses. No apparent testing. No proof. Not worth the trouble clawing through.
    • 3/5
      I was not exactly riveted by Riveted. While Jim Davies offers many interesting facts that help explain why we are compelled as human beings to act/react in certain ways, the book seemed to lack a cohesiveness to me. While I can see why Michael Shermer compares Davis to Malcom Gladwell in so far as subject mateers goes, Davies just doesn't have that interesting storytelling capability to keep the readers interest that Gladwell posses. Overall an interesting book and interesting ideas just a bit of a drag to read.
    • 3/5
      Riveted is a readable book that describes current cognitive research aimed at understanding how people think. The topics range from discussions of people's bias to seeing patterns to learning that British prime ministers have higher IQs than US presidents.A significant portion of the book explains religion's place in human thought, and might be better titled 'tips to designing a religion your brain will accept.' In some places the author sprinkles in theories along with the research, blurring the scientific basis of the observation. Still, there are nuggets here for everyone interested in the brain and its functions.
    • 4/5
      In an effort to understand human behavior the author examines five principles from our subconscious or biology that compel humans to respond and suggests these "compellingness foundations" make something riveting. The information is well presented and researched, even including studies that do not support a given point. The title is a little misleading since a there is a disproportionate focus on arguing science is a truer body of knowledge than religion.I would agree but while the author does admit to some shortcomings of science, he was less rigorous in pointing out how often science is influenced by the same subconscious compellingness foundations as religion.
    • 5/5
      When I pick up psychology/science books like “Riveted” that are intended for a broad audience, I always worry that I’m going to be disappointed by fluffy, dumbed down, generalizing text. I was happy to find that “Riveted” is actually pretty “dense” and specific—it depends heavily on scientific research, gives detailed explanations, has a ton of keywords/concepts like you’d get from a textbook, looks at each idea from different angles, and even includes discussion of a few studies that contradict points the author was making for comprehensiveness and transparency. The writing itself had a nice conversational tone with some occasional humor thrown in. Overall, a very informative, fascinating and fun read.The tagline mentions religion, jokes and movies, but a wide variety of things, like books, quotes, ideas, conspiracy theories, art, sports and music are also covered. The basic theme was that we find things compelling because of biological/evolutionary impulses and psychological biases. This is extremely useful to understand. When presented with ideas or situations, you can take these impulses and biases into account and evaluate your reactions and thoughts more objectively, which leads to better decision making. I only have one complaint. It seemed like a disproportionally large chunk of the book was devoted to analyzing religion. While I found the religion parts interesting, and I feel like I have a much better appreciation of why religions come into existence and why people are so dedicated to them, I wish there could have been more emphasis on other things. (Religion is a huge part of our culture, so maybe that’s why it was given so much space in the book?) Note: I received an advanced reading copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.